陳金花,林曉仁,羅湘湘,柯龍燕,張澍澍(.福建醫(yī)科大學(xué)省立臨床醫(yī)學(xué)院/福建省立醫(yī)院檢驗(yàn)科,
?
·論 著·
3項(xiàng)指標(biāo)檢測(cè)在細(xì)菌感染診斷中的價(jià)值探討*
陳金花1,林曉仁2,羅湘湘2,柯龍燕2,張澍澍2(1.福建醫(yī)科大學(xué)省立臨床醫(yī)學(xué)院/福建省立醫(yī)院檢驗(yàn)科,
福州 350001;2.福建醫(yī)科大學(xué)醫(yī)學(xué)技術(shù)與工程學(xué)院檢驗(yàn)系,福州 350004)
目的 探討炎性指標(biāo)中性粒細(xì)胞表面CD64、單核細(xì)胞HLA-DR、降鈣素原(PCT)檢測(cè)在細(xì)菌感染性疾病診斷中的價(jià)值。方法 選取2013年10月至2014年3月福建省立醫(yī)院臨床初步診斷為感染性疾病的住院患者90例,按出院時(shí)回顧性分析,將患者分為細(xì)菌感染組、非細(xì)菌感染組(包括真菌或支原體感染);另選取同期健康體檢者30例作為對(duì)照組。比較各組之間CD64、HLA-DR、PCT、C反應(yīng)蛋白(CRP)、中性粒細(xì)胞堿性磷酸酶(NAP)積分、白細(xì)胞計(jì)數(shù)(WBC)的檢測(cè)結(jié)果。結(jié)果 細(xì)菌感染組CD64、PCT、CRP明顯高于非細(xì)菌感染組與對(duì)照組,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.01),NAP、WBC明顯高于對(duì)照組,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.01),HLA-DR明顯低于非細(xì)菌感染組與對(duì)照組,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.01);非細(xì)菌感染組CD64、CRP、NAP積分(P<0.01)與WBC計(jì)數(shù)(P<0.05)明顯高于對(duì)照組,而PCT及單核細(xì)胞HLA-DR與對(duì)照組相比較,差異無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05)。細(xì)菌感染組各炎性指標(biāo)相關(guān)性分析表明:CD64與HLA-DR呈負(fù)相關(guān)(r=-0.36,P<0.01);PCT與CRP呈正相關(guān)(r=0.43,P<0.01);HLA-DR除與CD64呈負(fù)相關(guān)外,還與CRP、WBC呈負(fù)相關(guān)(P<0.01)。按PCT水平對(duì)感染程度分級(jí),結(jié)果顯示PCT各水平組的HLA-DR水平均明顯低于對(duì)照組(P<0.05,P<0.01),并呈現(xiàn)明顯遞減趨勢(shì);除0.05~0.5 ng/mL組外,其他PCT水平組的CD64水平均明顯高于對(duì)照組(P<0.05,P<0.01),并呈現(xiàn)明顯的遞增趨勢(shì)。結(jié)論 PCT、CD64、HLA-DR是較好的細(xì)菌感染指標(biāo),3者聯(lián)合檢測(cè)對(duì)細(xì)菌感染的診斷、評(píng)估與監(jiān)測(cè)有著重要的意義。
CD64; HLA-DR; 降鈣素原
傳統(tǒng)的炎性指標(biāo)有很多,主要包括C反應(yīng)蛋白(CRP)、中性粒細(xì)胞堿性磷酸酶(NAP)、白細(xì)胞計(jì)數(shù)(WBC)。隨著醫(yī)學(xué)水平的發(fā)展,近2年出現(xiàn)了新的炎性指標(biāo)如中性粒細(xì)胞CD64、降鈣素原(PCT)、單核細(xì)胞HLA-DR等。本文通過(guò)檢測(cè)CD64、HLA-DR、PCT、CRP、NAP及WBC炎性因子水平,并進(jìn)行聯(lián)合分析,探討CD64、PCT、HLA-DR在感染性疾病診斷與評(píng)估中的臨床應(yīng)用價(jià)值。
1.1 一般資料 根據(jù)感染性疾病的臨床初步診斷,選取2013年10月至2014年3月福建省立醫(yī)院收治的住院患者90例,其中男57例,女33例,年齡12~68歲。根據(jù)患者的臨床癥狀、體征,并結(jié)合細(xì)菌培養(yǎng)、抗炎治療的效果等指標(biāo),將患者分為細(xì)菌感染組70例,非細(xì)菌感染組(包括真菌或支原體感染)20例。另選取同期健康體檢者30例作為對(duì)照組,其中男19例,女11例,年齡18~52歲。2組人群一般資料比較差異無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05),具有可比性。
1.2 方法 采用美國(guó)BD公司生產(chǎn)的FACS Calibur流式細(xì)胞儀進(jìn)行定量檢測(cè)CD64、HLA-DR,抗體均為美國(guó)BD公司提供;采用意大利梅里埃公司生產(chǎn)的MINIVIDAS全自動(dòng)熒光酶聯(lián)免疫分析儀及配套試劑,通過(guò)酶聯(lián)免疫熒光法檢測(cè)PCT;采用德國(guó)西門(mén)子公司生產(chǎn)的BNⅡ全自動(dòng)蛋白分析儀及配套試劑,通過(guò)免疫散射比濁法檢測(cè)CRP;采用重氮鹽偶氮偶聯(lián)法手工染色,分類(lèi)100個(gè)中性粒細(xì)胞,計(jì)算NAP積分。
2.1 細(xì)菌感染組(A組)、非細(xì)菌感染組(B組)及對(duì)照組之間各炎性指標(biāo)水平的比較 細(xì)菌感染組CD64、PCT、CRP明顯高于非細(xì)菌感染組與對(duì)照組(P<0.01),NAP、WBC明顯高于對(duì)照組(P<0.01),HLA-DR明顯低于非細(xì)菌感染組與對(duì)照組(P<0.01);非細(xì)菌感染組CD64、CRP、NAP積分(P<0.01)與WBC計(jì)數(shù)(P<0.05)明顯高于對(duì)照組,差異均有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。而PCT及HLA-DR與對(duì)照組比較差異無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05)。見(jiàn)表1。
2.2 70例細(xì)菌感染患者炎性指標(biāo)相關(guān)性分析 CD64與HLA-DR呈負(fù)相關(guān)(P<0.01);PCT與CRP呈正相關(guān)(P<0.01);HLA-DR除與CD64呈負(fù)相關(guān)外,還與CRP、WBC呈負(fù)相關(guān)(P<0.01)。見(jiàn)表2。
表1 3組各炎性指標(biāo)水平的比較±s)
注:與對(duì)照組比較,**P<0.01,*P<0.05;與非細(xì)菌感染組比較,ΔP<0.01。
表2 細(xì)菌感染組各炎性指標(biāo)之間的相關(guān)性分析(r)
注:**P<0.01;-表示無(wú)數(shù)據(jù)。
2.3 PCT各水平組之間CD64、HLA-DR水平比較 70例感染性疾病患者PCT均大于0.05 ng/mL,根據(jù)PCT水平將這些患者分組:<0.05~0.5 ng/mL組(輕度感染)、<0.5~2.0 ng/mL組(可能全身細(xì)菌感染)、<2.0~10.0 ng/mL組(膿毒血癥)、>10.0 ng/mL組(嚴(yán)重膿毒血癥)。對(duì)照組PCT均小于0.05 ng/mL(無(wú)細(xì)菌感染)。各組之間CD64、HLA-DR水平比較,PCT各水平組的HLA-DR水平均明顯低于對(duì)照組(P<0.05,P<0.01),并呈現(xiàn)明顯遞減趨勢(shì);除可能全身細(xì)菌感染組外,其他PCT水平組的CD64水平均明顯高于對(duì)照組(P<0.05,P<0.01),并呈現(xiàn)明顯遞增趨勢(shì)。見(jiàn)表3。
表3 PCT各水平組之間CD64、HLA-DR水平的比較
注:與對(duì)照組比較,**P<0.01,*P<0.05。
細(xì)菌分離培養(yǎng)是診斷細(xì)菌感染的金標(biāo)準(zhǔn),但因培養(yǎng)陽(yáng)性率低且耗時(shí)長(zhǎng),不能達(dá)到早期診斷的目的,因此臨床常以傳統(tǒng)炎性指標(biāo)CRP、NAP積分、WBC計(jì)數(shù)等的變化并結(jié)合臨床癥狀,對(duì)感染作出初步判斷,進(jìn)行經(jīng)驗(yàn)性的抗生素治療,但常導(dǎo)致過(guò)度治療與一些不良反應(yīng)的發(fā)生。鑒于這幾項(xiàng)傳統(tǒng)炎性指標(biāo)在反映細(xì)菌感染上存在的敏感性和(或)特異性方面的不足,本研究檢測(cè)近年來(lái)新出現(xiàn)的CD64、PCT、HLA-DR,旨在為感染性疾病的診斷與評(píng)估尋找更有價(jià)值的炎性指標(biāo)。
CD64是免疫球蛋白IgG的Fc段受體1,主要分布在巨噬細(xì)胞、單核細(xì)胞及樹(shù)突狀細(xì)胞表面,具有連接體液與細(xì)胞免疫的橋梁作用,當(dāng)機(jī)體發(fā)生感染時(shí)中性粒細(xì)胞表面的CD64表達(dá)可迅速增高,尤其在細(xì)菌感染者升高,具有較高的靈敏度和特異性[1-4]。本研究結(jié)果顯示,CD64在細(xì)菌感染與非細(xì)菌感染時(shí)均升高,但細(xì)菌感染組的水平明顯高于非細(xì)菌感染組(P<0.01),且隨著感染程度的加重,CD64水平呈現(xiàn)明顯遞增趨勢(shì),嚴(yán)重膿毒血癥組CD64水平達(dá)(4 080±2 967)ng/mL,與對(duì)照組相比較差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.01)。以上結(jié)果提示CD64的表達(dá)缺乏特異性,但與細(xì)菌感染的嚴(yán)重程度密切相關(guān),可作為對(duì)細(xì)菌感染程度評(píng)估與監(jiān)測(cè)的1項(xiàng)良好指標(biāo),這與蘇密龍等[5]和Icardi等[6]的報(bào)道一致。
PCT是降鈣素的前肽物,健康人體中主要由甲狀旁腺細(xì)胞合成。本研究結(jié)果顯示PCT在細(xì)菌感染時(shí)增高明顯,在非細(xì)菌感染時(shí)則不增高,這與文獻(xiàn)報(bào)道一致,說(shuō)明PCT在反映細(xì)菌感染方面具有較高的敏感性和特異性[7]。
HLA-DR是單核細(xì)胞表面的重要抗原,是一種主要的Ⅱ級(jí)組織相容性抗原復(fù)合物,與感染時(shí)抗原在T細(xì)胞的表達(dá)和啟動(dòng)炎性瀑布反應(yīng)有關(guān)。單核細(xì)胞下調(diào)或不表達(dá)HLA-DR都會(huì)抑制其抗原提呈的功能,且還會(huì)抑制其響應(yīng)刺激分泌炎性因子功能。在成人創(chuàng)傷和手術(shù)患者明顯減少,膿毒癥時(shí)降低更為明顯[8]。HLA-DR嚴(yán)重下調(diào)的患者可被認(rèn)為是免疫麻痹,它可能會(huì)面臨發(fā)生感染合并癥的危險(xiǎn)[9]。本研究顯示在細(xì)菌感染時(shí)HLA-DR明顯下調(diào),而非細(xì)菌感染則無(wú)明顯改變,且二者間差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.01),提示HLA-DR在反映細(xì)菌感染上具有良好的敏感性與特異性。進(jìn)一步研究發(fā)現(xiàn),HLA-DR隨著細(xì)菌感染程度的加重而下調(diào)明顯,表明HLA-DR表達(dá)的下調(diào)還與臨床細(xì)菌感染患者病情的發(fā)生與發(fā)展相關(guān)聯(lián)。相關(guān)性分析顯示HLA-DR與CD64呈負(fù)相關(guān)(r=-0.36,P<0.01),提示聯(lián)合HLA-DR與CD64可能更有助于對(duì)細(xì)菌感染性疾病的評(píng)估與監(jiān)測(cè)。
傳統(tǒng)的炎性指標(biāo)CRP作為一種急性時(shí)相反應(yīng)蛋白,在炎性反應(yīng)或者急性組織損傷時(shí)合成增加;本研究顯示CRP與PCT呈正相關(guān)(r=0.43,P<0.01),與陸青等[10]的報(bào)道一致。另2項(xiàng)炎性指標(biāo)NAP積分與WBC計(jì)數(shù)在細(xì)菌感染時(shí)缺乏特異性,且與PCT及CD64無(wú)相關(guān)性。
綜上所述,PCT、CD64、HLA-DR是較好的細(xì)菌感染指標(biāo),三者聯(lián)合檢測(cè),對(duì)細(xì)菌感染的診斷、評(píng)估與監(jiān)測(cè)有著重要的意義。
[1]Hoffmann JJ.Neutrophil CD64:a diagnostic marker for infection and sepsis[J].Clin Chem Lab Med,2009,47(8):903-916.
[2]Icardi M,Erickson Y,Kilborn S,et al.CD64 index provides simple and predictive testing for detetion and monitoring of sepsis and bacterial infection in hospital patients[J].J Clin Microbiel,2009,47(12):3914-3919.
[3]Bhandari V,Wang C,Rinder C,et al.Hematologic profile of sepsis in neonates:neutrophil CD64 as a diagnostic marker[J].Pediatrics,2008,121(1):129-134.
[4]Groselj-Grenc M,Ihan A,Derganc M.Neutrophil and monocyte CD64 and CD163 expression in critically ill neonates and children with sepsis:comparison of fluorescence intensities and calculated indexes[J].Mediators Inflamm,2008,2008(1):2026-2046.
[5]蘇密龍,蘇智軍.流式細(xì)胞術(shù)監(jiān)測(cè)單核細(xì)胞、中性粒細(xì)胞CD64臨床價(jià)值研究[J].中國(guó)免疫學(xué)雜志,2013,29(2):1072-1076.
[6]Icardi M,Erickson Y,Kilborn S,et al.CD64 index provides simple and predictive testing for detetion and monitoring of sepsis and bacterial infection in hospital patients[J].J Clin Microbiel,2009,47(12):3914-3919.
[7]Marchini G,Berggren V,Djilaik M,et al.The birth process initiates all acute phase reaction in the fetus 2 newborn infant [J].Acta Paediatr,2000,89(9):1082-1086.
[8]Menestrian N,Martini A,Milan A,et al.HLA-DR expression on monocytes and the T-cell subset in septic patients[J].Critical Care,2005,9(S1):150.
[9]Gogos C,Kotsaki A,Pelekanou A,et al.Early alterations of the innate and adaptive immune statuses in sepsis according to the type of underlying infection[J].Crit Care,2010,14(3):R96.
[10]陸青,楊海敏.全血CRP及其試劑的評(píng)估[J].上海醫(yī)學(xué)檢驗(yàn)雜志,1999,14(5):2-5.
Value of 3 indexes in diagnosis of bacterial infections*
CHENJin-hua1,LINXiao-ren2,LUOXiang-xiang2,KELong-yang2,ZHANGShu-shu2
(1.FujianProvincialClinicalMedicalCollegeofFujianMedicalUniversity/DepartmentofClinicalLaboratory,FujianProvincialHospital,Fuzhou,Fujian350001,China;2.DepartmentofInspection,CollegeofTechniqueandEngineering,FujianMedicalUniversity,Fuzhou,Fujian350004,China)
Objective To explore the value of inflammatory indexes of neutrophil surface CD64,monocyte HLA-DR and procalcitonin(PCT) in the diagnosis of bacterial infectious diseases.Methods 90 inpatients with primarily diagnosed infectious diseases in the Fujian Provincial Hospital from October 2013 to March 2014 were randomly selected and detected CD64,HLA-DR,PCT,CRP,NAP integral and WBC count.According to the retrospective analysis at hospital discharge,the patients were divided into the bacterial infection group and non-bacterial infection (including fungal or mycoplasma infection) group;at the same period 30 individuals of healthy physical examination were selected as the control group.The detection results of inflammatory indexes were analyzed an compared among various groups.Results The CD64,PCT and CRP levels in the bacterial infection group were significantly higher than those in the non-bacterial infection group and the control group with statistical differences(P<0.01),the NAP integral and WBC counts were significantly higher than those in the control group with statistical differences(P<0.01),the HLA-DR expression was significantly lower than that in the control group and the non-bacterial infection group with statistical difference(P<0.01);the CD64 and CRP levels,NAP integral and WBC counts in the non-bacterial infection group were significantly higher than those in the control group(P<0.01,P<0.05),while PCT and the monocyte HLA-DR had no statistical differences between the non-bacterial infection group and the control group(P>0.05).The correlation analysis indicated that CD64 was negatively correlated with HLA-DR (r=-0.36,P<0.01);PCT and CRP was positively correlated (r=0.43,P<0.01),HLA-DR also was negatively correlated with CRP and WBC(P<0.01).The infection degree was graded according to the PCT level,the results showed that the HLA-DR level in various PCT levels groups was significantly lower than that in the control group(P<0.05,P<0.01),moreover which showing the decline trend;except for the 0.05-0.5 ng/mL group,the CD64 level in the other PCT levels groups was significantly higher than that in the control group(P<0.05,P<0.01),moreover which showing the ascending trend.Conclusion PCT,neutrophil CD64 and monocyte HLA-DR are better indicators of bacterial infection and their combined detection has an important significance for the diagnosis,evaluation and monitoring of bacterial infection.
CD64; HLA-DR; procalcitonin
10.3969/j.issn.1672-9455.2015.16.011
A
1672-9455(2015)16-2325-03
2015-01-25
2015-04-16)