中国临床医生
中國臨床醫生
중국림상의생
JOURNAL OF CHINESE PHYSICIAN
2014年
12期
26-29
,共4页
周鑫%杨建梅%陈路增%王虹%郭晓蕙
週鑫%楊建梅%陳路增%王虹%郭曉蕙
주흠%양건매%진로증%왕홍%곽효혜
糖尿病%冠心病%踝肱指数%颈动脉内中膜厚度%Framingham评分
糖尿病%冠心病%踝肱指數%頸動脈內中膜厚度%Framingham評分
당뇨병%관심병%과굉지수%경동맥내중막후도%Framingham평분
Diabetes%CHD%ABI%CIMT%Framingham scores
目的：观察踝肱指数( ABI)、趾肱指数( TBI)、颈动脉内中膜厚度( CIMT)及Framingham评分对2型糖尿病患者冠心病( CHD)的预测性。方法2型糖尿病患者196例,其中合并CHD者40例,无CHD者156例,测定ABI、TBI及CIMT,计算Framingham评分。结果 CIMT在CHD组为(0.92±0.23)mm,显著高于非CHD组(0.81±0.26)mm(P=0.017)；Framingham评分CHD组为(14.77±3.42),显著高于非CHD组(12.93±3.55)(P=0.005)；ABI在CHD组(1.04±0.20)显著低于非CHD组(1.12±0.16)(P=0.014)。行受试者工作特征曲线(ROC)分析,ABI、CIMT、Framingham评分的曲线下面积分别为0.638、0.663、0.641(P均<0.05)；最佳诊断界值分别为1.175、0.805mm、11.5。结论 ABI、CIMT、Framingham评分均可以作为2型糖尿病CHD的临床标志。
目的：觀察踝肱指數( ABI)、趾肱指數( TBI)、頸動脈內中膜厚度( CIMT)及Framingham評分對2型糖尿病患者冠心病( CHD)的預測性。方法2型糖尿病患者196例,其中閤併CHD者40例,無CHD者156例,測定ABI、TBI及CIMT,計算Framingham評分。結果 CIMT在CHD組為(0.92±0.23)mm,顯著高于非CHD組(0.81±0.26)mm(P=0.017)；Framingham評分CHD組為(14.77±3.42),顯著高于非CHD組(12.93±3.55)(P=0.005)；ABI在CHD組(1.04±0.20)顯著低于非CHD組(1.12±0.16)(P=0.014)。行受試者工作特徵麯線(ROC)分析,ABI、CIMT、Framingham評分的麯線下麵積分彆為0.638、0.663、0.641(P均<0.05)；最佳診斷界值分彆為1.175、0.805mm、11.5。結論 ABI、CIMT、Framingham評分均可以作為2型糖尿病CHD的臨床標誌。
목적：관찰과굉지수( ABI)、지굉지수( TBI)、경동맥내중막후도( CIMT)급Framingham평분대2형당뇨병환자관심병( CHD)적예측성。방법2형당뇨병환자196례,기중합병CHD자40례,무CHD자156례,측정ABI、TBI급CIMT,계산Framingham평분。결과 CIMT재CHD조위(0.92±0.23)mm,현저고우비CHD조(0.81±0.26)mm(P=0.017)；Framingham평분CHD조위(14.77±3.42),현저고우비CHD조(12.93±3.55)(P=0.005)；ABI재CHD조(1.04±0.20)현저저우비CHD조(1.12±0.16)(P=0.014)。행수시자공작특정곡선(ROC)분석,ABI、CIMT、Framingham평분적곡선하면적분별위0.638、0.663、0.641(P균<0.05)；최가진단계치분별위1.175、0.805mm、11.5。결론 ABI、CIMT、Framingham평분균가이작위2형당뇨병CHD적림상표지。
Objective To define the role of ankle branchial index( ABI) , toe branchial index ( TBI) , carotid intima-media thickness( CIMT) and Framingham scores as surrogate markers for CHD in patients with type 2 diabetes mel-litus. Method 196 patients with type 2 diabetes were divided into group of diabetes with CHD and group of diabetes without CHD. TBI, ABI and CIMT were measured, and Framingham scores was calculated. Result CIMT, Fram-ingham scores were significantly higher in patients of type 2 diabetes with CHD than that of the group without CHD (CIMT 0. 92±0. 23 vs 0. 81±0. 26mm(P=0. 017);Framingham scores 14. 77±3. 42 vs 12. 93±3. 55, P=0. 005), and ABI were significantly lower than that of the group without CHD (1. 04±0. 20 vs 1. 12±0. 16, P=0. 014). The areas under the receiver operating characteristics curve (ROC) of ABI, CIMT and Framingham scores were 0. 638、0. 663 and 0. 641(P all <0. 05). ROC curves plots suggest that the optimum cut off for for ABI, CIMT and Fram-ingham scores were 1. 175, 0. 805mm and 11. 5. Conclusion ABI, CIMT and Framingham scores are all surrogate markers for CHD in type 2 diabetes.
