【摘要】：目的:通過對缺血修飾白蛋白(IMA)、天門冬氨酸氨基轉(zhuǎn)移酶(AST)、肌酸激酶(CK)、肌酸激酶同工酶(CK-MB)、乳酸脫氫酶(LDH)、?-羥丁酸脫氫酶(HBDH)、超敏肌鈣蛋白T(HSCTNT)血漿水平的研究,獲取早期診斷急性冠脈綜合征(ACS)及病情危險程度的生化指標。方法:病例組選取2012年4月至2016年11月在新疆醫(yī)科大學(xué)附屬中醫(yī)醫(yī)院心血管內(nèi)科住院的ACS患者601例,通過GRACE(THE GLOBAL REGISTRY OF ACUTE CORONARY EVENTS)危險評分計算器進行危險分層:低危組226例、中危組227例高危組148人,另選取健康體檢者190例作為對照組。分別對病例組與對照組進行上述生化標志物的檢測與分析。結(jié)果:IMA在各危險分層組與對照組之間的比較有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.05),低危組與高危組之間比較有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.05)但中危組與低危組、高危組與中危組之間沒有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.05)。AST:低危組與對照組之間的比較沒有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.05),中危組與對照組、高危組與對照組之間的比較有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.05),各危險分層組之間的比較有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.05)CK:各危險分層組與對照組之間的比較有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.05);低危組與中危組之間的比較沒有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.05),中危組與高危組、高危組與低危組之間的比較有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.05)。CK-MB:各危險分層組與對照組之間的比較有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.05),各危險分層組之間的比較有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.05)LDH:各危險分層組與對照組之間的比較有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.05),低危組與中危組、高危組與低危組之間有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.05),中危組與高危組之間沒有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.05)。HBDH:各危險分層組與對照組之間的比較有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.05),低危組與中危組沒有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.05),中危組與高危組、高危組與低危組之間有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.05)。HSCTNT:各危險分層組與對照組之間的比較有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.05),各危險分層組之間的比較有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.05)。結(jié)論:(1)IMA、AST、CK、LDH、HBDH:在ACS早期診斷及危險分層中有一定的參考價值。(2)CK-MB、HSCTNT:其檢測對ACS的早期診斷具有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.05),對ACS的危險分層有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.05)。
[Abstract]:Objective: to investigate the effects of ischemia modified albumin (IMA), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), creatine kinase (CK), creatine kinase isoenzyme (CK-MB), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH),?-hydroxybutyrate dehydrogenase) (HBDH), To study the plasma level of hypertroponin T (HSCTNT) and to obtain biochemical indexes for early diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) (ACS) and the risk of acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Methods: from April 2012 to November 2016, a total of 601 ACS patients in the Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, affiliated Hospital of traditional Chinese Medicine, Xinjiang Medical University, were selected for risk stratification by GRACE (THE GLOBAL REGISTRY OF ACUTE CORONARY EVENTS) risk score calculator: 226 cases in low risk group. There were 227 cases in the middle risk group and 148 cases in the high risk group. 190 healthy persons were selected as the control group. The above biochemical markers were detected and analyzed in the case group and the control group respectively. Results: there were significant differences in IMA between the risk stratified group and the control group (P0.05), and between the low risk group and the high risk group (P0.05), but between the middle risk group and the low risk group. There was no significant difference between high risk group and middle risk group (P0.05) between low risk group and control group (P0.05). The comparison between the high risk group and the control group was statistically significant (P0.05), and the comparison between the risk stratification group and the control group was statistically significant (P0.05). There was no significant difference between the low risk group and the middle risk group (P0.05), but there was no significant difference between the middle risk group and the high risk group. The comparison between high risk group and low risk group was statistically significant (P0.05). The comparison between CK-MB: risk stratification group and control group was statistically significant (P0.05). The comparison between the risk stratification group and the control group was statistically significant (P0.05). There were significant differences between the LDH: risk stratification group and the control group (P0.05), the low risk group and the middle risk group. There was significant difference between the high risk group and the low risk group (P0.05), but there was no statistical significance between the middle risk group and the high risk group (P0.05). There was no significant difference between the low risk group and the middle risk group (P0.05), while the middle risk group and the high risk group had no statistical significance (P0.05). There was significant difference between high risk group and low risk group (P0.05) between). HSCTNT: risk stratification group and control group (P0.05), and between each risk stratification group had statistical significance (P0.05). Conclusion: (1) IMA,AST,CK,LDH,HBDH: has certain reference value in the early diagnosis and risk stratification of ACS. (2) the detection of CK-MB,HSCTNT: has statistical significance in the early diagnosis of ACS (P0.05). The risk stratification of ACS was statistically significant (P0.05).
【學(xué)位授予單位】：新疆醫(yī)科大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：R541.4

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張彥昂;朱曉紅;;心電圖與冠脈造影檢查在急性冠脈綜合征診斷中的應(yīng)用對比[J];河南醫(yī)學(xué)研究;2016年03期

2 周艷麗;章靜;王淑春;張建軍;宋楊英;;床旁快速聯(lián)合測定肌鈣蛋白I、肌酸激酶同工酶和肌紅蛋白診斷急性心肌梗死的臨床價值[J];檢驗醫(yī)學(xué)與臨床;2015年21期

3 陳傳華;馬祥波;羅艷華;;探討聯(lián)合檢測血清缺血修飾白蛋白、超敏肌鈣蛋白T水平對心肌缺血相關(guān)疾病的診斷價值[J];醫(yī)學(xué)檢驗與臨床;2015年05期

4 辛增蓮;楊麗;郭宇璇;彭輝;徐菲莉;;缺血修飾清蛋白和心型脂肪酸結(jié)合蛋白檢測在不穩(wěn)定性心絞痛診斷及危險分層中的應(yīng)用[J];國際檢驗醫(yī)學(xué)雜志;2015年16期

5 付英姿;安剛;呂紅君;許建成;張傳軍;;肌鈣蛋白I、肌酸激酶同工酶、肌紅蛋白檢測對急性冠脈綜合征的診斷價值[J];中國老年學(xué)雜志;2015年15期

6 陳容梅;陳琬瓊;黎志明;歐陽翠華;葉顯明;李巧汶;;血漿腦鈉肽、肌鈣蛋白T水平在急性冠脈綜合征危險分層的相關(guān)性研究[J];中國醫(yī)藥科學(xué);2015年12期

7 肖華勇;聶濱;;肝素對肌酸激酶及其同工酶測定干擾評價[J];國際檢驗醫(yī)學(xué)雜志;2015年09期

8 余平安;潘峰;;IMA及cTnI在早期診斷ACS病情評估中的價值[J];檢驗醫(yī)學(xué);2015年03期

9 劉振良;賈國渠;胡立祿;向乾才;;缺血修飾白蛋白與冠心病的關(guān)系[J];心血管病學(xué)進展;2015年02期

10 張寧;劉文嫻;;不穩(wěn)定型心絞痛患者血漿乳酸脫氫酶水平與冠狀動脈病變程度的關(guān)系研究[J];中國全科醫(yī)學(xué);2015年07期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 于曉麗;高敏肌鈣蛋白T檢測在心肌梗死中應(yīng)用價值的研究[D];大連醫(yī)科大學(xué);2011年

，

本文編號：2424625