摘要
目的:探究KDIGO诊断标准对急性肾损伤病人造影剂相关肾损害风险的预测作用。方法:选取2013年5月至2015年1月进行颅内动脉介入检查及治疗病人490例,分别采用KDIGO标准和RIFLE标准进行诊断评估,比较2种诊断方法的差异。结果:运用KDIGO诊断标准诊断急性肾损伤病人132例(26.94%),RIFLE标准诊断急性肾损伤89例(18.16%),差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);KDIGO诊断标准检出急性肾损伤的132例病人住院时间为(10.15±2.30)d,RIFLE标准检出89例病人平均时间为(9.23±1.95)d,KDIGO诊断标准检出而RIFLE标准未检出病人住院时间为(14.01±3.10)d。ROC曲线分析显示,KDIG标准的曲线下面积大于RIFLE标准,具有更高诊断价值。结论:KDIGO标准与RIFLE标准比较,可诊断出更多的急性肾损伤病人,利于诊断及治疗,可临床推广使用。
Objective： To investigate the predictive effects of the KDIGO criteria in the related kidney damage risk induced by contrast agents in severe patients. Methods： Four hundred and ninty patients with the history of intracranial artery interventional examination and therapy from May 2013 to January 2015 were selected. The diagnosis in the patients was evaluated using the KDIGO criteria and RIFLE criteria,and the difference between two diagnostic methods was compared. Results： Low permeability contrast agent was used,the evaluation of KDIGO and RIFLE diagnostic criteria showed that the acute kidney injury in 132 cases（ 26. 94%） and 89 cases（ 18. 16%） were identified,respectively. The average hospitalization time in 132 cases diagnosed by KDIGO criteria and 89 cases（ death in 5 cases） diagnosed by RIFLE criteria were（ 10. 15 ± 2. 30） and（ 9. 23 ± 1. 95） days,respectively. The average hospitalization time in the patients detected by KDIGO criteria,but not by RIFLE criteria detection was（ 14. 01 ± 3. 10） days. ROC curve anglysis shows that the area under the curve of the KDIGO standard is greater than the RIFLE standard and has a higher diagnosetic value.Conclusions： Compared with the RIFLE criteria,the KDIGO criteria can diagnose more patients with acute kidney injury more sensitively,which is beneficial to the diagnosis and treatment,and worthy of clinical application.
出处
《蚌埠医学院学报》
CAS
2017年第6期738-739,742,共3页
Journal of Bengbu Medical College
