血清淀粉酶和脂肪酶联合测定在急性胰腺炎诊断中的意义

目的探讨血清淀粉酶(AMY)和脂肪酶(LPS)测定在急性胰腺炎诊断中的价值。方法对51例急性胰腺炎患者、418例其他原因所致急腹症患者和78例健康对照组人员进行血清淀粉酶和脂肪酶测定。结果 51例急性胰腺炎患者中,AMY和LPS升高的敏感性分别为86.3%和92.2%。418例非急性胰腺炎的急腹症患者中,AMY、LPS升高和二者均升高的特异性分别为90.4%、91.7%和100%。结论联合测定血清AMY和LPS可提高急性胰腺炎诊断的敏感性和特异性,对急性胰腺炎的快速诊断具有重要意义。     

尿胰蛋白酶原—2测定在急性胰腺炎诊断中的意义

目的：探讨尿胰蛋白酶原－2的测定在急性胰腺炎诊断中的临床意义。方法：收集69例急腹症病人血清和尿液标本，按最终诊断分为急性胰腺炎组（34例）和非急性胰腺炎组（35例），分别测定尿胰蛋白酶原－2，血清脂肪酶和血、尿淀粉酶，并将其结果进行比较。结果：尿胰蛋白酶原－2试纸条检测对急性胰腺炎诊断的敏感性，特异性，准确度分别为85％，83％，84％；血清脂肪酶为82％，60％，71％；血淀粉酶为88％，54％，71％；尿淀粉酶为79％，54％，67％。结论：尿胰蛋白酶原－2检测是诊断急性胰腺炎的一个非常有用的筛选指标，尤其是特异性较高。阴性结果可以在很大程度上排除急性胰腺炎。     

尿胰蛋白酶原-2对诊断急性胰腺炎的应用价值

目的 探讨免疫层析法测尿胰蛋白酶原-2在急性胰腺炎诊断中的临床意义。方法收集347例急腹症患者血清和尿液标本，分别测定尿胰蛋白酶原-2和血、尿淀粉酶（AMY）活性，并将结果进行比较。结果 尿胰蛋白酶原-2检测对急性胰腺炎诊断的敏感性、特异性分别为89．3％和90.3％．血AMY为80．2％和81．9％，尿AMY为74．8％和77．8％。尿胰蛋白酶原-2的敏感性和特异性均显著高于血、尿AMY检测。结论 试纸法快速检测尿胰蛋白酶原-2诊断急性胰腺炎具有较高的特异性和敏感性．是筛选急性胰腺炎简便而快速的方法。     

血清淀粉酶和脂肪酶联合测定在急性胰腺炎诊断中的意义

目的：探讨联合检测血清淀粉酶（AMY）和脂肪酶（LPS）在急性胰腺炎诊断中的意义。方法分别检测65例急性胰腺炎患者（AP组）、67例其它急腹症患者（非AP组）和60名健康对照组血清AMY和LPS水平。结果在诊断AP过程中,AMY的敏感性72.3%,LPS敏感性86.1%,AMY和LPS联合检测的敏感性96.9%;相对AMY单独检测诊断和LPS单独检测诊断,AMY和LPS联合检测诊断AP的敏感性明显升高（χ^2=15.127,P=0.000;χ^2=4.866,P=0.027）。结论联合检测血清AMY与LPS,可以明显提高AP的诊断敏感性。     

以3倍正常上限值为cut off值评价血清脂肪酶和淀粉酶对急性胰腺炎的诊断价值

目的通过比较血清淀粉酶(AMY)和脂肪酶(LPS)的敏感性和特异性以探讨诊断急性胰腺炎(AP)的首选实验室指标。方法选取2013年1月至2014年6月该院收治的急腹症患者381例,其中急性胰腺炎患者128例,其他急腹症患者253例,另外选取2013年该院体检的80例健康者作对照。采用强生Vitros 350干式生化分析仪检测血清AMY和LPS水平,以3倍正常上限值为cut off值分别评价两者单项和联合检测诊断急性胰腺炎的敏感性和特异性。结果血清AMY和LPS特异性相似,分别为92.9%和93.3%,差异无统计学意义(P0.05);而LPS敏感性远高于AMY,分别为91.4%和60.2%,差异有统计学意义(P0.05);两者联合检测敏感性为93.8%,和LPS单项检测的敏感性(91.4%)比较,差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论血清LPS诊断急性胰腺炎的敏感性和特异性均较高,优于AMY单项检测,也优于两者联合检测,是诊断急性胰腺炎的首选实验室检测。可降低对昂贵的影像学检查的依赖,减少患者辐射,节约费用。     

胰型淀粉酶、脂肪酶在急性胰腺炎中的临床应用

目的为了评价急性胰腺炎中胰型淀粉酶（P—AMY）的临床应用价值,对总淀粉酶（α-AMY）、P—AMY、脂肪酶（lipase,LPS）进行方法学评价。方法选择急性胰腺炎患者126例、其他疾病患者对照组105例、健康对照组95例,用日立7600全自动生化分析仪测定α-AMY、P—AMY、LPS。本实验室临界值定为α-AMY216 U／L、P—AMY 115U／L、LPS 200U／L。结果α-AMY、P-AMY、LPS灵敏度分别为73．1％、88．5％、92．3％,特异性分别为70．5％、81．9％、82．9％,ROC工作曲线下α-AMY、P-AMY、LPS灵敏度分别为65．4％、88．5％、88．5％,特异性分别为86．7％、80．9％、89．5％,α-AMY和P—AMY之间差异有统计学意义（P=0．045）,P-AMY和LPS之间差异无统计学意义（P=0．613）。结论P-AMY检测比α-AMY更敏感、更特异性地反映急性胰腺炎。LPS也同样在急性胰腺炎中具有高灵敏度和特异性,临床上应同时检测P-AMY和LPS作为诊断急性胰腺炎的指标,具有更重要意义。     

血清淀粉酶和脂肪酶联合检测在小儿胰腺炎诊断中的应用

目的探讨血清淀粉酶（AMY）和脂肪酶（LPS）联合测定在小儿急性胰腺炎（CAP）诊断中的价值。方法同时测定36例CAP患儿患病不同时间（2～4h、4～8h、16～24h、2～4d、6～8d）的血清、尿AMY和LPS,并以50例其他疾病的患儿作为对照。结果AMY及LPS的阳性率随着发病时间的延长有逐步升高的趋势。在2—4h时AMY、LPS联合检测,阳性率可增至27．8％（10／36）。4～8h时LPS阳性率明显高于AMY;2—4d后,AMY阳性率明显低落,而LPS的阳性率尚保持较高水平。LPS对CAP的诊断特异性明显高于AMY。结论血清AMY和LPS联合测定可为小儿胰腺炎提供重要的诊断依据。     

胰蛋白酶原-2在诊断急性胰腺炎中的临床应用价值

目的探讨胰蛋白酶原-2检测在诊断急性胰腺炎中的临床应用价值。方法采用免疫层析法分别测定85例急性胰腺炎患者（其中轻度69例，重度16例）和30例非胰腺炎急腹痛患者发作后不同时间的尿胰蛋白酶原-2。同时测定血、尿淀粉酶和脂肪酶进行比较。结果85例急性胰腺炎患者中有80例尿胰蛋白酶原-2阳性，胰腺炎组和非胰腺炎组结果差异有极显著性（P〈0．01），但轻度与重度胰腺炎结果差异无显著性。胰蛋白酶原-2用于诊断急性胰腺炎的敏感度和特异性分别为94．1％和93.3％，均高于淀粉酶和脂肪酶。阳性预示值97．6％，阴性预示值84．8％。与CT检查结果有显著相关性（Kappa〉0．800）。结论胰蛋白酶原-2是诊断急性胰腺炎的较好指标。最适测定时间为腹痛发作后3天内。     

胰蛋白酶原-2在诊断急性胰腺炎中的临床应用价值

目的探讨胰蛋白酶原-2检测在诊断急性胰腺炎中的临床应用价值。方法采用免疫层析法分别测定85例急性胰腺炎患者（其中轻度69例，重度16例）和30例非胰腺炎急腹痛患者发作后不同时间的尿胰蛋白酶原-2。同时测定血、尿淀粉酶和脂肪酶进行比较。结果85例急性胰腺炎患者中有80例尿胰蛋白酶原-2阳性，胰腺炎组和非胰腺炎组结果差异有极显著性（P〈0．01），但轻度与重度胰腺炎结果差异无显著性。胰蛋白酶原-2用于诊断急性胰腺炎的敏感度和特异性分别为94．1％和93.3％，均高于淀粉酶和脂肪酶。阳性预示值97．6％，阴性预示值84．8％。与CT检查结果有显著相关性（Kappa〉0．800）。结论胰蛋白酶原-2是诊断急性胰腺炎的较好指标。最适测定时间为腹痛发作后3天内。     

血清脂肪酶在小儿流行性腮腺炎并急性胰腺炎诊断中的临床价值

目的探讨血清脂肪酶（Lps）在小儿流行性腮腺炎并急性胰腺炎诊断中的临床价值。方法将36例流行性腮腺炎并急性胰腺炎（AP）患儿设为检测组,另以20例单纯流行性腮腺炎（非AP）患儿为对照组,在入院后24～48h同时测定Lps和淀粉酶（Amy）的浓度,比较两种酶在诊断中的敏感性和特异性。结果Lps诊断流行性腮腺炎并急性胰腺炎的敏感度为97．2％,特异度为95．0％,Amy的敏感度为91．7％,特异度为80％,两者比较P〈0．05。结论在小儿流行性腮腺炎并急性胰腺炎的诊断中,血清脂肪酶较淀粉酶有更高的临床价值。     

Normal amylase levels in the presentation of acute pancreatitis

Recent literature suggests that serum amylase levels are not an appropriate screen for the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis because specificity and sensitivity are poor. Evidence from several studies supports the use of lipase determinations to diagnose acute pancreatitis, and recent improvements in this assay have made it more readily available to the emergency physician. This retrospective review compares the use of serum amylase to lipase levels in the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis in 52 patients who presented to the emergency department, with the hospital discharge diagnosis serving as the gold standard to which the assays were compared. Serum lipase was found to be more sensitive than serum amylase (95% vs 79%); serum amylase levels decreased to normal significantly faster than lipase levels.     

Lipase activity in serum measured with Ektachem is often increased in nonpancreatic disorders.

For patients with symptoms of pancreatitis, measurement of amylase in serum reportedly is more sensitive than that of lipase in acute pancreatitis, whereas lipase reportedly is more specific. However, serum lipase activities exceeding the upper reference limit (URL) have been reported for many patients who did not have pancreatitis. I reviewed the serum lipase and amylase concentrations of 493 consecutive inpatients and emergency department patients for whom both tests were ordered. Serum lipase and amylase activities, determined with an Ektachem 700 analyzer, were less than or equal to URL for 390 patients (83%) and greater than URL for 103. Medical records of 101 of these 103 were reviewed; 18 had acute or chronic relapsing pancreatitis. In this latter group, serum lipase values greater than URL had 100% sensitivity and 84% specificity; those of serum amylase greater than URL had 72% sensitivity and 88% specificity. However, the test combination of serum lipase greater than URL and serum amylase less than or equal to URL also occurred in 84% of the patients in which review of the medical records revealed nonpancreatic gastrointestinal or hepatobiliary disorders as the primary problem (n = 55). Therefore, serum lipase activity measured with the Ektachem assay is also often increased in patients with intra-abdominal disorders that appear to be nonpancreatic.     

血清淀粉酶和脂肪酶在急性胰腺炎中的应用

同时测定临床疑为急性胰腺炎的99例患者的淀粉酶、脂肪酶,运用统计学方法,分别计算出其灵敏度、特异度、准确度并比较。结果淀粉酶与脂肪酶联合测定的灵敏度、特异度、准确度,明显优于单独测定淀粉酶或脂肪酶。结论联合测定有利于实验室时AP的早期诊断。     

Point-of-care Urine Trypsinogen Testing for the Diagnosis of Pancreatitis

Objectives
To assess a point-of-care (POC) urine trypsinogen (UT) test for the diagnosis of pancreatitis in the emergency department (ED).
Methods
This was a prospective cohort study of a convenience sample of patients presenting to the ED with abdominal pain or symptoms suggestive of pancreatitis. A 3-minute POC UT test (Actim Pancreatitis; Medix Biochemica, Kauniainen, Finland) was compared with plasma lipase and amylase measurements, imaging results when performed, and final discharge diagnoses. The criterion standard was a final discharge diagnosis of acute pancreatitis.
Results
Of 191 patients included in this study, 17 patients were diagnosed with either acute or acute-on-chronic pancreatitis. The sensitivity and specificity of UT for acute pancreatitis were, respectively, 100% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 77% to 100%) and 96% (95% CI = 92% to 98%). Seven of the 17 patients with pancreatitis (41%) had diagnostic findings on CT and positive UT tests but had nondiagnostic plasma lipase and amylase levels.
Conclusions
A POC UT screening test for pancreatitis in the ED compared favorably with plasma lipase and amylase levels. Future studies should be performed to explore whether this test in the ED setting has better clinical utility than plasma lipase or amylase.     

Assays of serum lipase: analytical and clinical considerations

We evaluated three commercially available methods for determining lipase (EC 3.1.1.3) in serum--the Du Pont aca, Boehringer Mannheim Diagnostics (BMD), and Kodak Ektachem (EK) procedures--for their analytical properties and diagnostic efficiencies. Titrimetry was used as the comparative method. The BMD and EK methods showed better agreement with the titrimetric method, owing to the presence of the necessary cofactor, colipase, in their reagents. Colipase also increased the analytical sensitivity of the BMD and EK procedures as compared with the aca method. Determinations of serum lipase, by all methods, had a clinical sensitivity in excess of 80% for acute pancreatitis; the specificity of the lipase test was about 60%, or twice that of serum amylase. Serum lipase determinations with the current, simpler technology are superior to total amylase in the diagnosis of patients with acute pancreatitis. When a colipase-supplemented method is used, a serum lipase value greater than 10-fold the upper reference limit appears to be pathognomonic for acute pancreatitis or inflammation of organs close to the pancreas.     

尿淀粉酶/尿肌酐及尿胰蛋白酶原-2诊断急性胰腺炎的评价

目的探讨尿淀粉酶/尿肌酐(Uamy/Ucr)及尿胰蛋白酶原2测定对急性胰腺炎的临床诊断价值。方法对79例急性胰腺炎患者、48例非胰腺炎急腹症患者和50例健康对照组人员进行血清淀粉酶(Samy)、尿淀粉酶(Uamy)、尿肌酐(Ucr)及尿胰蛋白酶原2测定。结果急性胰腺炎尿胰蛋白酶原2的诊断特异性最高,其特异性和敏感性分别为97.92%和91.14%,其次Uamy/Ucr特异性为91.67%,敏感性为92.41%(临界值为75U/mmol),而临床常用的诊断指标Samy、Uamy的特异性和敏感性均低于前两者。结论尿淀粉酶/尿肌酐比值及尿胰蛋白酶原2检测是较好的早期诊断急性胰腺炎的指标。     

尿胰蛋白酶原-2在筛查急性胰腺炎临床应用中的评价

目的评价尿胰蛋白酶原-2试纸条在筛查急性胰腺炎中的临床价值.方法收集50例急腹症患者的血清和尿液,按最终诊断分为急性胰腺炎组(22例)和非急性胰腺炎组(28例),分别检测尿胰蛋白酶原-2,血淀粉酶和尿淀粉酶,并将结果进行比较.结果尿胰蛋白酶原-2诊断急性胰腺炎的敏感性、特异性分别为96%、86%;血淀粉酶为73%、82%;尿淀粉酶为82%、86%.结论尿胰蛋白酶原-2的敏感性和阴性预期值均高于血、尿淀粉酶,可以作为急性胰腺炎诊断的筛选指标.