论文部分内容阅读
目的了解青春期女性血清可溶性转铁蛋白受体(s-TfR)水平及其在铁营养状况评价中的价值。方法1.选择目标人群中的健康者为研究对象,确定该人群s-TfR的参考值范围。2.采用传统的评价指标将目标人群分为铁营养状况正常组,隐性缺铁(rID)组和缺铁性贫血(IDA)组,比较3组的血清铁蛋白(SF)、s-TfR、s-TfR/lgSF和血红蛋白(Hb)水平。3.用两种不同的方法诊断IDA,分别比较IDA组与非IDA贫血(non-IDA)组及正常组与non-IDA组SF、s-TfR、s-TfR/lgSF、Hb水平。结果1.该人群血清s-TfR参考值范围为1.616~24.516μmol/L。2.按照传统诊断方法,不同铁营养状况组的s-TfR、s-TfR/lgSF、Hb值差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),SF值在rID和IDA两组间差异无统计学意义。3.用SF+Hb法诊断IDA,IDA组和non-IDA组的s-TfR水平差异无统计学意义,non-IDA组的s-TfR值已超出该人群参考值的上限,是正常均值的2.36倍;non-IDA组的s-TfR,s-TfR/lgSF值均高于正常组;用SF+Hb+s-TfR法诊断IDA,IDA组和non-IDA组比较,SF、s-TfR、s-TfR/lgSF值差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);除Hb外,non-IDA组与正常组的各项铁生化指标差异均无统计学意义。结论s-TfR能很好的反映机体铁营养状况,在评价人群(尤其存在感染情况的人群)的铁营养状况时,联合应用s-TfR和SF两项指标,可能会有效地提高诊断灵敏度和特异度。
Objective To investigate the level of s-TfR in adolescent women and its value in the evaluation of iron nutrition status. Method 1. Select the target population of healthy subjects as the study to determine the population s-TfR reference range. The target population was divided into three groups: normal nutrition group, rID-deficient group and IDA-treated group. The levels of serum ferritin (SF), s-TfR , S-TfR / lgSF and hemoglobin (Hb) levels. Three different methods were used to diagnose IDA and compare SF, s-TfR, s-TfR / lgSF and Hb levels between IDA group and non-IDA anemia group and non-IDA group. Serum s-TfR reference value range of 1.616 ~ 24.516μmol / L. According to the traditional diagnostic methods, there were significant differences in s-TfR, s-TfR / lgSF and Hb between different iron nutritional status groups (P <0.05). There was no significant difference in SF value between rID and IDA . There was no significant difference in s-TfR levels between IDA group and non-IDA group by using SF + Hb method. The s-TfR value of non-IDA group was beyond the upper limit of the population reference value, which was normal mean 2.36 times. The s-TfR and s-TfR / lgSF values of non-IDA group were higher than those of normal group. SF-sf-TfR , S-TfR / lgSF values were statistically significant (P <0.05); except for Hb, non-IDA group and the normal group of iron biochemical indicators showed no significant difference. Conclusion s-TfR can well reflect the nutritional status of the body iron in the evaluation of the population (especially those infected with iron nutrition), the combination of s-TfR and SF two indicators may be effective in improving the diagnostic sensitivity and Specificity.