论文部分内容阅读
分析了肌酐代谢无明显异常的17名铅、镉接触者在自由饮水条件下收集的132份尿样。用尿比重(U_(SG))、尿肌酐(U_(Cr))、尿流速调整的肌酐比率(U_(CF))等方法校正尿测定浓度(U),比较其对尿铅、尿镉浓度的影响。结果表明,不同方法校正后的变异程度,以U_(CF)时最大,其次为U_(Cr)、U_(SG)校正,未校正的测定浓度(U)的变异程度最小。因此,可以认为,U_(SG)、U_(Cr)、U_(CF)校正与测定浓度相比,并未提供明显的优点。就尿铅、尿镉而言,在特殊情况下需校正时,以尿比重为参数较为合适。
A total of 132 urine samples collected from 17 lead and cadmium exposed free drinking water samples were analyzed for no apparent abnormalities in creatinine metabolism. Uric acid (U), urinary creatinine (U Cr) and urinary creatinine ratio (U CF) were used to calibrate urinary concentration (U), urinary lead and urinary cadmium concentration Impact. The results showed that the degree of variation after correction by different methods was highest at U CF, followed by U Cr and U SG, and the uncorrected measured concentration (U) had the smallest degree of variation. Therefore, it can be considered that U_ (SG), U_ (Cr) and U_ (CF) correction do not provide obvious advantages compared with the determination of concentration. In the case of urinary lead and urinary cadmium, the specific gravity of urine is the most appropriate parameter to be corrected in special cases.