血清淀粉酶和凝血功能指数在区分急性胰腺炎和主动脉夹层中的诊断价值

IF 0.7 4区 医学 Q4 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY Clinical laboratory Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.7754/Clin.Lab.2024.240407
Xiao-Wei Wang, Yue-Zhan Zhang
{"title":"血清淀粉酶和凝血功能指数在区分急性胰腺炎和主动脉夹层中的诊断价值","authors":"Xiao-Wei Wang, Yue-Zhan Zhang","doi":"10.7754/Clin.Lab.2024.240407","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Due to similar symptoms of abdominal pain, acute pancreatitis (AP) is often difficult to differentiate from acute aortic dissection (AAD) in clinical practice. It is unknown whether serum amylase and coagulation function indices can be used to distinguish AP from AAD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this retrospective study, 114 AP patients (AP group) and 48 cases with AAD (AAD group) admitted for acute abdominal pain were enrolled for a final analysis. The levels of serum amylase and coagulation function indices, including prothrombin time (PT), international normalized ratio (INR), activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), fibrinogen (FIB), and D-dimer (DD), were tested before or on admission and compared between the two groups. Student's t-test was adopted for comparing the mean. Model discrimination was evaluated by using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Comparison of AUC was performed by using the Z-test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared with the AAD group, amylase and FIB were both significantly increased, while DD was significantly lower in the AP group (all p < 0.01). There were no statistically significant differences of PT, INR, and APTT between AP and AAD (all p > 0.05). The AUCs in distinguishing AP from AAD were 0.913, 0.854, and 0.837 for amylase, FIB, and DD, respectively, but there were no significant differences observed among amylase, FIB, and DD (all p > 0.05). Finally, the cutoff values (specificity, sensitivity, and Youden index) in distinguishing between AP and AAD were 114 µ/L (80.70%, 95.83%, 0.765) for amylase, 2.62 g/L (76.32%, 85.42%, 0.617) for FIB, and 2.74 mg/L (95.61%, 62.50%, 0.581) for DD, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Amylase, FIB, and DD can demonstrate accurate and reliable diagnostic values, suggesting that they are useful and potential biomarkers in distinguishing AP from AAD.</p>","PeriodicalId":10384,"journal":{"name":"Clinical laboratory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic Value of Serum Amylase and Coagulation Function Indices in Distinguishing Acute Pancreatitis from Aortic Dissection.\",\"authors\":\"Xiao-Wei Wang, Yue-Zhan Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.7754/Clin.Lab.2024.240407\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Due to similar symptoms of abdominal pain, acute pancreatitis (AP) is often difficult to differentiate from acute aortic dissection (AAD) in clinical practice. It is unknown whether serum amylase and coagulation function indices can be used to distinguish AP from AAD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this retrospective study, 114 AP patients (AP group) and 48 cases with AAD (AAD group) admitted for acute abdominal pain were enrolled for a final analysis. The levels of serum amylase and coagulation function indices, including prothrombin time (PT), international normalized ratio (INR), activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), fibrinogen (FIB), and D-dimer (DD), were tested before or on admission and compared between the two groups. Student's t-test was adopted for comparing the mean. Model discrimination was evaluated by using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Comparison of AUC was performed by using the Z-test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared with the AAD group, amylase and FIB were both significantly increased, while DD was significantly lower in the AP group (all p < 0.01). There were no statistically significant differences of PT, INR, and APTT between AP and AAD (all p > 0.05). The AUCs in distinguishing AP from AAD were 0.913, 0.854, and 0.837 for amylase, FIB, and DD, respectively, but there were no significant differences observed among amylase, FIB, and DD (all p > 0.05). Finally, the cutoff values (specificity, sensitivity, and Youden index) in distinguishing between AP and AAD were 114 µ/L (80.70%, 95.83%, 0.765) for amylase, 2.62 g/L (76.32%, 85.42%, 0.617) for FIB, and 2.74 mg/L (95.61%, 62.50%, 0.581) for DD, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Amylase, FIB, and DD can demonstrate accurate and reliable diagnostic values, suggesting that they are useful and potential biomarkers in distinguishing AP from AAD.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10384,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical laboratory\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical laboratory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7754/Clin.Lab.2024.240407\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical laboratory","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7754/Clin.Lab.2024.240407","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:由于急性胰腺炎(AP)与急性主动脉夹层(AAD)具有相似的腹痛症状,因此在临床实践中往往难以区分。血清淀粉酶和凝血功能指数是否可用于区分急性胰腺炎和急性主动脉夹层还不得而知:在这项回顾性研究中,因急性腹痛入院的 114 例 AP 患者(AP 组)和 48 例 AAD 患者(AAD 组)被纳入最终分析。在入院前或入院时检测两组患者的血清淀粉酶水平和凝血功能指标,包括凝血酶原时间(PT)、国际标准化比值(INR)、活化部分凝血活酶时间(APTT)、纤维蛋白原(FIB)和D-二聚体(DD),并进行比较。采用学生 t 检验比较平均值。使用接收者操作特征曲线下面积(AUC)评估模型区分度。AUC的比较采用Z检验:与 AAD 组相比,AP 组的淀粉酶和 FIB 均明显升高,而 DD 则明显降低(均 p <0.01)。AP组与AAD组的PT、INR和APTT差异无统计学意义(均P > 0.05)。淀粉酶、FIB 和 DD 区分 AP 和 AAD 的 AUC 分别为 0.913、0.854 和 0.837,但淀粉酶、FIB 和 DD 之间无明显差异(均 p > 0.05)。最后,区分 AP 和 AAD 的临界值(特异性、敏感性和 Youden 指数)分别为:淀粉酶 114 µ/L (80.70%, 95.83%, 0.765),FIB 2.62 g/L (76.32%, 85.42%, 0.617),DD 2.74 mg/L (95.61%, 62.50%, 0.581):结论:淀粉酶、FIB和DD具有准确可靠的诊断价值,表明它们是区分AP和AAD的有用且潜在的生物标志物。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Diagnostic Value of Serum Amylase and Coagulation Function Indices in Distinguishing Acute Pancreatitis from Aortic Dissection.

Background: Due to similar symptoms of abdominal pain, acute pancreatitis (AP) is often difficult to differentiate from acute aortic dissection (AAD) in clinical practice. It is unknown whether serum amylase and coagulation function indices can be used to distinguish AP from AAD.

Methods: In this retrospective study, 114 AP patients (AP group) and 48 cases with AAD (AAD group) admitted for acute abdominal pain were enrolled for a final analysis. The levels of serum amylase and coagulation function indices, including prothrombin time (PT), international normalized ratio (INR), activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), fibrinogen (FIB), and D-dimer (DD), were tested before or on admission and compared between the two groups. Student's t-test was adopted for comparing the mean. Model discrimination was evaluated by using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Comparison of AUC was performed by using the Z-test.

Results: Compared with the AAD group, amylase and FIB were both significantly increased, while DD was significantly lower in the AP group (all p < 0.01). There were no statistically significant differences of PT, INR, and APTT between AP and AAD (all p > 0.05). The AUCs in distinguishing AP from AAD were 0.913, 0.854, and 0.837 for amylase, FIB, and DD, respectively, but there were no significant differences observed among amylase, FIB, and DD (all p > 0.05). Finally, the cutoff values (specificity, sensitivity, and Youden index) in distinguishing between AP and AAD were 114 µ/L (80.70%, 95.83%, 0.765) for amylase, 2.62 g/L (76.32%, 85.42%, 0.617) for FIB, and 2.74 mg/L (95.61%, 62.50%, 0.581) for DD, respectively.

Conclusions: Amylase, FIB, and DD can demonstrate accurate and reliable diagnostic values, suggesting that they are useful and potential biomarkers in distinguishing AP from AAD.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical laboratory
Clinical laboratory 医学-医学实验技术
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
494
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Clinical Laboratory is an international fully peer-reviewed journal covering all aspects of laboratory medicine and transfusion medicine. In addition to transfusion medicine topics Clinical Laboratory represents submissions concerning tissue transplantation and hematopoietic, cellular and gene therapies. The journal publishes original articles, review articles, posters, short reports, case studies and letters to the editor dealing with 1) the scientific background, implementation and diagnostic significance of laboratory methods employed in hospitals, blood banks and physicians'' offices and with 2) scientific, administrative and clinical aspects of transfusion medicine and 3) in addition to transfusion medicine topics Clinical Laboratory represents submissions concerning tissue transplantation and hematopoietic, cellular and gene therapies.
期刊最新文献
One Case of Abnormal Decrease of Interferon Gamma Release Assay Result Caused by Melphalan. Pulmonary Crystal-Storing Histiocytosis Misdiagnosed as Lung Cancer. Reference Intervals of Renal Function Set Established for Healthy Pregnant Women. SARS-CoV-2 not Detected in the Nasopharyngeal Sample but in Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid. The Diagnostic and Therapeutic Value of Anti CCP Antibodies and Double Stranded DNA in Rhupus Syndrome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1