acm Advances in Clinical Medicine 2161-8712 2161-8720 beplay体育官网网页版等您来挑战! 10.12677/acm.2024.1461961 acm-90787 Articles 医药卫生 SII、NAR与急性脑梗死患者静脉溶栓短期预后的相关性分析
Analysis of the Correlation between SII, NAR and Short-Term Prognosis of Intravenous Thrombolysis in Patients with Acute Cerebral Infarction
方传勤 安徽医科大学第二附属医院神经内科,安徽 合肥 06 06 2024 14 06 1655 1662 28 5 :2024 23 5 :2024 23 6 :2024 Copyright © 2024 beplay安卓登录 All rights reserved. 2024 This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 目的:分析全身免疫炎症指数(SII)、中性粒细胞与白蛋白比值(NAR)与急性脑梗死静脉溶栓短期预后的相关性。方法:通过收集2021年9月至2023年9月就诊于安徽医科大学第二附属医院卒中中心的199例发病4.5小时内采用阿替普酶静脉溶栓的急性脑梗死患者的临床资料,根据患者3个月的mRS评分,将患者的短期预后分为预后良好组及预后不良组。比较两组一般资料及SII、NAR,并将有统计学差异的单因素分析指标纳入二元Logistic回归分析中探讨影响短期预后的独立因素,并采用ROC曲线探讨SII、NAR对短期预后的预测价值。结果:两组结果相比,心房颤动病史、SII、NAR、白细胞计数、总胆红素、肌酐、甘油三酯均有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。二元Logistic回归分析结果显示SII、NAR是预后不良的独立影响因素(P < 0.05)。ROC曲线分析显示,SII预测不良预后的曲线下面积0.826,95.0%可信区间(0.755~0.898, P < 0.05),最佳截断值781.16,特异度96.2%,敏感度52.5%;NAR预测预后的曲线下面积0.813,95.0%可信区间(0.735~0.891, P < 0.05),最佳截断值126.31,特异度83.6%,敏感度67.5%;联合预测曲线下面积0.839,95.0%可信区间(0.769~0.910, P < 0.05),特异度91.2%,敏感度62.5%。结论:溶栓前高SII及高NAR与急性脑梗死患者静脉溶栓后的短期不良预后独立正相关,并可用于患者预后不良的预测,且预测价值二者联合高于SII,SII高于NAR。
Objective: To analyze the correlation between systemic immune inflammation index (SII), neutrophil to albumin ratio (NAR) and short-term prognosis of intravenous thrombolysis in acute cerebral infarction. Methods: The clinical data of 199 patients with acute cerebral infarction who underwent intravenous thrombolysis with alteplase within 4.5 hours of onset in the stroke center of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University from September 2021 to September 2023 were collected. According to the mRS score of 3 months, the short-term prognosis of patients was divided into good prognosis group and poor prognosis group. The general data, SII and NAR of the two groups were compared, and the univariate analysis indexes with statistical differences were included in the binary logistic regression analysis to explore the independent factors affecting the short-term prognosis, and the ROC curve was used to explore the predictive value of SII and NAR for short-term prognosis. Results: Compared with the results of the two groups, the history of atrial fibrillation, SII, NAR, white blood cell count, total bilirubin, creatinine and triglyceride were statistically significant (P < 0.05). Binary Logistic regression analysis showed that SII and NAR were independent influencing factors of poor prognosis (P < 0.05). ROC curve analysis showed that the area under the curve of SII predicting poor prognosis was 0.826, 95.0% confidence interval (0.755~0.898, P < 0.05), the best cut-off value was 781.16, the specificity was 96.2%, and the sensitivity was 52.5%. The area under the curve of NAR predicting prognosis was 0.813, 95.0% confidence interval (0.735~0.891, P < 0.05), the best cut-off value was 126.31, the specificity was 83.6%, and the sensitivity was 67.5%. The area under the combined prediction curve was 0.839, 95.0% confidence interval (0.769~0.910, P < 0.05), specificity was 91.2%, and sensitivity was 62.5%. Conclusion: High SII and high NAR before thrombolysis are independently and positively correlated with the short-term poor prognosis of patients with acute cerebral infarction after intravenous thrombolysis, and can be used to predict the poor prognosis of patients. The predictive value of the combination of the two is higher than that of SII, and SII is higher than NAR.
脑梗死,静脉溶栓,全身免疫炎症指数,中性粒细胞/白蛋白比值
Cerebral Infarction
Intravenous Thrombolysis Systemic Immune Inflammation Index Neutrophil/Albumin Ratio
1. 引言

急性脑梗死(Acute Cerebral Infarction, AIS)是导致我国老年人死亡和残疾的首要原因,并随着社会经济水平的发展,近年来呈现年轻化趋势 [1] 。超早期静脉溶栓(Intravenous Thrombolytic Therapy, IVT)治疗是AIS有效的治疗措施;《中国急性缺血性脑卒中诊治指南2018》中推荐AIS发病4.5 h内的首选静脉溶栓治疗 [2] 。在发病4.5小时内使用阿替普酶静脉溶栓能有效的挽救缺血半暗带,改善患者神经功能缺损症状。但部分患者并没有从溶栓中获益,反而出现病情的加重,所以尽早尽快预测溶栓患者的预后是管理脑卒中溶栓治疗的关键。近年来研究发现,免疫炎症反应贯穿脑梗死的发生、发展 [3] [4] ,尤其是炎症反应中的中性粒细胞、淋巴细胞及血小板等已被证实与急性脑梗死的不良预后相关,而从中演变来的全身免疫炎症指数(Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index, SII)、中性粒细胞计数/白蛋白比值(Neutrophil to Albumin Ratio, NAR)是新型的炎症标志物,反映了宿主免疫炎症状态 [5] 。SII融合了中性粒细胞计数、淋巴细胞计数、血小板计数三个炎症指标,相比于单个炎症指标来说,更能反应出患者的全身炎症状态。NAR作为新型复合炎症指标,近年才应用于脑卒中,目前关于其与急性脑梗死的关系仍处于研究阶段。因此,本研旨在探讨SII、NAR与AIS患者短期预后的关系,为早期判断患者的预后提供帮助,为临床管理AIS的预后提供指导。

2. 资料与方法 2.1. 一般资料

纳入2021年9月至2023年9月就诊于安徽医科大学第二附属医院急诊绿道收治的共199例患者。纳入标准:1) 年龄 > 18岁;2) 符合《中国急性缺血性脑卒中诊治指南2018》诊断标准 [2] ;3) 发病至入院溶栓时间 ≤ 4.5 h;4) 到院均行头颅CT或MRI检查确诊为脑卒中;5) 无严重感染、恶性疾病病史;6) 非妊娠及哺乳期女性;7) 临床资料完整。排除标准:1) 出血性脑卒中;2) 合并严重的肝肾功能损害、各种肿瘤及自身免疫系统疾病者;3) 接受桥接治疗者;4) 发病近期有感染或使用抗生素或使用过免疫抑制剂者;5) 临床资料不全或未能完成随访者。

2.2. 研究方法

回顾性收集病人性别、年龄、既往史(高血压、糖尿病、心房颤动、脑梗死)、吸烟史、饮酒史和用药史(他汀药、抗血小板聚集药)及溶栓前的实验室指标,并根据公式(SII = 中性粒细胞计数 × 血小板计数/淋巴细胞计数,NAR = 淋巴细胞计数/血清白蛋白)计算出SII及NAR。在研究对象发病后90 d采用改良Rankin量表(mRS)评分评估患者的短期预后,mRS评分0~2分为预后良好,纳入预后良好组;3~6分为预后不良 [6] ,纳入预后不良组。

2.3. 统计学方法

采用SPSS26.0统计学软件进行数据处理及统计分析。计量资料符合正态分布的用均数±标准差表示,两组间采用两独立样本t检验进行比较;不呈正态分布的计量资料以M (P25, P75)表示,两组间比较采用Mann-Whitney U检验;计数资料以例数和百分率表示,组间比较采用χ2检验;采用多因素Logistic回归进行危险因素分析;采用受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线下面积(AUC)评估SII、NAR及两者联合指标预测急性脑卒中不良预后的效能。以P < 0.05为差异有统计学意义。

3. 结果 3.1. 两组不同预后一般资料比较

在两组一般资料比较中的结果显示,心房颤动病史在是预后不良的影响因素(P < 0.05),而两组患者在性别、年龄、既往史、吸烟饮酒史及药物服用史等方面无统计学差异(P > 0.05)。见 表1

<xref></xref>Table 1. Comparison of general data of different prognosis between the two groupsTable 1. Comparison of general data of different prognosis between the two groups 表1. 两组不同预后一般资料比较

预后良好组(n = 159)

预后不良组(n = 40)

P值

性别

0.428

53 (33.3)

16 (40.0)

续表

106 (66.7)

24 (60.0)

年龄(岁)

63.00 (54.00,72.00)

67.00 (58.00,74.50)

0.058

高血压史[例(%)]

120 (75.5)

28 (70.0)

0.479

糖尿病史[例(%)]

42 (26.4)

9 (22.5)

0.612

心房颤动史[例(%)]

22 (13.8)

13 (32.5)

0.006

吸烟[例(%)]

56 (35.2)

13 (32.5)

0.747

饮酒[例(%)]

50 (31.4)

12 (30.0)

0.860

抗血小板药[例(%)]

60 (37.7)

9 (22.5)

0.070

他汀药[例(%)]

60 (37.7)

16 (40.0)

0.792

脑梗死既往史[例(%)]

23 (14.5)

7 (17.5)

0.632

DNT (min)

43.21 ± 15.78

42.08 ± 16.97

0.690

入院收缩压(mmHg)

153.34 ± 20.80

150.38 ± 21.41

0.424

入院舒张压(mmHg)

89.02 ± 14.46

87.25 ± 15.98

0.499

3.2. 两组不同预后实验室指标的单因素分析

实验室指标的单因素分析结果表明,预后不良组的SII、NAR、白细胞计数、总胆红素、肌酐、甘油三酯均高于预后良好组,且差异具有统计学意义(P < 0.05);而两组在红细胞计数、单核细胞计数、总蛋白、谷丙转氨酶、谷草转氨酶等实验室指标上无统计数差异(P > 0.05)。见 表2

<xref></xref>Table 2. Single factor analysis of different prognostic laboratory indexes in two groupsTable 2. Single factor analysis of different prognostic laboratory indexes in two groups 表2. 两组不同预后实验室指标的单因素分析

预后良好组(n = 159)

预后不良组(n = 40)

SII (×109/L)

377.19 (277.27,507.59)

787.78 (462.58,1033.86)

P < 0.001

NAR (×106/g)

101.91 (79.49,120.45)

146.94 (109.96,202.38)

P < 0.001

PT (s)

11.40 (10.50,108.30)

11.50 (10.73,19.23)

0.741

红细胞计数(×1012/L)

4.58 (4.21,5.00)

4.48 (4.14,4.85)

0.344

白细胞计数(×109/L)

6.82 (5.79,8.07)

8.16 (6.64,9.48)

P < 0.001

单核细胞计数(×109/L)

0.44 (0.34,0.53)

0.51 (0.34,0.65)

0.76

纤维蛋白原(g/L)

2.76 (2.36,3.09)

2.92 (2.43,4.06)

0.126

总蛋白(g/L)

71.00 (38.60,44.00)

39.15 (36.86,42.83)

0.511

谷丙转氨酶(U/L)

26.00 (18.00,34.00)

28.00 (16.25,45.00)

0.484

谷草转氨酶(U/L)

22.00 (19.00,30.00)

23.50 (19.25,31.75)

0.267

总胆红素(μmol/L)

11.70 (8.00,15.10)

14.45 (8.65,20.15)

0.047

续表

直接胆红素(μmol/L)

2.40 (1.90,3.10)

2.50 (1.30,3.30)

0.545

间接胆红素(μmol/L)

9.10 (5.90,12.00)

11.70 (5.68,14.55)

0.108

尿素氮(mmol/L)

5.65 (4.66,6.99)

5.72 (4.82,8.54)

0.388

尿酸(μmol/L)

332.00 ± 103.71

345.18 ± 105.78

0.475

肌酐(μmol/L)

75.00 (63.00,88.00)

82.50 (66.75,104.25)

0.034

总胆固醇(mmol/L)

4.86 ± 1.19

4.54 ± 0.97

0.125

甘油三酯(mmol/L)

1.31 (0.93,2.01)

1.06 (0.78,1.57)

0.048

高密度脂蛋白(mmol/L)

1.15 (0.98,1.35)

1.27 (1.03,1.42)

0.168

低密度脂蛋白(mmol/L)

3.08 (2.56,3.56)

2.78 (2.43,3.31)

0.093

同型半胱氨酸(μmol/L)

14.1 (12.00,17.5)

15.40 (12.5,17.43)

0.291

3.3. 预后不良的多因素分析

将上述单因素分析有意义的指标纳入到二元Logistic回归方程中,结果显示SII (OR = 1.003, 95% CI: 1.000~1.005, P < 0.05)、NAR (OR = 1.029, 95% CI: 1.002~1.058, P < 0.05)是预后不良的独立影响因素(P < 0.05)。见 表3

<xref></xref>Table 3. Binary Logistic regression analysis of poor prognosisTable 3. Binary Logistic regression analysis of poor prognosis 表3. 影响预后不良的二元Logistic回归分析

回归系数

标准误差

Wald

OR

95% CI

P值

心房颤动史

0.974

0.582

2.801

2.649

0.846~8.291

0.094

白细胞计数

−0.271

0.246

1.218

0.762

0.471~1.234

0.270

SII

0.003

0.001

4.986

1.003

1.000~1.005

0.026

NAR

0.029

0.014

4.431

1.029

1.002~1.058

0.035

总胆红素

0.044

0.037

1.455

1.045

0.973~1.019

0.228

肌酐

0.006

0.007

0.867

1.006

1.006~0.993

0.352

甘油三酯

−0.168

0.319

0.277

0.846

0.453~1.579

0.599

常量

−5.625

1.433

15.409

0.004

0

3.4. SII、NAR及两者联合指标对AIS静脉溶栓患者预后不良的预测价值

对SII、NAR及两者联合指标进行ROC曲线,分析结果显示,SII预测AIS患者不良预后的曲线下面积0.826,95.0%可信区间(0.755~0.898, P < 0.05),最佳截点值781.16,特异度96.2%,敏感度52.5%;NAR的曲线下面积0.813,95.0%可信区间(0.735~0.891, P < 0.05),最佳截点值126.31,特异度83.6%,敏感度67.5%。联合指标预测曲线下面积0.839,95.0%可信区间(0.769~0.910, P < 0.05),特异度91.2%,敏感度62.5%。根据曲线下面积可知,联合指标的预测价值大于SII、NAR,而SII的预测价值高于NAR。见 图1

Figure 1. ROC curve for predicting poor prognosis using SII, NAR, and their combined indicators--图1. SII、NAR及两者联合指标预测预后不良的ROC曲线--
4. 讨论

本研究发现SII及NAR与AIS患者静脉溶栓后的不良预后独立相关,均为其90 d预后不良的独立危险因素。NAR相对于SII来说预测预后不良的能力较强,而SII及NAR两者联合指标对溶栓患者不良预后的预测能力比SII、NAR单独的预测能力更好。

目前越来越多的研究表明在AIS的发生和发展中炎症机制起着不可或缺的作用。炎症介质在正常脑组织中表达水平很低,当脑组织发生缺血缺氧损伤后,可诱导促炎性细胞因子的释放,炎症反应加剧了缺血性脑损伤和神经功能障碍,缺血组织释放的趋化因子和细胞因子可促进外周循环白细胞向缺血部位的浸润 [7] [8] 。炎症细胞的浸润及各种炎症介质的释放通过破坏血脑屏障、诱导适应性免疫反应损失等各种途径加剧神经功能障碍导致神经元死亡或凋亡,从而导致AIS患者预后不良 [9] [10] 。中性粒细胞和淋巴细胞作为主要的炎症细胞,在缺血性脑损伤中发挥着重要作用。而SII作为淋巴细胞、中性粒细胞和血小板的综合指标,反映了适应性免疫应答、炎症反应和血栓形成这3个过程 [11] 。相比其他基于白细胞的炎症指标,如血小板与淋巴细胞比值、淋巴细胞与单核细胞比值,SII更可靠、更具代表性、更全面地反映局部免疫和全身炎症反应的平衡状态,与心脑血管疾病的发生、发展及预后等密切相关 [12] 。Hou等人研究分析362名脑卒中患者,结果提示SII是卒中患者入院时严重程度的独立危险因素 [13] 。Weng等人将216名脑梗死患者作为AIS组,875名健康者为对照组进行观察研究,结果AIS组患者的SII水平高于对照组,ROC曲线结果显示SII的最佳截断值是545.14 × 109/L,高SII组患者的NIHSS评分明显更高,同样得出SII与入院时卒中严重程度密切相关 [14] 。一项报道的meta分析显示,高SII与AIS的不良结局、高死亡率、高HT发生率显著相关,且表明SII可能是静脉溶栓预后的潜在预测指标 [15] 。朱来运等人的研究发现SII水平增加老年AIS病人溶栓后发生HT的风险,且与短期功能预后不良相关,在临床上具有一定参考价值 [16] 。杨丹丹等人的研究也表明脑梗死病情的严重程度、梗死灶体积的大小及预后均与SII有关 [17] 。本研究的结果与上述结果相吻合,更进一步验证了SII与AIS之间的关系。

近几十年来,人白蛋白己被证明具有神经保护作用,在动物试验中发现高浓度白蛋白可以降低脑缺血再灌注的平均红细胞压积、减少脑梗塞体积及脑水肿,并有临床研究发现白蛋白可以改善脑梗死患者的神经功能,预后良好的脑梗死患者白蛋白水平较预后差的患者高,而且发现白蛋白水平可以作为判断脑梗死预后好坏的独立危险因素 [18] - [21] 。而NAR是中性粒细胞和白蛋白的综合生物标志物,代表了急性期神经毒性及保护的双重作用,相比单一指标能更好的反映免疫炎症程度、微循环再灌注情况、脑水肿程度及药物疗效。有研究表明,高水平的NAR与动脉瘤性蛛网膜下腔出血患者的长期死亡率增加相关,并且NAR是动脉瘤性蛛网膜下腔出血长期死亡率的一个有希望的炎症标志物 [22] 。Shin等人通过评估接受手术或血管内治疗的动脉瘤性蛛网膜下腔出血患者术后的NAR,发现患者的临床结局与NAR之间存在显着相关性,并且术后即刻较高的NAR是不良预后的重要预测因素 [23] 。Mao等人近期研究发现,NAR水平的升高与IS的不同严重程度相关 [24] 。在陈光勇的研究中发现,溶栓后AIS患者入院24小时内NAR与神经功能缺损严重程度同样呈正相关 [25] 。本研究证实了溶栓前高NAR水平与预后不良有关,与其他研究结果相符合。

另外,本研究也有存在一些局限性。首先,这本研究为单一中心数据的回顾性研究,其结果有一定的偏倚性。其次,本研究样本量相对较小,需要用更大的数据库进一步研究。此外,本研究的数据具有区域性、种族性、偶然性等。因此要将SII、NAR作为预后生物标志物,其临床意义必须得到充分的验证,所以仍需要进行更大规模的前瞻性、大样本、多中心的临床研究,力求尽可能精准评估AIS患者的临床预后。

NOTES

*通讯作者。

References Cao, J., Eshak, E.S., Liu, K., Yang, J., Gero, K., Liu, Z., et al. (2020) An Age-Period-Cohort Analysis of Stroke Mortality Attributable to Low Physical Activity in China and Japan: Data from the GBD Study 1990-2016. Scientific Reports, 10, Article No. 6525. >https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-63307-x 彭斌, 刘鸣, 崔丽英. 与时俱进的新指南——《中国急性缺血性脑卒中诊治指南2018》解读[J]. 中华神经科杂志, 2018, 51(9): 657-659. Luo, Y., Reis, C. and Chen, S. (2019) NLRP3 Inflammasome in the Pathophysiology of Hemorrhagic Stroke: A Review. Current Neuropharmacology, 17, 582-589. >https://doi.org/10.2174/1570159x17666181227170053 Shi, K., Tian, D., Li, Z., Ducruet, A.F., Lawton, M.T. and Shi, F. (2019) Global Brain Inflammation in Stroke. The Lancet Neurology, 18, 1058-1066. >https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(19)30078-x Hu, B., Yang, X., Xu, Y., Sun, Y., Sun, C., Guo, W., et al. (2014) Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index Predicts Prognosis of Patients after Curative Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Clinical Cancer Research, 20, 6212-6222. >https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-14-0442 Sulter, G., Steen, C. and De Keyser, J. (1999) Use of the Barthel Index and Modified Rankin Scale in Acute Stroke Trials. Stroke, 30, 1538-1541. >https://doi.org/10.1161/01.str.30.8.1538 Kim, J.Y., Park, J., Chang, J.Y., Kim, S. and Lee, J.E. (2016) Inflammation after Ischemic Stroke: The Role of Leukocytes and Glial Cells. Experimental Neurobiology, 25, 241-251. >https://doi.org/10.5607/en.2016.25.5.241 Macrez, R., Ali, C., Toutirais, O., Le Mauff, B., Defer, G., Dirnagl, U., et al. (2011) Stroke and the Immune System: From Pathophysiology to New Therapeutic Strategies. The Lancet Neurology, 10, 471-480. >https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(11)70066-7 Jayaraj, R.L., Azimullah, S., Beiram, R., Jalal, F.Y. and Rosenberg, G.A. (2019) Neuroinflammation: Friend and Foe for Ischemic Stroke. Journal of Neuroinflammation, 16, Article No. 142. >https://doi.org/10.1186/s12974-019-1516-2 Anrather, J. and Iadecola, C. (2016) Inflammation and Stroke: An Overview. Neurotherapeutics, 13, 661-670. >https://doi.org/10.1007/s13311-016-0483-x Xu, M., Chen, R., Liu, L., Liu, X., Hou, J., Liao, J., et al. (2021) Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index and Incident Cardiovascular Diseases among Middle-Aged and Elderly Chinese Adults: The Dongfeng-Tongji Cohort Study. Atherosclerosis, 323, 20-29. >https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2021.02.012 Xia, Y., Xia, C., Wu, L., Li, Z., Li, H. and Zhang, J. (2023) Systemic Immune Inflammation Index (SII), System Inflammation Response Index (SIRI) and Risk of All-Cause Mortality and Cardiovascular Mortality: A 20-Year Follow-Up Cohort Study of 42,875 US Adults. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 12, Article No. 1128. >https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12031128 Hou, D., Wang, C., Luo, Y., Ye, X., Han, X., Feng, Y., et al. (2020) Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index (SII) but Not Platelet-Albumin-Bilirubin (PALBI) Grade Is Associated with Severity of Acute Ischemic Stroke (AIS). International Journal of Neuroscience, 131, 1203-1208. >https://doi.org/10.1080/00207454.2020.1784166 Weng, Y., Zeng, T., Huang, H., Ren, J., Wang, J., Yang, C., et al. (2021) Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index Predicts 3-Month Functional Outcome in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients Treated with Intravenous Thrombolysis. Clinical Interventions in Aging, 16, 877-886. >https://doi.org/10.2147/cia.s311047 Huang, Y., Yin, X. and Li, Z. (2022) Association of the Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index (SII) and Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Frontiers in Immunology, 13, Article ID: 1090305. >https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2022.1090305 朱来运, 刘静, 肖成华. 全身免疫炎症指数及D-二聚体与青年急性脑梗死患者的病情严重程度及预后的关系[J]. 神经疾病与精神卫生, 2022, 22(5): 363-368. 杨丹丹, 蒋琳芝, 李丽燕, 等. 系统免疫炎症指数预测老年卒中病人溶栓后出血转化的价值[J]. 实用老年医学, 2023, 37(8): 789-793. Huh, P.W., Belayev, L., Zhao, W., Busto, R., Saul, I. and Ginsberg, M.D. (1998) The Effect of High-Dose Albumin Therapy on Local Cerebral Perfusion after Transient Focal Cerebral Ischemia in Rats. Brain Research, 804, 105-113. >https://doi.org/10.1016/s0006-8993(98)00674-x Tang, J., Li, Y., Mu, J., Li, Q., Yang, D. and Xie, P. (2009) Albumin Ameliorates Tissue Plasminogen Activator-Mediated Blood-Brain Barrier Permeability and Ischemic Brain Injury in Rats. Neurological Research, 31, 189-194. >https://doi.org/10.1179/174313209x393898 Belayev, L., Liu, Y., Zhao, W., Busto, R. and Ginsberg, M.D. (2001) Human Albumin Therapy of Acute Ischemic Stroke: Marked Neuroprotective Efficacy at Moderate Doses and with a Broad Therapeutic Window. Stroke, 32, 553-560. >https://doi.org/10.1161/01.str.32.2.553 Dziedzic, T., Slowik, A. and Szczudlik, A. (2004) Serum Albumin Level as a Predictor of Ischemic Stroke Outcome. Stroke, 35, e156-e158. >https://doi.org/10.1161/01.str.0000126609.18735.be Zhang, R., Zhang, Y., Liu, Z., Pei, Y., He, Y., Yu, J., et al. (2023) Association between Neutrophil-to-Albumin Ratio and Long-Term Mortality of Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage. BMC Neurology, 23, Article No. 374. >https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-023-03433-x Shin, K.W., Choi, S., Oh, H., Hwang, S.Y. and Park, H. (2023) A High Immediate Postoperative Neutrophil-to-Albumin Ratio Is Associated with Unfavorable Clinical Outcomes at Hospital Discharge in Patients with Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage. Journal of Neurosurgical Anesthesiology, 36, 142-149. >https://doi.org/10.1097/ana.0000000000000906 Mao, S., Hu, Y., Zheng, X., Yang, C., Yang, M., Li, X., et al. (2023) Correlation Analysis of Neutrophil/Albumin Ratio and Leukocyte Count/Albumin Ratio with Ischemic Stroke Severity. Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, 7, 32-38. >https://doi.org/10.26502/fccm.92920305 陈光勇. 中性粒细胞/白蛋白比值与急性缺血性脑卒中患者预后相关性研究[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 杭州: 浙江中医药大学, 2023.
Baidu
map