摘要
目的检测妊娠期糖尿病(GDM)合并子痫前期(PE)患者血清中人脂质运载蛋白2(LCN-2)的水平,探讨LCN-2与相关指标和病情的关系。方法选取2010年1月—2013年12 GDM合并PE患者60例为研究对象,其中轻度PE患者(GDM合并轻度PE组)30例,重度PE患者(GDM合并重度PE组)30例,选择30例单纯GDM患者(GDM组)和30例PE患者(PE组)为疾病对照,选择正常妊娠孕妇为正常妊娠组。检测受试者血三酰甘油(TG)、游离脂肪酸(FFAs)、尿酸(UA)、24小时尿蛋白、LCN-2水平及稳态模型法的胰岛素抵抗指数(HOMA-IR),并对相关指标进行相关性分析。结果各组间FFAs、LCN-2水平差异有统计学意义(P=0.000),GDM合并PE组水平最高,正常妊娠组水平最低。PE组、GDM合并PE组HOMA-IR高于正常妊娠组和GDM组(P<0.05),但PE组和GDM合并PE组之间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),正常妊娠组和GDM组之间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);PE组、GDM合并PE组TG水平高于GDM组、正常妊娠组(P<0.05),GDM合并PE组高于PE组(P<0.05),正常妊娠组和GDM组之间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);PE组、GDM合并PE组UA水平高于GDM组、正常妊娠组(P<0.05),GDM合并PE组高于PE组(P<0.05),正常妊娠组和GDM组之间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);GDM合并PE组24 h尿蛋白水平高于PE组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01),而正常妊娠组和GDM组均未检测到尿蛋白。GDM合并重度PE组FFAs、HOMA-IR、TG、LCN-2、24 h尿蛋白和UA水平明显高于GDM合并轻度PE组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05、P<0.01);LCN-2与FFAs、HOMA-IR、TG、24 h尿蛋白和UA均呈正相关(r=0.598、0.602、0.587、0.562、0.571,P=0.009、0.006、0.011、0.015、0.012)。结论 GDM合并PE患者血清LCN-2水平明显升高,LCN-2的水平与患者的血脂代谢紊乱、胰岛素抵抗密切相关,LCN-2可作为预测GDM合并PE患者疾病严重程度及肾功能损害的指标。
Objective To test the level of human lipocalin 2 （ LCN-2 ） in gestational diabetes （ GDM） complicated with preeclampsia（PE） , and explore the relationship between LCN-2 and related indicators and disease.Methods From January 2010 to December 2013 , 60 patients with GDM merger PE were enrolled , including 30 patients with mild PE （ GDM combined with mild PE group ） , 30 cases of patients with severe PE （ GDM with severe PE group ） , 30 cases of patients with simple GDM （GDM group） and 30 patients with PE （PE group） as the disease control, selected normal pregnant women as normal pregnancy group.All subjects’ serum triglyceride （TG）, free fatty acids （FFAs）, uric acid （UA）,24 -hour urine protein, LCN-2 levels, insulin resistance and homeostasis model assessment index （HOMA-IR） were analyzed.Results There were statistically significant differences of FFAs , LCN-2 level in each group （ P =0.000）, GDM merger PE group with the highest level , the lowest level was in normal pregnancy group .PE group and GDM group ’ s HOMA-IR merger PE were higher than normal pregnancy group and the GDM group （ P 〈0.05）, but the difference between the PE group and GDM combined with PE group was not statistically significant （ P〉0.05）, No difference was statistically significant between nor-mal pregnancy group and GDM group （ P 〉0.05）;PE group, GDM group’s TG was higher than the GDM combined with PE group and normal pregnancy group （ P 〈0.05）, GDM combined with PE group was higher than PE group （ P 〈0.05）, the differences between normal pregnancy group and the GDM group was not statistically significant （ P 〉0 .05 ）; PE group,GDM combined with PE group’s UA were higher than normal pregnancy group （ P 〈0.05）, GDM combined with PE group was higher than the PE group （ P 〈0.05）, no statistically significant difference between normal pregnancy group and GDM group（ P〉0 .05）;GDM combined with PE group＇s 24 h urinary protein levels was
出处
《疑难病杂志》
CAS
2015年第9期956-959,共4页
Chinese Journal of Difficult and Complicated Cases
