红细胞分布宽度评估急性胰腺炎严重程度的价值

目的探讨红细胞分布宽度(RDW)对急性胰腺炎(AP)严重程度的评估价值。方法回顾性研究收集2013年5月~2016年5月南方医科大学南方医院消化内科住院的急性胰腺炎患者527例,按疾病严重程度分为轻度(MAP)组、中度(MSAP)组、重度(SAP)组,纳入同期非急性胰腺炎患者105例作为对照组,收集患者的一般资料及RDW,以经典评估指标"血糖"和"血钙"为对比进行统计与分析。结果急性胰腺炎组与对照组之间RDW、血糖(Glu)、血钙(Ca)差异有统计学意义(P〈0.05);SAP患者的RDW、Glu明显高于MAP及MSAP患者,Ca则明显低于MAP及MSAP患者(P〈0.05);RDW(P〈0....

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in南方医科大学学报 Vol. 37; no. 7; pp. 993 - 996
Main Author 汪俏妹 罗明武 肖冰
Format Journal Article
LanguageChinese
Published 南方医科大学南方医院消化内科//广东省胃肠疾病重点实验室,广东 广州,510515 2017
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN1673-4254
DOI10.3969/j.issn.1673-4254.2017.07.25

Cover

More Information
Summary:目的探讨红细胞分布宽度(RDW)对急性胰腺炎(AP)严重程度的评估价值。方法回顾性研究收集2013年5月~2016年5月南方医科大学南方医院消化内科住院的急性胰腺炎患者527例,按疾病严重程度分为轻度(MAP)组、中度(MSAP)组、重度(SAP)组,纳入同期非急性胰腺炎患者105例作为对照组,收集患者的一般资料及RDW,以经典评估指标"血糖"和"血钙"为对比进行统计与分析。结果急性胰腺炎组与对照组之间RDW、血糖(Glu)、血钙(Ca)差异有统计学意义(P〈0.05);SAP患者的RDW、Glu明显高于MAP及MSAP患者,Ca则明显低于MAP及MSAP患者(P〈0.05);RDW(P〈0.05,OR=3.374)、Glu(P〈0.05,OR=2.343)、Ca(P〈0.05,OR=2.182)均为急性胰腺炎的独立危险因素;ROC曲线预测SAP曲线下面积为RDW(0.801)〉Glu(0.658)〉Ca(0.227)。结论 RDW是评估急性胰腺炎严重程度的有效指标。
Bibliography:44-1627/R
WANG Qiaomei, LUO Mingwu, XIAO Bing( Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Gastroenterology, Department of Gastroenterology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510515, China)
red blood cell distribution width;acute pancreatitis;severity
Objective To explore the value of red blood cell distribution width (RDW) in assessment of the severity of acute pancreatitis (AP). Methods This retrospective analysis was conducted among 527 patients with AP treated in our department from May, 2013 to May, 2016. According to the severity of the condition, the patients were classified into mild acute pancreatitis (MAP) group, moderately severe acute pancreatitis (MSAP) group and severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) group, with 105 subjects without AP as the control group. The demographic data and data of RDW were collected from all cases to evaluate the value of RDW in assessing the severity of AP in comparison with classic evaluation indicators glucose (Glu) and calcium (Ca). Results The patients with
ISSN:1673-4254
DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1673-4254.2017.07.25