摘要
目的:评价胱抑素C(CC)与传统肾功能实验尿素(Ure)、肌酐(Cr)对肾脏损害的诊断价值。方法:对193例疑有肾脏损害的患者,用酶法测定血清Ure和Cr的浓度,用胶乳增强透射免疫比浊法,测定血清CC的浓度。结果:血Ure、Cr和CC对肾脏损害的灵敏性分别为47.4%、16.5%和97.9%,CC的灵敏性最高,与Ure比较差异有显著性(P<0.05),与Cr比较差异有极显著性(P<0.01),Cr与Ure比较差异有显著性(P<0.05);血Ure、Cr和CC对肾脏损害的特异性分别为55.2%、100.0%和60.4%,Cr的特异性最好,Cr特异性与CC、Cre比较差异有显著性(P<0.05),CC和Ure的特异性比较差异无显著性(P>0.05);血Ure、Cr和CC对肾脏损害的准确性分别为51.3%、58.0%和79.0%,CC的准确性最好,与Cr和Ure比较差异有显著性(P<0.05),Cr和Ure的准确性差异无显著性(P>0.05)。结论:CC对诊断肾功能损害有较高的灵敏性、特异性和准确性,优于Cr和Ure。
Objective：To evaluate the diagnostic value of cystatin C （CC） with traditional laboratory test indexes of renal function such as urea （Ure）, creatinine （Cr） on kidney damage.Methods： 193 suspected patients with kidney damage were detected for serum Ure, Cr by enzymatic determination and serum CC by enhanced transmission latex immunoturbidimetric assay.Results：The sensitivity of Ure, Cr and CC to renal damage were 47.4%, 16.5% and 97.9% respectively. CC had highest sensitivity and significant difference compared with Ure（P〈0.05）and very significant difference compared with Cr（P〈0.01）.There was significant difference comparing Cr and Ure（P〈0.05）. The specificity of serum Ure, Cr and CC to renal damage were 55.2%, 100.0% and 60.4% respectively.There was significant difference comparing Cr and CC, Cre（P〈0.05）.There was no significant difference comparing Cc and Ure（P〉O.05）.The accuracy of serum Ure, Cr and CC to renal damage were 51.3%. 58.0% and 79.0% respectively.CC had highest accuracy and significant difference compared with Cr and Ure（P〈0.05）.There was no significant difference between Cr and Ure （P〉0.05）.Conclusion：CC has higher sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for diagnosing renal damage, which is superior to Cr and Ure.
出处
《现代医药卫生》
2010年第3期351-352,共2页
Journal of Modern Medicine & Health
关键词
尿素
肌酐
胱抑素C
肾脏损害
Urea
Creatinine
Cystatin C
Kidney damage
