尿蛋白膜保存法与直接冻存法的成本效益分析  

Comparison of cost-effectiveness between urimem and direct freezing for urinary protein preservation

作　　者：王明铭[1,2] 刘雪姣[1,3] 贾露露[4,5] 孙颖[1] 高友鹤[5] 李明喜[1] 

机构地区：[1]中国医学科学院北京协和医学院北京协和医院肾内科,北京100730 [2]河北省邢台市人民医院肾内科,河北邢台054000 [3]首都医科大学附属北京安贞医院肾内科,北京100029 [4]首都医科大学附属北京儿童医院,北京100045 [5]杭州医学科学院北京协和医学院基础医学研究所病理生理学系,北京100005

出　　处：《生物工程学报》2014年第7期1128-1133,共6页Chinese Journal of Biotechnology

基　　金：卫生公益性行业科研专项基金(No.200702008);“十二五”国家科技支撑计划(Nos.2011BA110B00,2011BA110B05)资助~~

摘　　要：为了比较尿液蛋白PVDF膜富集保存法(尿膜)和尿液直接冻存法两种方法的优缺点。通过比较两种方法在时间、所占空间、费用、蛋白降解程度及大样本临床实践性方面的区别。发现在所占空间、电费方面及临床实践性方面尿膜保存法优于直接冻存法,而在时间及耗材花费方面直接冻存法优于尿膜保存法。因此尿蛋白的尿膜保存法比直接冻存法有更强的实际应用价值。To compare two enrichment and preservation methods of urinary proteins, stored in polyvinylidene difluoride （PVDF） membrane （Urimem） or direct freezing, we examined the differences between the two methods in time, space, costs of supplies and electricity, degree of protein degradation and convenience of the sample handling. The urimem method is superior in the storage space, the cost of electricity and the clinical convenience compared to the direct freezing method. However, the direct freezing method is superior in the time and the cost of supplies to the urimem method. The enrichment and preservation of urinary proteins using urimem have more cost-effective benefits compared to those of the direct freezing method.

关 键 词：尿液蛋白 富集保存方法 成本效益分析 

分 类 号：R446.12[医药卫生—诊断学]