Objective To explore the risk factors of pulmonary artery hypertension (PAH) and the its relationship with T cell subsets to provide a foundation for the prevention and treatment of PAH.Methods 154 maintained hemodialysis (MHD) patients in our dialysis center were recruited according to the criterion and divided into two groups subsequently:PAH group (pulmonary artery systolic pressure,PASP ＞ 35 mmHg) and non-PAH group (PASP≤35 mmHg).The related clinical,biochemical and ultrasonic cardiogram data were collected and peripheral blood was acquired to detect the expressions of the surface antigen CD3,CD4,CD8 and CD69 with flow cytometry.Logistic regression analysis was used to find out the relationship between PAH and T cell subsets.Results There was no significant difference between 56 cases of PAH and 98 cases of non-PAH as regards gender,age,mean systolic and diastolic pressure,dialysis durations,morbidities of hypertension and diabetes,smoking rate,and left ventricular diameter.Compared with the non-PAH group,the PAH group demonstrated a lower percent of CD8 T cells and CD8 CD69 T cells,but a much higher left atrial diameter (LAD),Interventricular septum thickness,left ventricular posterior wall thickness,and NT-proBNP.The percentage of T cells,CD4 T cells and CD4 CD69 T cells showed no difference between the two groups.Multivariate analysis confirmed that PAH was negatively independently associated with the percentage of CD8 T cells and CD8CD69 T cells.Conclusions The decreased percentage of CD8 T cells and CD8CD69 T cells in the peripheral blood is a risk factor of PAH in maintained hemodialysis patients,and CD8 T cells may play an important role in the genesis of PAH.

Objective:To explore clinical value of nucleic acid detection for hepatitis B virus (HBV) screening in hospitalized patients.Methods:This cross-sectional study collected and analyzed plasma samples from patients admitted to 10 domestic medical institutions from July 2021 to December 2021. Serological immunoassay and nucleic acid screening were used to simultaneously detect hepatitis B markers such as hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), hepatitis B surface antibody (HBsAb), hepatitis B e Antigen (HBeAg), hepatitis B e antibody (HBeAb), hepatitis B core antibody (HBcAb),and HBV DNA. Statistical analysis was performed on the serology, nucleic acid test results and clinical information of the patients.Results:Of the 8 655 collected samples, HBsAg was positive in 216 (2.50%) samples,HBV DNA was positive in 238 (2.75%) samples ( P>0.05); 210 (2.43%) samples were positive for both HBsAg and HBV DNA, 28 (0.32%) were HBsAg negative and HBV DNA positive, 6 cases (0.07%) were HBsAg positive and HBV DNA negative. Conclusion:These results indicate that the HBV DNA testing is equally effective as hepatitis B virus serological detection for hepatitis B virus screening in hospitalized patients.

Objective:To compare the cost-effectiveness of hospitalized Chinese patients undergoing nucleic acid screening strategies for hepatitis B and hepatitis C, immunological screening strategy, and no screening strategy under different willingness to pay (WTP). The results might aid to decision-making for the optimal strategy.Methods:In this study, nucleic acid screening, immunological screening and no screening were used as screening strategies, and China′s GDP in 2021 (80 976 yuan) was used as the threshold of WTP to construct a Markov model. After introducing parameters related to the diagnosis and treatment of hepatitis B and C in inpatients, a cohort population of 100 000 inpatients was simulated by TreeAge Pro 2021 software, the total cost, total health effects, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and average cost-effectiveness ratio of different screening strategies were calculated, and cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were used to assess the impact of parameter uncertainty on the final results.Results:Compared with the non-screening strategy, the incremental total cost of the hepatitis B immunological screening strategy for cohort patients was 11 049 536 yuan, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was 24 762 yuan/quality-adjusted life years (QALY), while the total incremental cost of nucleic acid screening was 19 208 059 yuan, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was 29 873 yuan/QALY; the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of nucleic acid screening and immunological screening was 45 834 yuan/QALY. Compared with the non-screening strategy, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of hepatitis C immunological screening strategy was 5 731 yuan/QALY, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of nucleic acid screening strategy was 8 722 yuan/QALY, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of nucleic acid screening and immunological screening was 45 591 yuan/QALY. The results of probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that when the cost of nucleic acid testing exceeded 214.53 yuan, it was not cost-effective to perform hepatitis B nucleic acid screening under the WTP as 1 fold GDP. When the cost of nucleic acid testing exceeded 132.18 yuan, it was not cost-effective to conduct hepatitis C screening under the WTP as 1 fold GDP.Conclusions:Nucleic acid screening strategy can achieve more cost-effectiveness and is worthy of vigorous promotion. Compared with no screening, both the nucleic acid and immunological screening strategies are cost-effective, and hepatitis nucleic acid screening is the optimal strategy for hospitalized patients.

Objective:This multi-centre study was conducted to assess the efficacy of various preoperative/pre-transfusion screening methods for blood transmitted disease.Methods:From July 2021 to December 2021, plasma samples of patients admitted to 10 hospitals were collected for screening preoperative/pre-transfusion blood transmitted disease. Nucleic acid detection technology was used to detect hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA, hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)(1+2) RNA, and the results were compared with the immuno-serological methods. χ 2 test and Kappa test were used to analyze the efficacy of these two methods. Results:A total of 8 655 valid specimens were collected from 10 hospitals. There was a statistically significant difference in the positive detection rate of HCV between the two methods ( P<0.001). There was no significant difference in the positive detection rate of HBV and HIV assessed by the two methods ( P>0.05), but the number of positive cases detected by HBV DNA and HIV RNA (218 and 4 cases) was significantly higher than the corresponding serological results (216 and 2 cases). At the same time, there were HBV, HCV and HIV immuno-serological omissions by the immuno-serological methods, among which 28 cases were HBsAg negative and HBV DNA positive, 2 cases were HCV antibody negative and HCV RNA positive, and 2 cases were HIV antigen/antibody negative and HIV RNA positive. In addition, in the 66 samples with inconsistent results from the two detection methods, 83.3% (55/66), 68.2% (45/66), 63.6% (42/66) and 62.1% (41/66) of patients aged was>45 years, tumor, surgery and male, respectively. Conclusions:Compared with immuno-serological tests, nucleic acid tests have the advantage in terms of sensitivity on detecting HBV, HCV and HIV infection and could reduce missed detection. The risk of transmission can be reduced by adding HBV, HCV, and HIV nucleic acid tests to preoperative/pre-transfusion immuno-serological tests screening for patients over 45 years of age and tumor patients.