机构地区:[1]山东大学附属省立医院检验医学部,济南250021
出 处:《中国医药》2016年第11期1662-1666,共5页China Medicine
基 金:山东省自然科学基金(ZR2011HM019);山东省科学技术发展计划(2014GGH218041);山东省临床重点专科建设项目(鲁卫医字2013-26)
摘 要:目的探讨儿童肾病综合征(NS)患者尿微量白蛋白(MA)及血肾功能系列指标检测的临床价值。方法选取2014年1—12月于山东大学附属省立医院就诊的NS患儿114例作为观察组,按照其治疗后尿MA的检测值分为尿MA正常组(52例)和尿MA异常组(62例)2个亚组。选择同期来院健康体检年龄相仿儿童30例作为正常对照组。分别检测尿蛋白、MA、免疫球蛋白(Ig)G及肾功能系列指标[血白蛋白、尿素氮、肌酐、胱抑素C、β2微球蛋白(β2-MG)、视黄醇结合蛋白(RBP)、补体C1q],组间做比较。结果①观察组患儿尿常规中尿蛋白阳性率为31.6%(36/114),尿MA阳性率达54.4%(62/114),尿MA阳性率明显高于尿常规中尿蛋白阳性率,差异有统计学意义(P〈0.05)。②治疗后尿MA正常组与正常对照组比较,血β2-MG、尿素氮、RBP低,尿IgG、尿素氮/肌酐比值、补体C1q高,差异有统计学意义[(1.48±0.24)mg/L比(1.84±0.47)mg/L、(4.4±1.5)mmol/L比(4.6±0.8)mmol/L、(29±10)mg/L比(33±7)mg/L、(4.4±3.3)mg/L比(4.0±0.6)mg/L、(122±65)比(60±10)、(180±22)mg/L比(176±13)mg/L](P〈0.01或P〈0.05),白蛋白、肌酐、胱抑素C差异无统计学意义(P〉0.05);尿MA异常组与正常对照组比较,尿IgG、血尿素氮、尿素氮/肌酐比值、胱抑素c、RBP、补体CIq高,白蛋白低,差异有统计学意义[(28.7±44.3)mg/L比(4.0±0.6)mg/L、(5.0±1.9)mmol/L比(4.6±0.8)mmol/L、(129±43)比(60±10)、(0.98±0.24)mg/L比(0.81±0.14)mg/L、(35±12)mg/L比(33±7)mg/L、(184±25)mg/L比(176±13)mg/L、(36.6±8.1)g/L比(45.6±2.0)g/L](P〈0.01或P〈0.05),肌酐、β2-MG差异无统计学意义(P〉0.05)。③治疗后尿MA正常组中尿MA与血肌Objective To investigate the clinical value of microalbuminuria and blood-renal function indexes in children with nephrotic syndrome (NS). Methods One hundred and fourteen children with NS from January to December 2014 in Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University were enrolled as observation group which was divided into normal microalbuminuria group(52 cases) and abnormal microalbuminuria group (62 cases) according to the detection after treatment. Thirty healthy children with similar ages were selected as contrul group. Urine protein, microalbuminuria, urine immunoglobuhn(Ig) G and blood-renal function indexes [ albumin ( ALB ), blood urea nitrogen ( BUN ), serum creatinine ( SCr), cystatin C ( CysC ), β2-microglobulin (β2-MG) , retinal binding protein( RBP), complement Clq] were analyzed. Results (1)In observation group, urine protein positive rate was 31.6% (36/114) and microalbuminuria positive rate was 54. 4% (62/114) ; the difference was statisticlly slgnificant(P 〈 0. 05). (2)In normal microalbuminuria group, [32-MG, BUN, RBP were significantly lower than those in control group; urine IgG, BUN/SCr and Clq were signifcantly higher than those in control group [ ( 1.48 ± 0. 24) mg/L vs ( 1.84 ± 0.47 ) mg/L, (4. 4 ± 1.5 ) mmol/L vs (4. 6 ± 0. 8 ) mmol/L, (29 ±10)mg/L vs (33 ±7)mg/L, (4. 4 ±3.3)mg/L vs (4.0 ±0.6)mg/L,(122 ±65) vs (60 ±10), (180 ± 22) mg/L vs ( 176 ± 13 ) mg/L] ( P 〈 0. 01 or P 〈 0. 05 ) ; ALB, SCr, CysC showed no significant differences between groups(P 〉 0. 05). In abnormal microalbuminuria group, urine IgG, BUN, BUN/SCr, CysC, RBP and Clq were significantly higher than those in control group; ALB was significantly lower than those in control group [ (28.7 ± 44. 3 ) mg/L vs (4. 0 ± 0. 6) mg/L, ( 5.0 ± 1.9) mmol/L vs (4. 6 ± 0. 8 ) mmol/L, ( 129 ± 43 ) vs ( 60 ± 10),(0.98±0.24)mg/L vs (0.81±0.14)mg/
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...