广州医药 ›› 2022, Vol. 53 ›› Issue (6): 36-41.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-8535.2022.06.008

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

IPF、H-IPF在血流感染中的应用价值

罗丽香1, 熊德芳2, 杨潇1, 徐邦牢1   

  1. 1 广州市第一人民医院检验科(广州 510180)
    2 广州市胸科医院(广州 510095)
  • 收稿日期:2021-11-22 出版日期:2022-11-20 发布日期:2022-11-30

Application value of IPF and H-IPF in bloodstream infection

LUO Lixiang1, XIONG Defang2, YANG Xiao1, XU Banglao1   

  1. 1 Guangzhou First People's Hospital,Guangzhou 510180,China
    2 Guangzhou Chest Hospital,Guangzhou 510095,China
  • Received:2021-11-22 Online:2022-11-20 Published:2022-11-30

摘要: 目的 研究未成熟血小板分数(IPF)、高荧光未成熟血小板比例(H-IPF)指标在血流感染中的早期诊断价值。方法 选取2020年7月—2021年1月广州市第一人民医院的血培养阳性患者100例作为主要的研究对象,重症病人对照50例,健康对照50例。收集各组患者IPF、H-IPF、大型血小板比率(P-LCR)、血小板体积分布宽度(PDW)、粒/淋、粒/单指标的数值,采用单因素方差分析、构建ROC曲线的方法分析比较各组的IPF、H-IPF、P-LCR、PDW、粒/淋、粒/单比值的差异及其与血流感染效能的关系。结果 IPF、H-IPF、粒/淋、粒/单比值在血流感染组高于其他2组,差异有统计学意义(χ2分别是15.190,10.250,39.490,12.850;P<0.05),而 P-LCR、PDW在3组之间无统计学意义。其中,IPF与H-IPF对血流感染诊断效能较高,其中IPF的AUC为0.855(95% CI为0.737~0.973),H-IPF的AUC为0.845(95% CI为0.722~0.968)。结论 IPF、H-IPF与血流感染密切相关,这2个指标对血流感染患者具有一定的诊断价值。

关键词: IPF指标, H-IPF指标, 血流感染, 诊断价值

Abstract: Objective To explore the early diagnosis value of immature platelet fraction (IPF) and high fluorescent immature platelet fraction (H-IPF) in bloodstream infection.Methods A total of 100 patients with positive blood culture result from July 2020 to January 2021 in Guangzhou First People's Hospital were selected as the research objects,in the mean while,50 critically ill patients and 50 healthy patients were enrolled as two control groups.The values of IPF,H-IPF,platelet-large cell rate (P-LCR),platelet distribution width (PDW),neutrophils/lymphocytes,neutrophils/monocyte ratio of patients in each group were collected,and one-way analysis of variance and ROC curve were used to compare the data,to further analyze their relationship with the bloodstream infection.Results The IPF,H-IPF,neutrophils/lymphocytes,neutrophils/monocyte ratio in the bloodstream infection group were significantly higher than control groups,with statistical significance (χ2=15.190,10.250,39.490,12.850; P<0.05),while P-LCR and PDW had no statistical significance.Among them,IPF and H-IPF were highly effective in diagnosing bloodstream infection,the AUC of IPF was 0.855 (95% CI: 0.737-0.973) and the AUC of H-IPF was 0.845 (95% CI: 0.722-0.968).Conclusions IPF and H-IPF were closely related to bloodstream infection,and these two indicators had a certain value in diagnosing patients with bloodstream infection.

Key words: IPF, H-IPF, bloodstream infection, diagnostic value