检验医学
檢驗醫學
검험의학
LABORATORY MEDICINE
2010年
2期
96-99
,共4页
CD64指数%细菌感染%C反应蛋白
CD64指數%細菌感染%C反應蛋白
CD64지수%세균감염%C반응단백
CD64 index%Bacterial infection%C reactive protein
目的 观察不同感染程度患者外周血中性粒细胞表面CD64的表达水平,评价CD64对诊断细菌感染的实用价值.方法 将110名研究对象分为4组,即败血症组、局部感染组、病毒感染组和正常对照组.采用流式细胞仪、免疫浊度法和血液分析仪分别检测各组研究对象外周血CD64指数的表达水平、C反应蛋白(CRP)含量、白细胞(WBC)数量及中性粒细胞的百分比(Neu%).结果 败血症组CD64指数(5.12±2.10)明显高于其他3组(P<0.001),局部感染组(2.51±1.64)与病毒感染组(1.35±0.39)、正常对照组(1.00±0.31)比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.001),病毒感染组与正常对照组差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).细菌感染组(败血症组+局部感染组)CD64与CRP、WBC、Neu%呈正相关(r=0.81、0.46、0.43, P均<0.05).根据受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线,当CD64指数临界值取1.34时,敏感性为89.7%,特异性为79.8%.结论 中性粒细胞表面CD64指数可以作为诊断细菌感染的敏感指标,特别是对败血症的诊断更有价值.
目的 觀察不同感染程度患者外週血中性粒細胞錶麵CD64的錶達水平,評價CD64對診斷細菌感染的實用價值.方法 將110名研究對象分為4組,即敗血癥組、跼部感染組、病毒感染組和正常對照組.採用流式細胞儀、免疫濁度法和血液分析儀分彆檢測各組研究對象外週血CD64指數的錶達水平、C反應蛋白(CRP)含量、白細胞(WBC)數量及中性粒細胞的百分比(Neu%).結果 敗血癥組CD64指數(5.12±2.10)明顯高于其他3組(P<0.001),跼部感染組(2.51±1.64)與病毒感染組(1.35±0.39)、正常對照組(1.00±0.31)比較,差異有統計學意義(P<0.001),病毒感染組與正常對照組差異無統計學意義(P>0.05).細菌感染組(敗血癥組+跼部感染組)CD64與CRP、WBC、Neu%呈正相關(r=0.81、0.46、0.43, P均<0.05).根據受試者工作特徵(ROC)麯線,噹CD64指數臨界值取1.34時,敏感性為89.7%,特異性為79.8%.結論 中性粒細胞錶麵CD64指數可以作為診斷細菌感染的敏感指標,特彆是對敗血癥的診斷更有價值.
목적 관찰불동감염정도환자외주혈중성립세포표면CD64적표체수평,평개CD64대진단세균감염적실용개치.방법 장110명연구대상분위4조,즉패혈증조、국부감염조、병독감염조화정상대조조.채용류식세포의、면역탁도법화혈액분석의분별검측각조연구대상외주혈CD64지수적표체수평、C반응단백(CRP)함량、백세포(WBC)수량급중성립세포적백분비(Neu%).결과 패혈증조CD64지수(5.12±2.10)명현고우기타3조(P<0.001),국부감염조(2.51±1.64)여병독감염조(1.35±0.39)、정상대조조(1.00±0.31)비교,차이유통계학의의(P<0.001),병독감염조여정상대조조차이무통계학의의(P>0.05).세균감염조(패혈증조+국부감염조)CD64여CRP、WBC、Neu%정정상관(r=0.81、0.46、0.43, P균<0.05).근거수시자공작특정(ROC)곡선,당CD64지수림계치취1.34시,민감성위89.7%,특이성위79.8%.결론 중성립세포표면CD64지수가이작위진단세균감염적민감지표,특별시대패혈증적진단경유개치.
Objective To observe the level of neutrophil surface CD64 in the peripheral blood of patients with different degrees of bacterial infection, and evaluate the practical value of CD64 in diagnosis of bacterial infection. Methods 110 subjects were classified into four groups: sepsis, local bacterial infection, viral infection and normal control. For all subjects, the levels of the index of CD64, C reaction protein (CRP), white blood cell (WBC) and the percent of neutrophil (Neu%) in the peripheral blood were measured by automatic flow cytometry, immunoturbidimetry and haematology analyser. Results The index of CD64 in the sepsis group (5.12±2.10) was significantly higher than that in the other three groups(P<0.001), and the index of CD64 in the local bacterial infection group(2.51±1.64) was higher than that in the viral infection group(1.35±0.39) and the normal control group (1.00±0.31, P<0.001). There was no statistical difference in the viral infection group and the normal control group (P>0.05). The index of CD64 in bacterial infection group (including sepsis group and local bacterial infection) had positive correlation with CRP, WBC and Neu% (r=0.81, 0.46, 0.43, P<0.05). According to the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, the best threshold in diagnosis of infection was 1.34 with the sensitivity of 89.7% and the specificity of 79.8%. Conclusions Neutrophil surface CD64 index may be a sensitive index for diagnosing bacterial infection, especially sepsis.
