切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版) ›› 2023, Vol. 17 ›› Issue (05) : 307 -314. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-1358.2023.05.004

论著

血小板计数、红细胞分布宽度对急性戊型肝炎肝衰竭患者预后的预测价值
李兆明, 章颖, 刘先进()   
  1. 226001 南通市,南通市第三人民医院,南通大学附属南通第三医院感染科
  • 收稿日期:2023-04-10 出版日期:2023-10-15
  • 通信作者: 刘先进
  • 基金资助:
    江苏省中医药科技发展计划项目(No. MS2022093); 南通市市级科技计划项目(No. MSZ19083)

Predictive effects of platelet count and red blood cell distribution width on the prognosis of patients with acute hepatitis E-induced liver failure

Zhaoming Li, Ying Zhang, Xianjin Liu()   

  1. Department of Infection, Nantong Third People’s Hospital, Affiliated Nantong Hospital 3 of Nantong University, Nantong 226006, China
  • Received:2023-04-10 Published:2023-10-15
  • Corresponding author: Xianjin Liu
引用本文:

李兆明, 章颖, 刘先进. 血小板计数、红细胞分布宽度对急性戊型肝炎肝衰竭患者预后的预测价值[J]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 307-314.

Zhaoming Li, Ying Zhang, Xianjin Liu. Predictive effects of platelet count and red blood cell distribution width on the prognosis of patients with acute hepatitis E-induced liver failure[J]. Chinese Journal of Experimental and Clinical Infectious Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2023, 17(05): 307-314.

目的

探讨血小板计数(PLT)和红细胞分布宽度(RDW)在急性戊型肝炎肝衰竭预后预测中的价值。

方法

选取2018年1月至2022年12月于南通市第三人民医院住院的急性戊型肝炎肝衰竭患者128例。收集患者性别和年龄等一般资料以及入院后1周内的肝肾功能、血常规、凝血指标、炎症指标及甲胎蛋白(AFP)等指标,计算终末期肝病模型(MELD)评分和终末期肝病模型联合血清钠(MELD-Na)评分。根据入组病例治疗后12周的生存状态分为生存组(104例)和死亡组(24例),比较两组患者总胆红素(TBil)、外周血白细胞计数(WBC)、红细胞分布宽度(RDW)、MELD-Na评分、血谷氨酰转肽酶(GGT)、总胆固醇(TC)、载脂蛋白A(ApoA)、纤维蛋白原(FIB)、抗凝血酶Ⅲ(AT-Ⅲ)、血小板计数(PLT)和血钠(NA)等指标。采用Stata 14.0软件进行统计学分析。采用Logistic多因素回归分析筛选影响患者预后的危险因素;通过绘制受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线评估上述危险因素对戊型肝炎肝衰竭预后的预测效能。

结果

128例急性戊型肝炎肝衰竭患者中男性116例(90.62%),女性12例(9.38%);平均年龄(60.25 ± 9.96)岁。128例患者中并发感染52例,并发肝性脑病12例,55例进行人工肝治疗。死亡组患者年龄(t =-0.35、P = 0.36)、性别(χ2 = 0.04、P = 0.85)、感染发生率(χ2 = 1.97、P = 0.16)、肝性脑病发生率(χ2 = 1.85、P = 0.17)及人工肝治疗率(χ2 = 3.16、P = 0.08)与生存组患者差异有统计学意义。死亡组患者血TBil水平(t =-3.18、P < 0.001)、WBC计数(t =-2.41、P = 0.01)、RDW值(Z =-2.40、P = 0.02)以及MELD-Na评分(t =-2.18、P = 0.02)显著高于生存组患者;而血GGT(Z = 2.40、P = 0.02)、TC (t = 2.03、P = 0.02)、ApoA(Z = 3.27、P < 0.001)、FIB(Z = 2.30、P = 0.02)、AT-Ⅲ(t = 3.25、P < 0.001)、PLT(t = 3.42、P < 0.001)和Na(Z = 2.58、P = 0.01)水平显著低于生存组患者,差异均有统计学意义。多元Logistic回归分析提示血RDW(OR = 1.45、95%CI:1.04~2.12、P = 0.03)、PLT计数(OR = 0.97、95%CI:0.95~0.99、P = 0.04)均为急性戊型肝炎肝衰竭患者12周预后的独立影响因素。Logistic回归分析建立回归方程LogitP = 26.01-0.03 × PLT + 0.37 × RDW,根据此回归方程可得到一个包含PLT和RDW的模型命名为PRM。以PLT、RDW和PRW分别绘制受试者工作特征曲线(ROC曲线),计算曲线下面积(AUC),PLT预测急性戊型肝炎肝衰竭患者12周预后的最佳Cut-off值为157.5,敏感性和特异性分别为49%和93%,AUC为0.7303;RDW预测预后的最佳Cut-off值为16.75,敏感性和特异性分别为53%和92%,AUC为0.6990;PRM预测预后的最佳Cut-off值为28.33,敏感性和特异性分别为67%和92%,AUC为0.8369。PRM的预测价值显著优于PLT(Z = 2.29、P = 0.02)。

结论

血RDW和血PLT计数为急性戊型肝炎肝衰竭患者12周预后的独立影响因素;由PLT、RDW组成的模型PRM可作为简单准确的预后指标用于评估急性戊型肝炎肝衰竭患者的预后。

Objective

To investigate the value of platelet count (PLT) and red blood cell distribution width (RDW) in predicting the prognosis of acute hepatitis E-induced liver failure.

Methods

Total of 128 patients with acute hepatitis E-induced liver failure who were hospitalized in Nantong Third People’s Hospital, Affiliated Nantong Hospital 3 of Nantong University from January 2018 to December 2022 were selected. General data such as gender and age, liver and kidney function, blood routine, coagulation index, inflammation index and alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) of patients within one week after admission were collected, and the model of end-stage liver disease (MELD) score and model of end-stage liver disease combined serum sodium (MELD-Na) score were calculated. According to the survival status at 12 weeks after treatment, the enrolled patients were divided into survival group (104 cases) and death group (24 cases). The levels of total bilirubin (TBil), peripheral white blood cell count (WBC), red blood cell distribution width (RDW), MELD-Na score, serum glutamyltransferase (GGT), total cholesterol (TC), apolipoprotein A (ApoA), fibrinogen (FIB) and antithrombin-Ⅲ (AT-Ⅲ), platelet count (PLT), blood sodium (Na) and other indicators were compared between the two groups. Stata 14.0 software was used for statistical analysis. Logistic regression analysis was used to screen the risk factors affecting the prognosis of patients. The prognostic efficacy of these risk factors in hepatitis E-induced liver failure were evaluated by receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC).

Results

Among the 128 patients with acute hepatitis E-induced liver failure, 116 cases were males (90.62%) and 12 cases were females (9.38%), with an average age of (60.25 ± 9.96) years old. Among the 128 patients, 52 cases were complicated with infection, 12 cases were complicated with hepatic encephalopathy, and 55 cases were treated with artificial liver. In the death group, age (t =-0.35, P = 0.36), sex (χ2 = 0.04, P = 0.85), incidence of infection (χ2 = 1.97, P = 0.16), incidence of hepatic encephalopathy (χ2 = 1.85, P = 0.17) and treatment rate of artificial liver (χ2 = 3.16, P = 0.08). The difference was statistically significant compared with survival group. Serum TBil (t =-3.18, P < 0.001), WBC (t =-2.41, P = 0.01), RDW (Z =-2.40, P = 0.02) and MELD-Na score (t =-2.18, P = 0.02) of patients in death group were significantly higher than those of survival group, with significant differences. GGT (Z = 2.40, P = 0.02), TC (t = 2.03, P = 0.02), ApoA (Z = 3.27, P < 0.001), FIB (Z = 2.30, P = 0.02), AT-Ⅲ (t = 3.25, P < 0.001), PLT (t = 3.42, P < 0.001), Na (Z = 2.58, P = 0.01) levels were significantly lower than those of survival group, the differences were statistically significant. Multiple Logistic regression analysis indicated RDW (OR = 1.45, 95%CI: 1.04-2.12, P = 0.03) and PLT count (OR = 0.97, 95%CI: 0.95-0.99, P = 0.04) were all independent prognostic factors of patients with acute hepatitis E-induced liver failure at 12 weeks. Logistic regression analysis results obtained regression equation LogitP = 26.01-0.03 × PLT + 0.37 × RDW, according to a model including PLT and RDW which can be obtained and named PRM. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of PLT, RDW and PRW were plotted respectively, and the area under the curve (AUC) were calculated. The optimal Cut-off value of PLT for predicting 12-week prognosis of patients with acute hepatitis E-induced liver failure was 157.5, the sensitivity and specificity were 49% and 93%, respectively, and the AUC was 0.7303. The optimal Cut-off value of RDW for predicting prognosis was 16.75, the sensitivity and specificity were 53% and 92%, respectively, and the AUC was 0.6990. The optimal Cut-off value of PRM was 28.33, the sensitivity and specificity were 67% and 92%, respectively, and the AUC was 0.8369. The predictive value of PRM was significantly better than that of PLT (Z = 2.29, P = 0.02).

Conclusions

Blood RDW and blood PLT count are independent factors of 12-week prognosis in patients with acute hepatitis E-induced liver failure. PRM model consisting of PLT and RDW could be used as a simple and accurate prognostic indicator to evaluate the prognosis of acute hepatitis E-induced liver failure.

表1 生存组与死亡组患者一般资料
表2 生存组与死亡组病例各项实验室指标
指标 生存组(104例) 死亡组(24例) 统计量 P
ALT [M(P25,P75),U/L] 848.00(537.00,1 675.00) 180(69.50,1 604.00) Z = 1.86 0.06
AST [M(P25,P75),U/L] 565.00(184.00,1 349.00) 250(63.50,1 087.50) Z = 1.58 0.11
ALB [M(P25,P75),g/L] 32.60(30.20,34.60) 30.50(30.15,35.00) Z = 0.38 0.71
TBil [ ± s,µmol/L] 246.68 ± 7.89 326.99 ± 10.60 t =-3.18 < 0.001
ALP [ ± s,U/L] 193.41 ± 7.69 163.93 ± 13.32 t = 1.71 0.05
GGT [M(P25,P75),U/L] 175.00(106.00,302.00) 90.00(75.00,165.00) Z = 2.40 0.02
LDH [M(P25,P75),U/L] 220.00(180.00,329.00) 295.00(212.00,478.50) Z =-1.81 0.07
PA( ± s,mg/L) 98.94 ± 7.65 87.73 ± 7.69 t = 0.68 0.25
CHE( ± s,U/L) 4 311.45 ± 173.79 3 665.13 ± 575.28 t = 1.43 0.08
C3( ± s,g/L) 0.67 ± 0.09 0.42 ± 0.03 t = 1.31 0.10
AFP [M(P25,P75),ng/ml] 7.10(4.06,40.20) 7.20(3.06,16.80) Z = 0.82 0.41
CA199 [M(P25,P75),U/ml] 56.62(24.18,145.00) 45.20(8.60,70.16) Z = 1.09 0.28
TC( ± s,mmol/L) 3.36 ± 0.12 2.77 ± 0.28 t = 2.03 0.02
ApoA [M(P25,P75),g/L] 0.52(0.42,0.72) 0.33(0.18,0.50) Z = 3.27 < 0.001
PCT [M(P25,P75),ng/ml] 0.52(0.33,0.82) 0.68(0.43,0.81) Z =-1.04 0.30
CRP [M(P25,P75),mg/L] 9.11(5.63,17.30) 12.90(4.25,41.50) Z =-1.03 0.30
NK [M(P25,P75),个/μl] 130.00(70.00,176.00) 108.00(75.50,140.00) Z = 1.21 0.22
INR( ± s 1.87 ± 0.08 2.06 ± 0.13 t =-1.10 0.14
FIB [M(P25,P75),g/L] 2.12(1.86,2.72) 1.71(1.58,2.26) Z = 2.30 0.02
AT-Ⅲ( ± s,%) 64.56 ± 2.19 49.17 ± 2.63 t = 3.25 < 0.001
WBC( ± s,× 109/L) 6.55 ± 0.26 8.23 ± 0.92 t =-2.41 0.01
RBC [M(P25,P75),× 1012/L] 4.53(4.24,4.89) 4.48(3.56,4.80) Z = 1.12 0.26
PLT( ± s,× 109/L) 162.00 ± 6.19 112.93 ± 13.10 t = 3.42 < 0.001
RDW [M(P25,P75),%] 14.20(13.40,14.70) 16.80(14.00,19.45) Z =-2.40 0.02
HB( ± s,g/L) 140.91 ± 1.82 136.40 ± 6.06 t = 0.95 0.17
MPV( ± s,fL) 11.53 ± 0.14 11.28 ± 0.23 t = 0.81 0.21
Na [M(P25,P75),mmol/L] 137.10(135.70,138.50) 135.6(132.8,136.7) Z = 2.58 0.01
Cr [M(P25,P75),μmol/L] 67.50(57.00,80.60) 67.40(60.50,77.85) Z = 0.06 0.95
MELD评分( ± s 20.66 ± 0.54 23.00 ± 1.89 t =-1.63 0.05
MELD-Na评分( ± s 21.42 ± 0.58 25.25 ± 2.70 t =-2.18 0.02
表3 戊型肝炎肝衰竭患者预后影响因素的Logistic回归分析
图1 RDW、PLT和PRM预测戊型肝炎肝衰竭预后的ROC曲线
表4 PLT、RDW和PRM对戊型肝炎肝衰竭预后预测效能
[1]
中华医学会肝病学分会. 戊型肝炎防治共识[J]. 中华肝脏病杂志,2022,30(8):820-831.
[2]
陈晓云, 刘晓慧, 宋静静, 等. 急性戊型肝炎肝衰竭不良预后的影响因素分析[J]. 北京医学,2022,44(10):935-938.
[3]
陈珂, 陈榕, 王晓琳, 等. 急性重症戊型肝炎临床特征及危险因素分析[J]. 肝脏,2021,26(11):1221-1223, 1249.
[4]
Asrani SK, Kamath PS. Model for end-stage liver disease score and MELD exceptions: 15 years later[J]. Hepatol Int,2015,9(3):346-354.
[5]
中华医学会感染病学分会肝衰竭与人工肝学组; 中华医学会肝病学分会重型肝病与人工肝学组. 肝衰竭诊治指南(2018年版)[J]. 实用肝脏病杂志,2019,24(2):164-171.
[6]
Kumar SS,Kumar CK, Zaigham A, et al. Acute-on-chronic liver failure: consensus recommendations of the Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver (APASL) 2014[J]. Hepatol Int,2014,8(4):453-471.
[7]
Jenna P, Sophia HH, Sheetal S, et al. Systematic review of the global epidemiology of viral-induced acute liver failure[J]. BMJ Open,2020,10(7):e037473.
[8]
Koch A, Trautwein C, Tacke F. Acute liver failure[J]. Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed,2017,112(4):371-381.
[9]
Steve RJ, Gnanadurai FJ, Anantharam R, et al. Expanded diagnostic approach to hepatitis E virus detection in patients with acute-onchronic liver failure: a pilot study[J]. Indian J Med Microbiol,2018,36(3):391-396.
[10]
Kumar A, Saraswat VA. Hepatitis E and acute- on- chronic liver failure[J]. J Clin Exp Hepatol,2013,3(3):225-230.
[11]
廖宝林, 林思炜, 陈铿, 等. 621例急性戊型肝炎流行病学及临床特征研究[J]. 中华传染病杂志,2014,32(9):554-558.
[12]
Wallace SJ, Swann R, Donnelly M, et al. Mortality and morbidity of locally acquired hepatitis E in the national Scottish cohort: a multicentre retrospective study[J]. Aliment Pharmacol Ther, 2020,51(10):974-986.
[13]
Moreau R, Jalan R, Gines P, et al. Acute-on-chronic liver failure is a distinct syndrome that develops in patients with acute decompensation of cirrhosis[J]. Gastroenterology,2013,144(7):1426-1437.
[14]
Arroyo V, Moreau R, Jalan R. Acute-on-chronic liver failure[J]. N Engl J Med,2020,382(22):2137-2145.
[15]
Cervoni JP, Thevenot T, Weil D, et al. C-reactive protein predicts short-term mortality in patients with cirrhosis[J]. J Hepatol,2012,56(6):1299- 1304.
[16]
Lippi G, Teti L, Dipalo M, et al. Relationship between red blood cell distribution width and prognostic biomarkers in patients admitted to the emergency department with acute infections[J]. EJIM, Eur J Immunol,2013,24(2):e15-e16.
[17]
Wang J, Huang R, Yan X, et al. Red blood cell distribution width: A promising index for evaluating the severity and long-term prognosis of hepatitis B virus-related diseases[J]. Dig Liver Dis,2020,52(4):440-446.
[18]
Qiang L, Qin J, Sun C, et al. A novel predictive model based on inflammatory markers to assess the prognosis of patients with HBV-related acute-on-chronic liver failure: a retrospective cohort study[J]. BioMed Central Gastroenterol,2020,20(1):301.
[19]
Macdougall IC, Cooper A. The inflammatory response and epoetin sensitivity[J]. Nephrol Dial Transplant,2002,17(Suppl 1):S48-S52.
[20]
Jongen-Lavrencic M, Peeters HR, Vreugdenhil G, et al. Interaction of inflammatory cytokines and erythropoeitin in iron metabolism and erythropoiesis in anaemia of chronic disease[J]. Clin Rheumatol, 1995,14(5):519-525.
[21]
Wu J, Zhang X, Liu H, et al. RDW, NLR and RLR in predicting liver failure and prognosis in patients with hepatitis E virus infection[J]. Clin Biochem,2018,63:24-31.
[22]
Gary T, Pichler M, Belaj K, et al. Lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio: a novel marker for critical limb ischemia in PAOD patients[J]. Int J Clin Pract,2014,68(12):1483-1487.
[23]
Wu W, Yan H, Zhao H, et al. Characteristics of systemic inflammation in hepatitis B-precipitated ACLF: Differentiate it from No-ACLF[J]. Liver Int,2018,38(2):248-257.
[24]
Lo Re V 3rd, Haynes K, Forde KA, et al. Risk of acute liver failure in patients with drug-induced liver injury: evaluation of Hy’s law and a new prognostic model[J]. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol,2015,13(13):2360-2368.
[25]
Matsuo R , Nakano Y , Ohkohchi N. Platelet administration via the portal vein promotes liver regeneration in rats after 70% hepatectomy[J]. Ann Surg,2011,253(4):759-763.
[26]
Michalopoulos GK, DeFrances MC. Liver regeneration[J]. Science,1997,276(5309):60-66.
[27]
Mu XY, Zou J, Chen J, et al. Low platelets: a new and simple prognostic marker for patients with hepatitis E virus-related acute liver failure[J]. Hepato Int,2022,16(5):1-11.
[28]
Chauhan A, Adams DH, Watson SP, et al. Platelets: no longer bystanders in liver disease[J]. Hepatology,2016,64(5):1774-1784.
[29]
Masood I, Rafq A, Majid Z. Hepatitis E presenting with thrombocytopaenia[J]. Trop Doct,2014,44(4):219-220.
[30]
赵一鸣, 刘秀红, 李伟华, 等. 戊型肝炎研究进展[J/CD]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版),2018,12(3):216-220.
[1] 欧阳剑锋, 李炳权, 叶永恒, 胡少宇, 向阳. 关节镜联合富血小板血浆治疗粘连性肩周炎的疗效[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 765-772.
[2] 许正文, 李振, 侯振扬, 苏长征, 朱彪. 富血小板血浆联合植骨治疗早期非创伤性股骨头坏死[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 773-779.
[3] 夏传龙, 迟健, 丛强, 连杰, 崔峻, 陈彦玲. 富血小板血浆联合关节镜治疗半月板损伤的临床疗效[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 877-881.
[4] 张中斌, 付琨朋, 朱凯, 张玉, 李华. 胫骨高位截骨术与富血小板血浆治疗膝骨关节炎的疗效[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 633-641.
[5] 王泽勇, 覃健. 白细胞含量对富血小板血浆治疗运动系统损伤的影响[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 684-688.
[6] 张健, 刘小龙, 查天建, 姚俊杰, 王傑. 富含血小板血浆联合异种脱细胞真皮基质修复糖尿病足缺血性创面的临床效果[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2023, 18(06): 503-506.
[7] 韩李念, 王君. 放射性皮肤损伤治疗的研究进展[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2023, 18(06): 533-537.
[8] 李硕, 尹希, 祁连港, 王丽, 刘宗宝. 浓缩生长因子在促进失神经皮瓣术后神经再生的应用前景[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2023, 18(06): 547-551.
[9] 陈静, 张春明, 周斌, 吴明明. 甲苯磺酸瑞马唑仑联合瑞芬太尼全身麻醉对胸腔镜肺叶切除患者术后应激反应及血清PAF、γ干扰素的影响[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2023, 16(04): 554-556.
[10] 吕垒, 冯啸, 何凯明, 曾凯宁, 杨卿, 吕海金, 易慧敏, 易述红, 杨扬, 傅斌生. 改良金氏评分在儿童肝豆状核变性急性肝衰竭肝移植手术时机评估中价值并文献复习[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 661-668.
[11] 李勇, 兰川, 吴斌, 张光年, 李敬东. 术前血小板-白蛋白评分对肝硬化肝癌术后预后的预测价值[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(04): 412-416.
[12] 王静, 何彬. 经颅彩色多普勒超声联合血sCD40L、Fib、PAF对短暂性脑缺血发作后脑梗死的预测效果[J]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2023, 09(04): 222-227.
[13] 马聪, 李雪靖, 郑晓佐, 张晓阳, 段坤峰, 刘国强, 郄素会. 关节腔内注射富血小板血浆与透明质酸钠治疗Ⅰ-Ⅲ期膝骨关节炎的对比研究[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2023, 09(05): 282-288.
[14] 吉茜茜, 田尧, 马林, 钱进. 红细胞分布宽度-白蛋白比值联合BISAP评分对急性胰腺炎严重程度及死亡率的预测价值[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 433-438.
[15] 郭亮亮, 邱珊珊, 钟萍, 赵心恺. 血小板-白蛋白-胆红素评分对肝硬化上消化道出血的诊断价值[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(04): 216-219.
阅读次数
全文


摘要