肺泡动脉血氧分压差联合单核细胞与大血小板比率在AECOPD合并肺栓塞中的临床意义
李洁 , 赵婧 , 胡建秋 , 乔华
中国现代医学杂志 ›› 2026, Vol. 36 ›› Issue (13) : 99 -105.
肺泡动脉血氧分压差联合单核细胞与大血小板比率在AECOPD合并肺栓塞中的临床意义
Clinical significance of alveolar-arterial oxygen partial pressure difference combined with monocyte-to-large platelet ratio in patients with AECOPD complicated by pulmonary embolism
目的 探讨肺泡动脉血氧分压差(PA-aDO2)联合单核细胞与大血小板比率(MLPR)在急性加重期慢性阻塞性肺疾病(AECOPD)合并肺栓塞(PE)患者中的临床意义。 方法 选取2022年1月—2024年12月在秦皇岛市第一医院确诊的AECOPD合并PE患者96例作为研究对象,另从该院同期收治的单纯AECOPD患者中选取80例未合并PE者作为合并PE组,50例同期健康人群纳入对照组。比较合并PE组与非合并PE组的临床资料、实验室资料,比较3组的PA-aDO2、单核细胞与大血小板比率(MLPR)水平。采用多因素一般Logistic回归分析AECOPD患者合并PE的影响因素,并绘制受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线评估PA-aDO2、MLPR单独及联合预测AECOPD合并PE的效能。 结果 合并PE组咳嗽率和呼吸困难率均高于非合并PE组(P 0.05)。合并PE组PaCO2、D-D、降钙素原(PCT)水平均高于非合并PE组,PaO2水平低于非合并PE组(P 0.05)。合并PE组的PA-aDO2与MLPR水平均高于非合并PE组和对照组,非合并PE组亦高于对照组(P 0.05)。多因素一般Logistic回归分析结果显示:PaO2水平高[O^R =0.227(95% CI:0.056,0.924)]为AECOPD合并PE的保护因素(P 0.05),PaCO2水平高[O^R =7.218(95% CI:1.064,48.959)]、D-D水平高[O^R =3.530(95% CI:1.027,12.135)]、PCT水平高[O^R =26.208(95% CI:2.468,278.254)]、PA-aDO2水平高[O^R =9.567(95% CI:2.189,41.818)]及MLPR水平高[O^R =10.908(95% CI:2.082,57.155)]均为AECOPD合并PE的危险因素(P 0.05)。ROC曲线结果显示,PA-aDO2与MLPR联合预测AECOPD合并PE的敏感性为83.3%(95% CI:0.744,0.902),特异性为98.8%(95% CI:0.932,1.000)。 结论 PA-aDO2及MLPR在AECOPD合并PE患者中显著升高,与疾病严重程度密切相关,联合检测可提高早期诊断及风险评估的准确性,可为临床评估患者病情、指导治疗决策提供有益参考。
Objective To investigate the clinical significance of the alveolar–arterial oxygen partial pressure difference (PA-aDO2) combined with the monocyte-to-large platelet ratio (MLPR) in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) complicated by pulmonary embolism (PE). Methods Ninety-six patients diagnosed with AECOPD complicated by PE between January 2022 and December 2024 were enrolled. Another 80 AECOPD patients without PE served as the non-PE group, and 50 healthy individuals were included as the control group. Levels of PA-aDO2 and MLPR were measured and compared among the three groups, and their correlations with D-dimer, arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2), and carbon dioxide (PaCO2) were analyzed. Logistic regression was used to identify independent risk factors for PE in AECOPD patients. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed to assess the diagnostic performance of PA-aDO2 and MLPR alone and in combination. Results The incidence of cough and dyspnea was higher in the combined PE group than in the non-PE group (P 0.05). PaCO2, D-dimer, and procalcitonin (PCT) levels were significantly higher in the combined PE group, while PaO2 was significantly lower (P 0.05). PA-aDO2 and MLPR levels were significantly elevated in the combined PE group compared with the non-PE and control groups, and were also higher in the non-PE group than in controls (P 0.05). Higher PaO₂ level [O^R = 0.227 (95% CI: 0.056, 0.924) ] was identified as a protective factor for AECOPD complicated with PE (P 0.05), whereas elevated PaCO2 [O^R = 7.218 (95% CI: 1.064, 48.959) ], D-dimer [O^R = 3.530 (95% CI: 1.027, 12.135) ], PCT [O^R = 26.208 (95% CI: 2.468, 278.254) ], PA-aDO2 [O^R = 9.567 (95% CI: 2.189, 41.818) ], and MLPR [O^R = 10.908 (95% CI: 2.082, 57.155) ] were independent risk factors for PE in AECOPD patients (P 0.05). The combined detection of PA-aDO2 and MLPR yielded a sensitivity of 83.3% (95% CI: 0.744, 0.902) and a specificity of 98.8% (95% CI: 0.932, 1.000). Conclusion PA-aDO2 and MLPR are markedly elevated in AECOPD patients with PE and closely associated with disease severity. Their combined detection enhances the accuracy of early diagnosis and risk assessment, providing valuable reference for clinical evaluation and treatment decision-making.
| [1] |
苗灵月, 刘晓娜, 仝亚婷, 老年慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重患者住院期间发生肺栓塞的危险因素分析[J]. 血管与腔内血管外科杂志, 2025, 11(6): 804-807. |
| [2] |
MAI V, GIRARDI L, de WIT K, et al. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation purulence status and its association with pulmonary embolism: protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis[J]. BMJ Open, 2024, 14(6): e085328. |
| [3] |
王洪霞, 黄妮雯, 毕红英, 肺泡动脉血氧分压差检测在肺部感染致急性呼吸窘迫综合征患者治疗中的临床意义[J]. 中国急救复苏与灾害医学杂志, 2020, 15(5): 566-569. |
| [4] |
CAO Y Q, DONG L X, CAO J. Pulmonary embolism in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease[J]. Chin Med J (Engl), 2018, 131(14): 1732-1737. |
| [5] |
万铠瑞, 赖宁, 马杰羚, 2018年肺血栓栓塞症诊治与预防指南的质量评价[J]. 中华结核和呼吸杂志, 2019, 42(3): 213-218. |
| [6] |
中华医学会呼吸病学分会慢性阻塞性肺疾病学组, 中国医师协会呼吸医师分会慢性阻塞性肺疾病工作委员会. 慢性阻塞性肺疾病诊治指南(2021年修订版)[J]. 中华结核和呼吸杂志, 2021, 44(3): 170-205. |
| [7] |
MAI V, FERGUSSON D, LE GAL G, et al. Prospective evaluation of the prevalence of pulmonary embolism in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation: challenges and feasibility[J]. Blood, 2024, 144, Supplement 1: 5570. |
| [8] |
SATO R, HASEGAWA D, NISHIDA K, et al. Prevalence of pulmonary embolism in patients with acute exacerbations of COPD: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Am J Emerg Med, 2021, 50: 606-617. |
| [9] |
曾令聪, 张龙举, 周玲, 4级肺栓塞临床概率评分对老年急性肺栓塞的预测价值研究[J]. 中国全科医学, 2024, 27(9): 1062-1067. |
| [10] |
叶婉霜, 王贵良, 刘鹏, CT肺动脉造影衍生左心房参数与急性肺栓塞血栓负荷相关[J]. 影像科学与光化学, 2025, 43(2): 39-46. |
| [11] |
董妍, 王宋, 田静, 动脉肺泡氧分压比对肺移植术后机械通气延长的预测价值[J]. 实用器官移植电子杂志, 2025, 13(1): 28-33. |
| [12] |
闫云, 赵璟, 范风江, 脓毒症肺损伤患者中医证型分布状况与肺损伤相关指标及SOFA、APACHE Ⅱ评分的相关性分析[J]. 中华中医药学刊, 2025, 43(3): 175-178. |
| [13] |
LI J M, XIONG Y L, LI S Y, et al. Prevalence and risk factors of pulmonary embolism in COPD patients complicated with secondary polycythemia[J]. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis, 2024, 19: 2371-2385. |
| [14] |
邢芳远, 郭小霞, 郭瑞霞. MLPR、NLR、RDW对老年AECOPD患者合并肺栓塞的评估价值[J]. 分子诊断与治疗杂志, 2024, 16(4): 599-603. |
| [15] |
杨军, 袁开芬, 张婷玉, 单核细胞/大血小板比率对慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重期肺栓塞的诊断价值[J]. 医学研究生学报, 2020, 33(9): 957-962. |
| [16] |
LI Y N, DU X Q, ZHOU L, et al. Use of the PaO2/FiO2 ratio in acute pulmonary embolism: a simple and reliable parameter to predict the risk stratification[J]. J Thorac Dis, 2025, 17(7): 4681-4688. |
| [17] |
徐佩枫, 陈玉玲. 慢性阻塞性肺病急性加重伴肺栓塞的危险因素[J]. 临床肺科杂志, 2017, 22(8): 1375-1379. |
| [18] |
张建泉, 沈智勇, 龚海鹏, 肺动脉CTA与D-二聚体对肿瘤患者肺栓塞诊断的一致性研究[J]. 中国CT和MRI杂志, 2025, 23(1): 72-74. |
| [19] |
NWANERI C, RACE R, OLADELE R, et al. Pulmonary embolism presenting as shoulder and back pain: a case report[J]. Cureus, 2024, 16(7): e64016. |
| [20] |
MA M J, LI Y, XU X J, et al. Early diagnosis for pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Medicine (Baltimore), 2023, 102(28): e34352. |
| [21] |
EGGERS A S, HAFIAN A, LERCHBAUMER M H, et al. Acute infections and inflammatory biomarkers in patients with acute pulmonary embolism[J]. J Clin Med, 2023, 12(10): 3546. |
| [22] |
李有霞, 王红嫚, 杨茂祥, 慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重合并肺栓塞血液相关风险因素分析[J]. 国际检验医学杂志, 2017, 38(20): 2829-2831. |
| [23] |
OZBAY S, AYAN M, OZSOY O, et al. Diagnostic and prognostic roles of procalcitonin and other tools in community-acquired pneumonia: a narrative review[J]. Diagnostics (Basel), 2023, 13(11): 1869. |
| [24] |
李瑞敏, 丁艳艳, 赵莹, 血浆相关指标及联合检测在病毒性肺炎早期诊断中的临床价值[J]. 分子诊断与治疗杂志, 2024, 16(7): 1281-1284. |
| [25] |
KARAKURT G, GUVEN O, AYNACI E, et al. Evaluation of hemogram parameters in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: immature granulocytes and other new tips[J]. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost, 2024, 30: 10760296241227212. |
河北省卫生健康委员会医学科学计划项目(H20231347)
秦皇岛市科学技术研究与发展计划项目(202301A167)
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |