期刊文献+

联合检测ADA、CEA、CRP、淀粉酶在鉴别结核性和恶性胸腔积液中的诊断价值 被引量:11

Diagnostic Value of Combined Detection of ADA and CEA,CRP and Amylase in the Differential Diagnosis of Tuberculous and Malignant Pleural Effusion
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的:探讨联合检测腺苷脱氨酶(ADA)、癌胚抗原(CEA)、C反应蛋白(CRP)和淀粉酶在鉴别结核性与恶性胸腔积液中的诊断价值。方法:选取胸腔积液患者117例,分为结核组72例和恶性组45例,每组均留取胸腔积液检测ADA、CEA、CRP和淀粉酶。结果:结核组胸腔积液ADA和CRP均高于恶性组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.001);恶性组胸腔积液CEA和淀粉酶均高于结核组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.001)。结论:联合检测腺苷脱氨酶(ADA)、癌胚抗原(CEA)、C反应蛋白(CRP)和淀粉酶对于结核性和恶性胸腔积液的鉴别诊断有更高参考价值,胸腔积液中ADA和CRP增高时支持结核性胸腔积液诊断,而CEA和淀粉酶增高则倾向于诊断恶性胸腔积液。 Objective: To investigate the combined detection of adenosine deaminase ( ADA ), carcinoembryonic antigen ( CEA ), C-reactive protein ( CRP ) and amylase in the diagnostic value in the differential diagnosis of tuberculous and malignant pleural effusion. Method: 117 patients with pleural effusion, 45 cases divided into 72 cases of tuberculous and malignant group, for each patient, specimens from the pleural effusion detected ADA, CEA, CRP and amylase. Result: tuberculous pleural effusion, ADA and CRP were higher than the malignant group, the difference was statistically significant ( P〈0.001 ) ; the malignant group and pleural effusion CEA and amylase were higher than the TB group, the difference was statistically significant ( P〈0.001 ) . Conclusion: The combined detection of adenosine deaminase ( ADA ) and earcinoembryonic antigen ( CEA ), C-reactive protein ( CRP ) and amylase for the differential diagnosis of tuberculous and malignant pleural effusions have a higher reference value, and pleural effusionADA and CRP level support the diagnosis of tuberculous pleural effusion, CEA and amylase tended to the diagnosis of malignant pleural effusions.
作者 石代辉
出处 《中国医学创新》 CAS 2013年第4期77-78,共2页 Medical Innovation of China
关键词 腺苷脱氨酶 癌胚抗原 C反应蛋白 淀粉酶 胸腔积液 Adenosine deaminasc Careinoembryonie antigen C-reactive protein Amylase Pleural effusion
  • 相关文献

参考文献7

二级参考文献25

共引文献19

同被引文献84

  • 1朱光成,姚丹成,石开芳.贵州省职业病危害现状及防治对策初探[J].职业卫生与病伤,2004,19(3):194-195. 被引量:5
  • 2中华人民共和国卫生部.2010年全国职业病报告[R].北京:中华人民共和国卫生部,2010.
  • 3Lehtimiki L, Kankaanranta H, Saarelainen S, et al.Exlended exhaled NO measurement differentiates between alveolar and bronchial inflammation[J].Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2001, 163(7): 1557-1561.
  • 4中华人民共和国卫生部.GBZ70-2009尘肺病诊断标准[M].北京:人民卫生出版社,2009.
  • 5李德鸿.今肺病[M].北京:化学工业出版社,2010:90,142,145.
  • 6Terracciano D, Mazzarella C, Cicalese M, et al.Diagnostic value of carbohydrate antigens in supernatants and sediments of pleural effusions[J]. Oneol Lett, 2010, 1(3): 465-471.
  • 7Hackbarth J S, Murata K, Reillyw M, et al.Performance of CEA and CA19-9 in identifying pleural effusions caused by specific m alignancies[J].ClinBioche, 2010, 43(13-14): 1051-1055.
  • 8Radjenovic-Petkovic T, Pejcic T, Nastasijevic-Borovac D, et al.Diagnostic value of CEA in pleural fluid for differential diagnosis of benign and malign pleural effusion[J].Med Arh, 2009, 63(3): 141-142.
  • 9Wagner I C, Guimaraes M J, IDa S L, et al.Evaluation of serum and pleural levels of the tumor markers CEA, CYFRA21-1 and CA 15-3 in patients with pleural effusion[J].J Bras Pneumol, 2007, 33(2): 185-191.
  • 10Victoria V,Jose ES,Angel LE,e. al. High amylase levels in pleuraleffusion[J]. Chestf 1995.108(3) :888.

二级引证文献39

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部