Clinical value of related indexes in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis with esophageal varices
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1000-6680.2017.04.004
- VernacularTitle:原发性胆汁性肝硬化食管静脉曲张患者相关指标的临床价值
- Author:
Xinglu WANG
;
Qin XU
;
Cuihuan ZHU
;
Xinxin PU
;
Yuexin ZHANG
;
Hao LIU
;
Xiaofeng SUN
- Keywords:
Primary biliary cirrhosis;
Esophageal varices;
Clinical indicators
- From:
Chinese Journal of Infectious Diseases
2017;35(4):203-207
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To investigate the clinical indicators which can predict esophageal varices in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC).Methods A total of 351 patients with PBC from the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University from January 2013 to December 2016 were retrospectively analyzed, including 173 patients with esophageal varices and 178 patients without varicose veins.The alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate transaminase (AST), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), γ-glutamyl transpeptadase (γ-GT), total bilirubin (TBil), albumin (Alb), prothrombin time (PT), platelet (PLT), AST to ALT ratio (AAR), fibrosis index based on the 4 fator (FIB-4), AST to PLT ratio index (APRI) and Mayo scores were compared between two groups.Group t test or rank sum test was used to compare the two groups.Relation between the indicators mentioned above and esophageal varices were tested by univariate analysis.Multivariate unconditional Logistic regression was used to screen these indicators to independently predict esophageal varices in PBC patients.Results Age, PT, TBil, AAR, FIB-4, APRI and Mayo scores of PBC patients with esophageal varices were all higher than those of patients without esophageal varices ([60.3±10.6] years old vs [51.9±10.9] years old, [13.31±3.12] s vs [11.17±2.42] s, 28.06 [18.05, 60.06] mmol/L vs 15.39 [10.64, 33.63] μmol/L, 1.69±0.91 vs 1.23±0.95, 6.18 [4.05,9.16] vs 1.80 [1.10,2.74], 1.95 [1.12,3.08] vs 0.69 [0.38,1.57], 6.45±1.52 vs4.62±1.53, respectively).Whereas ALT, γ-GT, Alb and PLT levels were all lower than those without varicose veins (36.60 [19.88, 74.28] U/L vs 59.32 [23.58, 132.70] U/L, 71.00 [38.36, 165.38] U/L vs 125.00 [37.50, 336.21] U/L, [29.78±6.33] g/L vs [39.51±25.16] g/L, [103.43±52.84]×109/L vs [234.44±90.40]×109/L, respectively).The differences were all statistically significant (t=-7.25, t=-7.18, Z=-5.823, t=-4.60, Z=-8.427, Z=-12.661, t=-11.25, Z=-3.218, Z=2.987, t=4.94, t=16.63, respectively;all P<0.01).Multivariate unconditional logistic regression analysis showed that PLT<149×109/L (OR=0.966, 95% CI: 0.957-0.974), PT>11.95 s (OR=0.705, 95%CI: 0.569-0.874), TBil>17.19 μmol/L (OR=0.99, 95%CI: 0.982-0.999), FIB-4>3.02 (OR=0.868, 95% CI: 0.807-0.932) and Mayo score>4.88 (OR=6.053, 95%CI: 2.388-15.342) were independent clinical indicators for the prediction of esophageal varicose veins.Conclusions PLT, PT, TBil, FIB-4, and Mayo scores can be used as predictors of esophageal varices in patients with PBC.
