细胞游离DNA定量分析用于浆膜腔积液鉴别诊断研究

目的应用实时荧光定量PCR检测浆膜腔积液中细胞游离DNA含量,探讨浆膜腔漏出液和渗出液鉴别诊断指标。方法选择β-珠蛋白基因作为细胞游离DNA的代表标志物,设计引物和探针建立双标记荧光素TaqMan系统;以人类全基因组DNA为模板PCR扩增,扩增产物经克隆建立标准物,从而对浆膜腔积液中细胞游离DNA进行定量分析。结果对172份明确诊断的浆膜腔积液标本进行分析,浆膜腔积液中细胞游离DNA浓度的受试者工作特征曲线(ROC)曲线下面积为0.958,95%可信区间(CI)为0.931~0.986(P=0.00);积液中细胞游离DNA的cutoff浓度为306拷贝/mL,对浆膜腔积液漏出液和渗出液的鉴别诊断灵敏度为91.8%,特异性为92.3%;渗出液(细菌性、结核性和恶性)中细胞游离DNA浓度明显高于漏出液(P≤0.001),细菌性积液和结核性积液之间细胞游离DNA浓度差异无统计学意义(P=0.996),但明显高于恶性积液中细胞游离DNA浓度(P≤0.018)。结论浆膜腔积液中细胞游离DNA可作为浆膜腔漏出液和渗出液鉴别诊断指标。     

血管紧张素转换酶对结核性与恶性胸腔积液的鉴别诊断价值

目的探讨血管紧张素转换酶（ACE）在鉴别诊断结核性与恶性胸腔积液中的价值。方法采用酶法测定46例已确诊的结核性渗出液和40例恶性渗出液中ACE水平。结果结核性渗出液组ACE水平显著高于恶性渗出液组，两组间差异有统计学意义（P〈O．01）。以ACE为30U／I。作为临界点，对结核性渗出液诊断的灵敏度为95．7％，特异度为90．0％。结论胸腔积液ACE检测可用于鉴别诊断结核性与恶性渗出液。     

浆膜腔积液中有关生化和免疫学指标的检测对鉴别积液性质的意义(摘要)

有文献报道，对浆膜腔积液中（以下简称积液）的总蛋白／血清中总蛋白，其比值＞0．5、积液中总胆红素／血清中包胆红素，其比值lero．6为渗出液，反之为漏出液等生化检验方面的鉴别指标，其免疫学指标报道甚少。本文对6O例积液标本，其中渗出液20例，为结核性胸膜炎组，漏出波40例；20例为冠心病、心功能不全组，ZO例为肝硬化肝功能先代偿期组．进行上述指标以及免疫学指标：免疫球蛋白IgG、IgA、IgM，补体已、C；及急性时相蛋白（APR），C一反应性蛋白（＊＊P）、铜蓝蛋白（＊P）、。l一抗胰蛋白酶（。人T）、触珠蛋白（＊P）、前…     

274例浆膜腔积液恶性细胞学诊断分析

２７４例浆膜腔积液恶性细胞学诊断分析山东省菏泽地区医院细胞室（２７４０３１）滕秀兰，刘爱芹近十多年来，脱落细胞学检查已在国内外广泛开展，诊断水平和经验也不断提高，浆膜腔积液一般只区分为渗出液和漏出液，而对恶性肿瘤的诊断只有找到恶性瘤细胞才是唯一的诊断...     

白细胞介素-6、C反应蛋白联合检测在胸腔积液诊断中的价值

目的：分析胸腔积液患胸水中白细胞介素-6(IL-6)、C反应蛋白(CRP)水平，探讨两指标及其联合检测在胸腔积液性质鉴别诊断中的价值。方法：将97例不同病因的胸腔积液患分成漏出液组、良性渗出液组及恶性渗出液组，平行检测胸腔积液中IL-6、CRP水平，并通过受试工作特征曲线(ROC)进行评价。结果：良性渗出液组IL-6、CRP值明显高于漏出液和恶性渗出液组(均P＜0．01)；恶性渗出液组IL-6、CRP值明显高于漏出液组(均P＜0．01)。分别以95pg／ml、12．5mg／L作为IL-6、CRP诊断渗出液与漏出液的临界值。诊断渗出液的敏感度分别为95．5%、91．0%；特异性分别为93．3％、96．0％。两指标联检，诊断渗出液的敏感度为97．0％，特异性为100oA。结论：胸腔积液IL-6、CRP检测及其联合检测对鉴别胸腔积液性质有一定的实用价值。     

浆膜腔积液系列检测对良恶性疾病的鉴别诊断

[目的]探讨浆膜腔积液系列检测在良恶性疾病的鉴别诊断中的意义。[方法]按照常规方法进行间皮细胞计数，同时进行细胞病理学检查是否有癌细胞；其它指标均按试剂盒说明书进行检测。[结果]间皮细胞百分数超过20％，CEA大于20ng／ml，对恶性浆膜腔积液的诊断准确率为98％；当两项指标均低于此值时，对良性浆膜腔积液的诊断准确率为91％。ADA小于45U／L，LZM低于40μg／ml时．对恶性浆膜腔积液的诊断准确率为78％，两项指标均高于此值时，对良性浆膜腔积液的诊断准确率为96％。LDH高于300U／L．AMY高于80U／L时，对恶性浆膜腔积液的诊断准确率为90％，两项指标均低于此值时，对良性浆膜腔积液的诊断准确率为71％。浆膜腔积液中查到癌细胞对恶性疾病的诊断准确率达100％，但是未查到癌细胞的并不一定都是良性疾病，本组资料的癌细胞的检出率为90．3％（28／30）。ALP、GGT、Pro、LAC、CER、Glu的检测在鉴别良恶性浆膜腔积液方面无显著性差异（P〉0．05）。[结论]间皮细胞百分数、找到癌细胞、ADA、LZM、LDH、AMY、CEA的检测在鉴别良恶性浆膜腔积液方面有显著性差异（P〈0．01），为两类浆膜腔积液的鉴别诊断提供了可靠的指标。因此在临床诊断中综合分析这些指标可以作为诊断依据，值得大力推广。     

细胞染色体检测在诊断恶性多浆膜腔积液中的临床研究

目的探讨细胞染色体检测对诊断恶性多浆膜腔积液的价值。方法染色体检测采取涂片染色镜检定性的方法。本研究共有43例恶性肿瘤和30例非恶性肿瘤伴多浆膜腔积液的患者,对其浆膜腔积液均进行了染色体、癌细胞、CEA等检查。结果浆膜腔积液染色体检测的敏感性为79．07％,准确性为92．65％,明显优于癌细胞、CEA的检测结果（P〈0．05,P〈0．01）,且特异性高达96．67％。31例恶性肿瘤伴渗出性多浆膜腔积液患者中,28例染色体阳性,阳性检出率为90．32％;12例恶性肿瘤伴非渗出性多浆膜腔积液患者中,6例染色体阳性,阳性检出率为50．00％,两组阳性率均较高,但经比较P〈0．05。结论恶性肿瘤患者伴发多浆膜腔积液时,无论是渗出液还是非渗出液,其染色体阳性检出率和特异性都很高,对诊断恶性多浆膜腔积液具有很好的临床实用价值,但非渗出液的细胞培养时间应适当延长。     

31例浆膜腔积液恶性细胞标本分析

浆膜腔积液是临床常见的检验标本之一 ,主要包括胸腹腔积液和心包积液。根据其性质的不同大致可鉴别是渗出液还是漏出液 ,对临床不明原因的浆膜腔积液作病因学的判定有一定帮助 ,特别是浆膜腔积液肿瘤细胞学检查 ,往往可以获得一个比较确切的肿瘤诊断的实验室依据 ,对临床肿瘤患者的诊断有重要的指导意义。为此我们在 1999年～2 0 0 3年检测的浆膜腔积液中选择 3 1例恶性肿瘤细胞阳性标本结合临床资料作一初步分析 ,以期对检验工作者及临床医师有所助益。1　一般资料3 1例恶性浆膜腔积液标本均来自 1999年～ 2 0 0 3年我院门诊及住院患者 ,…     

63例多浆膜腔积液临床分析

目的：探讨多浆膜腔积液的临床特点及其与常见病因之间的关系。方法：回顾性分析63例多浆膜腔积液患者的临床资料。结果：多浆膜腔积液常见病因为恶性肿瘤（30．2％）和结核（30．2％），其次为肝硬化、心功能不全等；多浆膜腔积液的病因与积液部位、积液性质、性状有一定关系；结核性多浆膜腔积液组中ADA含量明显升高，较恶性和非结核良性多浆膜腔积液组差异显著（P〈0．01）。23例（恶性积液18例、结核5例）患者通过病理细胞学确诊。结论：恶性肿瘤和结核是多浆膜腔积液常见病因。     

321例浆膜腔积液常规及脱落细胞学检查分析

目的总结分析浆膜腔积液常规及脱落细胞学检查对结核性胸（腹）膜炎、化脓性胸（腹）膜炎及胸腹腔转移性肿瘤的诊断价值,找出存在的问题及对策。方法准确描述浆膜腔积液的颜色、透明度、密度及细胞计数。认真涂片染色,细胞分类在涂片边缘尾部查找癌细胞。抗酸染色找抗酸杆菌,革兰染色找相关细菌。结果根据浆膜腔积液检测结果,判定结核性胸膜炎132例,结核性腹膜炎44例;化脓性胸膜炎19例（含4例脓胸）,化脓性腹膜炎24例。找到癌细胞52例（胸水34例、腹水17例、心包积液1例）,检出率为20．07％（52／259）;年龄分布31岁以上占92．30％（48／52）。血性积液85例,找到癌细胞19例（22．35％）,174例非血性积液找到癌细胞33例（18．96％）,经Х^2检验,P〉0．05,二者差异无统计学意义。漏出液50例由心力衰竭胸水13例及肝硬化腹水37例构成。结论浆膜腔积液检验是一项经典检验技术,对于鉴别诊断结核性、化脓性胸（腹）膜炎以及胸、腹腔恶性肿瘤转移有重要价值,在诊断结核性胸（腹）膜炎方面,应配合胸（腹）水结核菌DNA、血液结核抗体、结核杆菌培养、结核菌素皮内试验、胸透及摄胸片等检查。在诊断肿瘤方面,应配合胸（腹）水癌胚抗原,血清甲胎蛋白、腺苷脱氨酶、乳酸脱氢酶等检测。     

Quantitative analysis of pleural fluid cell-free DNA as a tool for the classification of pleural effusions

BACKGROUND: Recently, much interest has been focused on the quantification of DNA in miscellaneous body fluids. In this study, the application is extended to classifying pleural effusions by measuring cell-free DNA in pleural fluid. METHODS: We recruited 50 consecutive patients with pleural effusions with informed consent. Pleural fluids were centrifuged at 13000 g, with supernatants aliquoted for extraction and analysis of beta-globin DNA sequence by quantitative real-time PCR. Serum and pleural fluid biochemistries were performed to classify pleural effusions using the modified criteria of Light et al. (Ann Intern Med 1972;77:507-13). The ROC curve was plotted to determine the cutoff DNA concentration for classifying pleural fluids as transudates or exudates. Indicators of diagnostic accuracy were calculated for both pleural fluid DNA and modified criteria of Light et al., using the discharge, microbiologic, and histologic diagnoses as the reference standard. RESULTS: The area under the ROC curve was 0.95 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.84-0.99]. At 509 genome-equivalents/mL, pleural fluid DNA alone correctly classified 46 of 50 pleural effusions with 91% sensitivity (95% CI, 76-98%), 88% specificity (95% CI, 64-98%), and positive and negative likelihood ratios of 7.7 (95% CI, 3.1-19.5) and 0.10 (95% CI, 0.04-0.27), respectively. With the modified criteria of Light et al., 43 of 50 pleural effusions were correctly classified with 97% sensitivity (95% CI, 91-100%) and 67% specificity (95% CI, 45-89%). There were significant correlations between cell-free DNA and both lactate dehydrogenase and total protein in pleural fluid, suggesting their common origin. CONCLUSIONS: Pleural fluid DNA concentrations are markedly increased in exudative effusions, making it a potential new tool to evaluate the etiologic causes of pleural effusions.     

浆膜腔积液中组织蛋白酶D与肿瘤转移的关系

目的研究浆膜腔积液中组织蛋白酶D（CD）与肿瘤转移之间的关系。方法分别采用酶联免疫吸附试验（ELISA）和化学发光法检测77例患者的浆膜腔积液CD及癌胚抗原（CEA）浓度。结合临床资料和病理诊断,将77例患者的浆膜腔积液标本分为非肿瘤组（22例）和肿瘤组[55例,包括肿瘤细胞阳性组（30例）和肿瘤细胞阴性组（25例）]。比较各组CD及CEA浓度,同时采用受试者工作特征（ROC）曲线评估CD及CEA单项检测和联合检测的诊断价值。结果肿瘤组CD和CEA浓度均明显高于非肿瘤组（P〈0．05）。CEA与CD呈正相关（Kendall相关系数为0．323、Spearman相关系数为0．396,P均〈0．001）,CD、CEA及CEA与CD联合诊断肿瘤的ROC曲线下面积分别为0．763、0．723和0．812。肿瘤细胞阳性组CD浓度明显高于肿瘤细胞阴性组（P〈0．05）,而CEA浓度2组间中差异无统计学意义（P=0．051）,CD、CEA及CEA与CD联合诊断肿瘤转移的ROC曲线下面积分别为0．677、0．654和0．767。结论浆膜腔CD浓度与肿瘤浆膜腔转移相关,可作为肿瘤诊断和转移的辅助指标,联合CEA诊断更佳。     

胸腔积液患者血清癌抗原125检测的临床意义

目的探讨血清癌抗原（CA）125在胸腔积液中的检测价值。方法选取2010年1月2012年9月来我院就诊的胸腔积液患者128例,测定血清CAl25浓度,对比不同性别、胸水性质、胸水量及胸水部位患者血清CA125阳性率及水平的差异;比较恶性胸腔积液患者与结核性、炎性、漏出性胸腔积液患者间上述指标的差异;对血清CAl25浓度与胸水深度进行相关分析。结果恶性及良性胸腔积液患者的血清CA125阳性率分别为83．3％（35／42）和76．7％（66／88）,差异无统计学意义（x2=0．74,P〉0．05）;恶性胸腔积液患者的血清CA125（177．8±31．4）U／ml显著高于良性胸腔积液（110．6±13．6）U／ml,差异有统计学意义（t=31．24,P〈0．05）;恶性胸腔积液血清CA125（177．8±31．4）U／ml高于炎性胸腔积液（72．5±12．8）U／ml（P〈0．05）,但与结核性（140．6±28．2）U／ml、漏出性胸腔积液（154．3±30．5）U／ml比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）;结核性、炎性、漏出性积液与恶性胸腔积液血清CA125阳性率差异无统计学意义[75．8％（25／33）、70．O％（20／29）、87．5％（21／24）与83．3％（35／42）,X2=3．48,P〉0．05];少量、中量、大量胸腔积液患者的血清CA125浓度依次升高[（56．4±18．2）、（120．2±24．5）、（185．5±34．6）U／m1],各组间比较差异有统计学意义（F=296．03,P〈0．05）;血清CA125浓度与胸水深度呈正相关（r=0．56,P〈0．01）;不同性别、胸水部位患者血清CA125阳性率及水平差异均无统计学意义（P均〉0．05）。结论不论是良性还是恶性胸腔积液,血清CA125均明显升高,血清CA125阳性对判断胸水良恶性的意义不大;血清CA125浓度与胸水深度呈正相关,可以作为监测胸水量变化的参考指标。     

Measurement of vitamin D-binding protein in pleural fluids and sera by means of a turbidimetric immunoassay measuring system

BACKGROUND: Vitamin D-binding protein (DBP) has been recognized as a multifunctional plasma protein that can modulate certain immune and inflammatory responses. There may be differences between the DBP concentrations in pleural fluids from various diseases involving a variety of possible responses in the pleural cavity. METHODS: An anti-DBP polyclonal antibody was prepared using commercially available DBP to establish a quantitative measuring system for DBP. With a rabbit antibody, a turbidimetric immunoassay (TIA) was developed for DBP with an automatic analyzer. Using this measuring system, the concentrations of DBP were compared with the protein concentration in pleural fluid and serum specimens from patients with various diseases. RESULTS: The fluid DBP concentrations in transudative (n=11) and exudative (n=41) effusions were 71.9+/-21.2 and 180.7+/-43.7 mg/l, respectively. Among the exudative effusions, the fluid DBP concentrations in the bacterial (n=10), tuberculous (n=13), and malignant (n=18) effusions were 218.8+/-37.3, 186.7+/-26.2, and 155.1+/-41.3 mg/l, respectively. The DBP fluid/serum ratio and the fluid DBP/protein ratio in bacterial effusions were significantly higher than those in tuberculous (p<0.005, p<0.05, respectively) and malignant effusions (p<0.0005, p<0.005, respectively), although no statistically significant differences in the serum DBP/protein ratio between those effusions were found. CONCLUSIONS: Using the TIA assay, the DBP concentrations in bacterial pleural effusions were significantly higher than in tuberculous and malignant effusions.     

Comparative study of penetration of lomefloxacin and ceftriaxone into transudative and exudative pleural effusion.

We investigated the transpleural penetration of lomefloxacin (LFLX) and ceftriaxone (CTRX). LFLX (200 mg) was administered orally to three patients with transudative fluid and four with exudative fluid, and 2 g of CTRX was administered by drip infusion to four patients with transudative fluid and three with exudative fluid. For both groups that received LFLX and CTRX, blood samples were drawn at time zero and 1, 2, and 6 h after drug administration. Thoracocentesis of each group was performed at 6 h after drug administration. The mean ratios of concentrations in pleural fluid/maximum concentrations in serum (P/S max) of LFLX were 66% in patients with transudative fluid and 69% in patients with exudative fluid. The mean ratios of P/S max of CTRX were 9.1% in patients with transudative fluid and 13.5% in patients with exudative fluid. The P/S max ratios for the penetration of LFLX were five to six times higher than those for CTRX. In addition, there was less differentiation in concentrations of LFLX in pleural fluid between the transudative and exudative effusions than there was in the concentrations of CTRX.     

CRP CEA等指标检测在良恶性渗出性胸腔积液鉴别诊断中的价值

目的分析胸腔积液患者胸水中C反应蛋白（CRP）、癌胚抗原（CEA）、β2微球蛋白（β2-MG）及触珠蛋白（HPT）四项指标水平，探讨多指标检测在胸腔积液鉴别诊断中的价值。方法将68例不同病因的渗出性胸腔积液分为良、恶性渗出液组二组，检测患者胸腔积液四项指标水平，并通过受试者工作特征曲线分析。结果二组胸腔积液患者CRP、CEA、β2-MG及HTP均有显著性差异（P〈0．05），胸水CRP与CEA平行联合检测的敏感性为97．3％，两者系列联合检测的特异性为96．8％。结论胸腔积液CRP、CEA、β2MG及HPT水平检测对鉴别渗出性胸腔积液性质有较好的临床实用价值，联合检测CRP和CEA能提高对良恶性渗出性胸腔积液的敏感度、特异度。     

Pleural diseases.

In the United States, approximately one million patients each year develop a pleural effusion. Pleural effusions have classically been divided into transudative and exudative pleural effusions. A transudative pleural effusion occurs when the systemic factors influencing pleural fluid formation and reabsorption are altered so that pleural fluid accumulates; an exudative pleural effusion occurs when the local factors influencing pleural fluid formation and reabsorption are altered, allowing accumulation of pleural fluid. The leading causes of transudative pleural effusions are left ventricular failure and cirrhosis with ascites. The leading causes of exudative pleural effusions are pneumonia, malignancy, and pulmonary embolization. Transudative pleural effusions can be differentiated from exudative pleural effusions by measurement of the pleural fluid protein and lactic dehydrogenase (LDH) levels. The ratio of the pleural fluid protein to the serum protein is less than 0.5, the ratio of the pleural fluid LDH to the serum LDH is less than 0.6, and the absolute value of the pleural fluid LDH level is less than two thirds of the upper normal limit for serum with transudative pleural effusions while at least one of these criteria is not met with exudative effusions. Most patients who have a pleural effusion with congestive heart failure have left ventricular failure. It is believed that the transudation of the pulmonary interstitial fluid across the visceral pleura overwhelms the capacity of the lymphatics to remove the fluid. Most patients with cirrhosis who have a pleural effusion also have ascites. It is also believed that the pleural effusions form when fluid moves directly from the peritoneal cavity into the pleural cavity through pores in the diaphragm. Approximately 40% of patients with pneumonia will have a pleural effusion. If these patients have a significant amount of pleural fluid, a diagnostic thoracentesis should be performed. Chest tubes should be inserted if the pleural fluid is gross pus, if the Gram stain of the pleural fluid is positive, if the pleural fluid glucose level is below 40 mg/dl, or if the pleural fluid pH level is less than 7.00. If drainage with the chest tubes is unsatisfactory, either streptokinase or urokinase should be injected intrapleurally. If drainage is still unsatisfactory, a decortication should be considered. The three leading malignancies that have an associated pleural effusion are breast carcinoma, lung carcinoma, lymphomas and leukemias. The diagnosis of pleural malignancy is made most commonly with pleural fluid cytology; in recent years immunohistochemical tests have proved invaluable in differentiating benign from malignant pleural effusions.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)     

Pleural effusion: comparison of clinical judgment and Light's criteria in determining the cause

Pleural fluid analysis is often the initial diagnostic test used to determine the cause of a pleural effusion. We prospectively studied 33 consecutive patients with pleural effusions to determine whether the fluid arose from a transudative or an exudative process. Clinical judgment by an internist before thoracentesis and both serum and pleural fluid protein and lactic dehydrogenase levels (commonly referred to as "Light's criteria") were compared to the patient's final diagnosis. The internist correctly classified 15 of 17 exudative processes and all 16 transudative processes; the presence of any one of Light's three criteria correctly classified 15 of 17 exudative processes, whereas the absence of all three criteria correctly classified 14 of 16 transudative processes. Clinical judgment and Light's criteria are comparable in their ability to predict whether an exudative or transudative process was responsible for the effusion. Both methods are associated with errors, though of different kinds; these errors occurred infrequently. Recognizing the limitations of these methods will permit the most accurate effusion categorization.     

Diagnostic value of pleural fluid adenosine deaminase activity in tuberculous pleurisy

BACKGROUND: Diagnosis of tuberculous pleuritis is difficult because of its nonspecific clinical presentation and insufficient efficiency of traditional diagnostic methods. We investigated the use of adenosine deaminase (ADA) activity in tuberculous pleuritis diagnosis. METHODS: We optimized a kinetic assay and retrospectively analysed 210 patients with exudative pleural effusions. Using the ROC curve, we determined the optimal cutoff for TB pleurisy. RESULTS: One hundred forty-seven exudative samples were nontuberculous (non-TB) and 63 were tuberculous (TB). There was statistically significant difference (p<0.0001) between the means of pleural fluid ADA levels among the TB and non-TB populations. The disease prevalence of TB pleurisy in the studied population was 30%. The cutoff value for diagnosing TB effusions was >55.8 U/L, with a sensitivity of 87.3% (95% CI: 76.5-94.3%) and specificity of 91.8% (95% CI: 86.2-95.7%). The positive predictive value (PPV) was 82.1% and the negative predictive value (NPV) was 94.4%. A pleural fluid ADA value <16.81 IU/L suggests that a tuberculous effusion is highly unlikely (100% sensitive with 100% NPV and 0% negative likelihood ratio for a pleural fluid ADA level>/=16.81 U/L). In addition, the area under the ROC curve was 0.933 (S.E.=0.0230, 95% CI: 0.890-0.963). CONCLUSION: Pleural fluid total ADA assay is a sensitive and specific test suitable for rapid diagnosis of TB pleurisy.     

超声引导胸膜穿刺组织活检联合胸腔积液生化检查在恶性和结核性胸腔积液鉴别诊断中的价值

目的分析超声引导胸膜穿刺组织活检联合胸腔积液生化检查在恶性和结核性胸腔积液鉴别诊断中的价值。方法选取64例中至大量胸腔积液合并胸膜增厚患者,根据术前胸部CT的检查结果,超声再次寻找可疑胸膜病变处,以选择合适的穿刺路径,并在超声引导下行斜行胸膜穿刺组织活检术,送病理检查以获取病理分型。完成胸膜活检后,进行胸腔积液的抽吸或置管引流,胸腔积液送生化等检查。采用成组设计两样本均数的t检验统计分析恶性和结核性胸腔积液内癌胚抗原、CAl25、CYFRA21、乳酸脱氢酶水平的差异;采用完全随机设计两样本率比较的,检验分析恶性和结核性胸腔积液中的癌胚抗原、CAl25、CYFRA21、乳酸脱氢酶阳性率的差异。结果64例患者均一次成功取到胸膜组织,超声引导胸膜穿刺组织活检取材成功率为100％（64／64）,有73％（46／64）的患者超声引导胸膜穿刺组织活检病理明确诊断为肿瘤性或结核性胸腔积液。经临床综合评价,64例病例中,27例确诊为恶性胸腔积液,37例诊断为结核性胸腔积液。癌胚抗原、CAl25、CYFRA21、乳酸脱氢酶在恶性胸腔积液中的阳性率分别为100％（27／27）、100％（27／27）、100％（27／27）、89％（24／27）,在结核性胸腔积液中的阳性率分别为0％（0／37）、84％（31／37）、78％（29／37）、76％（28／37）,在恶性和结核性胸腔积液中癌胚抗原、CAl25、CYFRA21阳性率的差异均有统计学意义（庐=64．0、3．1、4．8,P均〈0．05）。癌胚抗原、CAl25、CYFRA21、乳酸脱氢酶在恶性胸腔积液中的水平分别为（727．1±658．8）pg／L、（795．2±1249．6）kU／L、（296．2±320．7）μg／L、（1077．9±1058．5）U／L,在结核性胸腔积液中的水平分别为（1．7±1．1）μg/L、（336．3±208．6）kU／L、（20．7±14．9） μg,L、（309．2±182．7）U／L,在恶性和结核性胸腔积液中癌胚抗原、CYFRA21、乳酸脱氢酶水平的差异均有统计学意义（t=-45．1、27．4、18．8,P均〈0．01）。结论超声引导胸膜穿刺组织活检联合癌胚抗原、CYFRA21及乳酸脱氢酶可以为临床判断胸腔积液的性质提供可靠依据,而肿瘤标志物CAl25的鉴别诊断意义较小。