中国实用医药
中國實用醫藥
중국실용의약
CHINA PRACTICAL MEDICAL
2014年
25期
3-5
,共3页
周凯%许恩赐%李梦强%杨旭
週凱%許恩賜%李夢彊%楊旭
주개%허은사%리몽강%양욱
尿路结石%尿路感染%白细胞酯酶%尿细菌培养
尿路結石%尿路感染%白細胞酯酶%尿細菌培養
뇨로결석%뇨로감염%백세포지매%뇨세균배양
Lithangiuria%Urinary tract infection%Leukocyte esterase%Urine bacteria culture
目的：评估尿白细胞酯酶对尿路结石患者是否合并尿路感染的诊断价值。方法308例尿路结石患者及127例非尿路结石可疑尿路感染患者为研究对象。研究尿液标本均为无菌采集中段尿，进行尿细菌培养、白细胞酯酶干化学法检测。比较两样本间白细胞酯酶诊断的敏感性、特异性。结果白细胞酯酶诊断尿路结石患者合并尿路感染的敏感性为90.0%，特异性为29.5%，阳性预测值为19.8%，阴性预测值为93.8%；诊断非尿路结石尿路感染的敏感性为93.8%，特异性为32.3%，阳性预测值为59.2%，阴性预测值为83.3%。白细胞酯酶诊断尿路结石患者合并尿路感染的敏感性与非尿路结石尿路感染差异无统计学意义(P=0.499)；特异性与非尿路结石尿路感染差异无统计学意义(P=0.647)；阳性预测值明显低于非尿路结石尿路感染(P=0.000)；阴性预测值与非尿路结石尿路感染差异无统计学意义(P=0.205)。结论与非尿路结石患者比较，尿白细胞酯酶对诊断尿路结石患者合并尿路感染的阳性预测值明显降低。
目的：評估尿白細胞酯酶對尿路結石患者是否閤併尿路感染的診斷價值。方法308例尿路結石患者及127例非尿路結石可疑尿路感染患者為研究對象。研究尿液標本均為無菌採集中段尿，進行尿細菌培養、白細胞酯酶榦化學法檢測。比較兩樣本間白細胞酯酶診斷的敏感性、特異性。結果白細胞酯酶診斷尿路結石患者閤併尿路感染的敏感性為90.0%，特異性為29.5%，暘性預測值為19.8%，陰性預測值為93.8%；診斷非尿路結石尿路感染的敏感性為93.8%，特異性為32.3%，暘性預測值為59.2%，陰性預測值為83.3%。白細胞酯酶診斷尿路結石患者閤併尿路感染的敏感性與非尿路結石尿路感染差異無統計學意義(P=0.499)；特異性與非尿路結石尿路感染差異無統計學意義(P=0.647)；暘性預測值明顯低于非尿路結石尿路感染(P=0.000)；陰性預測值與非尿路結石尿路感染差異無統計學意義(P=0.205)。結論與非尿路結石患者比較，尿白細胞酯酶對診斷尿路結石患者閤併尿路感染的暘性預測值明顯降低。
목적：평고뇨백세포지매대뇨로결석환자시부합병뇨로감염적진단개치。방법308례뇨로결석환자급127례비뇨로결석가의뇨로감염환자위연구대상。연구뇨액표본균위무균채집중단뇨，진행뇨세균배양、백세포지매간화학법검측。비교량양본간백세포지매진단적민감성、특이성。결과백세포지매진단뇨로결석환자합병뇨로감염적민감성위90.0%，특이성위29.5%，양성예측치위19.8%，음성예측치위93.8%；진단비뇨로결석뇨로감염적민감성위93.8%，특이성위32.3%，양성예측치위59.2%，음성예측치위83.3%。백세포지매진단뇨로결석환자합병뇨로감염적민감성여비뇨로결석뇨로감염차이무통계학의의(P=0.499)；특이성여비뇨로결석뇨로감염차이무통계학의의(P=0.647)；양성예측치명현저우비뇨로결석뇨로감염(P=0.000)；음성예측치여비뇨로결석뇨로감염차이무통계학의의(P=0.205)。결론여비뇨로결석환자비교，뇨백세포지매대진단뇨로결석환자합병뇨로감염적양성예측치명현강저。
Objective To appraise the diagnostic value of urinary leukocyte esterase in the test of lithangiuria combined with urinary tract infection. Methods There were 308 cases of lithangiuria and 127 cases without lithangiuria but suspected with urinary tract infection were selected as objects of study. The urine specimens were all collected as asepsis midstream urine, and send for urine bacteria culture and dry chemical method test for leukocyte esterase. The specificities and the sensibilities of leukocyte esterase were compared. Results In the cases of lithangiuria combined with urinary tract infection, the sensibility of leukocyte esterase test was 90.0%, the specificity was 29.5%, the positive predictive value was 19.8%and the negative predictive value was 93.8%. While in the cases of suspected urinary tract infection without lithangiuria, the sensibility of leukocyte esterase test was 93.8%, the specificity was 32.3%, the positive predictive value was 59.2% and the negative predictive value was 83.3%. The difference of the sensibility of leukocyte esterase test between the two kinds of cases was not statistically significant (P=0.499). The difference of specificity had no statistical significance (P=0.647). The positive predictive value of the former cases was obviously higher than that of the later cases (P=0.000). The difference of the negative predictive value had no statistical significance (P=0.205). Conclusion Compared with the cases of no lithangiuria, leukocyte esterase test for the positive predictive value of lithangiuria combined with urinary tract infection cases is much lower.
