肝硬度×脾脏直径/血小板评分对肝硬化食管静脉曲张的预测价值

周佳美; 班志超; 李艳; 张晓娟; 张咏华; 王明蕾

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2018.11.014

肝硬度×脾脏直径/血小板评分对肝硬化食管静脉曲张的预测价值

DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2018.11.014

保定市第二中心医院消化内科

基金项目:

保定市科技支撑计划项目(17ZF132)；

详细信息

中图分类号: R575.2
计量
- 文章访问数: 2132
- HTML全文浏览量: 50
- PDF下载量: 336
- 被引次数: 17
出版历程
- 出版日期: 2018-11-20

Value of liver stiffness-spleen diameter-to-platelet ratio score in predicting esophageal varices in patients with liver cirrhosis

Research funding:

摘要

摘要:
目的探讨肝硬度×脾脏直径/血小板评分（LSPS）预测肝硬化食管静脉曲张（EV）的临床价值。方法收集2012年10月-2017年8月于保定市第二中心医院就诊的肝硬化患者76例,分为EV组（n=32）和非EV组（n=44）。所有患者行肝功能、血常规、凝血象检查,行胃镜检查有无静脉曲张及程度,行肝硬度检查,并计算肝脏血清学纤维化指标AST与PLT比值（APRI）、FIB-4、LSPS。计量资料2组间比较采用Mann-Whitney U检验,计数资料组间比较采用χ2检验,相关性分析采用Spearman相关分析。绘制受试者工作特征曲线,选取敏感度和特异度之和最大值对应的LSPS为最佳界值。结果 EV组PLT值低于非EV组（Z=-6. 932,P <0. 01）,EV组脾脏直径、肝硬度、LSPS明显高于非EV组（Z值分别为-4. 566、-6. 575、-7. 323,P值均<0. 01）;脾脏直径、肝硬度和LSPS与EV的rs分别为0. 537、0. 759、0. 775,P值均<0. 001;中度EV患者LSPS明显高于轻度患者[6. 50（5. 71<...
- 肝硬化 /
- 食管和胃静脉曲张 /
- 诊断
Abstract:
Objective To investigate the value of liver stiffness-spleen diameter-to-platelet ratio score ( LSPS) in predicting esophageal varices ( EV) in patients with liver cirrhosis. Methods A total of 76 patients with liver cirrhosis who visited The Second Central Hospital of Baoding from October 2012 to August 2017 were enrolled and divided into EV group with 32 patients and non-EV group with 44 patients.Blood samples were collected from all patients for liver function test, routine blood test, and coagulation test. Gastroscopy was performed to evaluate the presence or absence of EV and the degree of EV. Liver stiffness was measured, and aspartate aminotransferase-to-platelet ratio index, fibrosis-4, and LSPS were calculated. The Mann-Whitney U test was used for comparison of continuous data between groups, and the chi-square test was used for comparison of categorical data between groups. The Spearman correlation analysis was also performed. The receiver operating characteristic ( ROC) curve was plotted to select LSPS corresponding to the maximum sum of sensitivity and specificity as the optimal cut-off value. Results Compared with the non-EV group, the EV group had a significantly lower platelet count ( Z =-6. 932, P < 0. 01) and significantly higher spleen diameter, liver stiffness, and LSPS ( Z =-4. 566, -6. 575, and-7. 323, all P < 0. 01) .Spleen diameter, liver stiffness, and LSPS were positively correlated with EV ( rs= 0. 537, 0. 759, and 0. 775, all P < 0. 001) . The patients with moderate EV had a significantly higher LSPS than those with mild EV [6. 50 ( 5. 71-9. 20) vs 4. 63 ( 2. 12-6. 13) , Z =-2. 010, P = 0. 044]. At the optimal cut-off value of 1. 59, LSPS had a sensitivity of 100%, a specificity of 93. 2%, a positive predictive value of91. 4%, and a negative predictive value of 100% in the diagnosis of EV, with an accuracy of 96. 1%, a Youden index of 93. 2%, and an area under the ROC curve of 0. 994 ( 95% confidence interval: 0. 985-1. 004) , suggesting that LSPS > 1. 59 showed the possibility of EV in cirrhotic patients and gastroscopy was unnecessary for patients with LSPS < 1. 59. Conclusion LSPS has a certain value in predicting the presence or absence of EV in patients with liver cirrhosis.
- liver cirrhosis /
- esophageal and gastric varices /
- diagnosis

HTML全文

参考文献(9)

[1] BERZIGOTTI A, SEIJO S, ARENA U, et al. Elastography, spleen size, and platelet count identify portal hypertension in patients with compensated cirrhosis[J]. Gastroenterology, 2013, 144 (1) :102-111.

[2] KIM BK, HAN KH, PARK JY, et al. A liver stiffness measurement-based, noninvasive prediction model for high-risk esophageal varices in B-viral liver cirrhosis[J]. Am J Gastroenterol, 2010, 105 (6) :1382-1390.

[3] SHIBATA S, UMEMURA T, YAMAZAKI T, et al. Liver stiffness-spleen size-to-platelet ratio risk score identifies esophageal varices in Japanese patients with chronic hepatitis C[J]. Hepatol Res, 2016, 46 (9) :884-889.

[4] Chinese Society of Hepatology and Chinese Society of Infectious Diseases Chinese, Medical Association. The guideline of prevention and treatment for chronic hepatitis B:A 2015 update[J]. J Clin Hepatol, 2015, 31 (12) :1941-1960. (in Chinese) 中华医学会肝病学分会, 中华医学会感染病学分会.慢性乙型肝炎防治指南 (2015年更新版) [J].临床肝胆病杂志, 2015, 31 (12) :1941-1960.

[5] Chinese Society of Hepatology, Chinese Medical Association; Chinese Society of Gastroenterology, Chinese Medical Association; Chinese Society of Endoscopy, Chinese Medical Association. Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of esophageal and gastric variceal bleeding in cirrhotic portal hypertension[J]. J Clin Hepatol, 2016, 32 (2) :203-219. (in Chinese) 中华医学会肝病学分会, 中华医学会消化病学分会, 中华医学会内镜学分会.肝硬化门静脉高压食管胃静脉曲张出血的防治指南[J].临床肝胆病杂志, 2016, 32 (2) :203-219.

[6] ROULOT D, CZERNICHOW S, LE CLESIAU H, et al. Liver stiffness values in apparently healthy subjects:influence of gender and metabolic syndrome[J]. J Hepatol, 2008, 48 (4) :606-613.

[7] DENG H, QI X, PENG Y, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of APRI, AAR, FIB-4, FI, and King Scores for diagnosis of esophageal varices in liver cirrhosis:A retrospective study[J]. Med Sci Monit, 2015, 21 (42) :3961-3977.

[8] XU XD, XU CF, DAI JJ, et al. Ratio of platelet count/spleen diameter predicted the presence of esophageal varices in patients with schistosomiasis liver cirrhosis[J]. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2016, 28 (5) :588-591..

[9] ZHANG DK, CHEN M, GAO YJ, et al. Clinical value of spleen acoustic radiation force impulse, aspartate aminotransferase-to-platelet ratio index, and aspartate aminotransferase/alanine aminotransferase ratio in predicting esophageal varices in patients with liver cirrhosis[J]. J Clin Hepatol, 2018, 34 (3) :508-512. (in Chinese) 张大鹍, 陈敏, 皋月娟, 等.脾脏ARFI弹性值与APRI及AAR指数对肝硬化食管静脉曲张的预测价值[J].临床肝胆病杂志, 2018, 34 (3) :508-512.

施引文献

期刊类型引用(13)

1.	温芳芳，张龙，王娟. 预后营养指数、血清白蛋白对肝切除术病人术后感染风险的预测价值及护理指导意义. 全科护理. 2025(02): 236-239 . 百度学术
2.	魏红艳，王远珍，常丽仙，木唤，刘春云，刘立. 原发性肝癌合并腹水患者发生SBP的风险预测分析. 昆明医科大学学报. 2024(03): 133-140 . 百度学术
3.	魏红艳，王远珍，常丽仙，木唤，刘春云，刘立. 原发性肝癌患者并发自发性腹膜炎临床诊断模型的构建和应用. 现代肿瘤医学. 2024(19): 3718-3725 . 百度学术
4.	朱明强，杨大帅，熊祥云，裴俊鹏，彭阳，丁佑铭. 肝癌肝切除术后感染风险预测模型的建立与评价. 临床肝胆病杂志. 2023(01): 110-117 . 本站查看
5.	罗清兰，邓宇伟，曾涛. 原发性肝癌术前中性粒细胞/淋巴细胞比值、血小板/淋巴细胞比值和甲胎蛋白对预后的评估分析. 当代医学. 2022(19): 18-21 . 百度学术
6.	付先锋，晏燕. 肝动脉介入栓塞治疗的肝癌患者预后与血清胆碱酯酶、钠水平的关系分析. 检验医学与临床. 2022(24): 3417-3420 . 百度学术
7.	曾桥. 腹腔镜手术治疗肝癌的分析. 当代医学. 2021(04): 96-98 . 百度学术
8.	黄旦华. 多项肿瘤标志物联合检测在肝癌中的诊断效能. 医疗装备. 2021(11): 52-53 . 百度学术
9.	袁维，孙克伟，陈斌，朱文芳，银思涵. 56例中晚期原发性肝癌死亡患者的临床分析. 中西医结合肝病杂志. 2021(08): 707-711 . 百度学术
10.	马冰，白黎，赵艳，海丹丹，李花花. 原发性肝癌TACE术后发生感染性并发症的影响因素研究. 实用癌症杂志. 2021(12): 2033-2035 . 百度学术
11.	王益卓，刘唯佳，卢兵，黄其密，唐德奉. 原发性肝癌合并肺部感染58例临床特征分析. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版). 2020(01): 83-84 . 百度学术
12.	刘娟. 以坚强概念为基础的心理干预对原发性肝癌合并抑郁病人症状改善、心理状态及生命质量的影响. 全科护理. 2020(28): 3834-3837 . 百度学术
13.	叶颖剑，刘波，陈伟，李琼霞. 血清AFP阴性的肝细胞癌患者预后及分期系统分析. 临床肝胆病杂志. 2019(03): 535-541 . 本站查看