首页> 外文OA文献 >Diagnostic utility of the serum–ascites albumin gradient in Mexican patients with ascites related to portal hypertension
【2h】

Diagnostic utility of the serum–ascites albumin gradient in Mexican patients with ascites related to portal hypertension

机译:墨西哥腹水腹水患者腹股沟患者腹水高血压腹水诊断效用

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Abstract Background and Aim Analysis of ascitic fluid is necessary to determine the etiology and to distinguish portal hypertension (PH)‐related and unrelated ascites. Numerous diagnostic parameters have been studied, but no single parameter has completely distinguished these. We aimed to validate the serum albumin–ascites gradient (SAAG) for the diagnosis of ascites secondary to PH and to establish cutoff points to predict PH using its sensitivity and specificity. Methods This was a cross‐sectional study conducted on patients diagnosed with ascites of any etiology. The SAAG and albumin concentration in ascitic fluid (AFA) were measured to establish their sensitivity and specificity for determining the presence or absence of PH. Cutoff points and levels of statistical significance were established based on the area under the curve. Results Eighty‐seven patients were evaluated, of whom 74 (84%) were men, with an average age of 54.0 ± 13.6 years. Seventy‐two (83%) were diagnosed at admission with PH‐related ascites and 15 (17%) with non‐PH‐related ascites. SAAG correctly classified 48 (67%) patients, but 24 (33%) were classified incorrectly, while AFA classified 59 (82%) correctly and only 13 (17%) incorrectly. The diagnostic accuracy of SAAG was 57 versus 73% for AFA. AFA had a sensitivity of 82% and specificity of 66% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.63–0.93), while SAAG had a sensitivity of 66% but a specificity of 86% (95% CI: 0.72–0.95). Conclusions The SAAG showed poor diagnostic performance with low sensitivity but high specificity. The diagnostic accuracy of AFA is superior to that of SAAG in discriminating between PH and non‐PH ascites.
机译:摘要背景和腹水液体的瞄准分析是确定病因的必要条件,并区分门静脉高血压(pH) - 相关腹水和无关腹水。已经研究了许多诊断参数,但没有单一参数完全区分这些。我们旨在验证血清白蛋白 - 腹水梯度(SAAG),用于诊断第一次pH的腹水,并建立截止点以使用其敏感性和特异性来预测pH值。方法这是对诊断患有任何病因腹水的患者进行的横截面研究。测量腹水(AFA)中的SAAG和白蛋白浓度,以确定它们的敏感性和特异性,用于确定存在或不存在pH。基于曲线下的区域建立截止点和统计显着性水平。结果八十七名患者评估,其中74名(84%)是男性,平均年龄为54.0±13.6岁。七十二(83%)用pH相关腹水进行诊断诊断,与非pH相关腹水有15(17%)。 SAAG正确分类48(67%)患者,但24例(33%)被错误分类,而AFA正确分类为59(82%),只有13(17%)不正确。 AFA的Saag的诊断准确性为57%,而73%。 AFA的敏感性为82%,特异性为66%(95%置信区间[CI]:0.63-0.93),而Saag的敏感性为66%,但特异性为86%(95%CI:0.72-0.95)。结论Saag表现出诊断性能差,敏感性低,但特异性高。 AFA的诊断准确性优于萨图鉴别pH和非pH腹水之间的SAAG。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号