尿α1-微球蛋白及N-乙酰-β-D-氨基葡萄糖苷酶/尿肌酐在慢性HBV感染相关肝病患者早期肾损伤中的检测价值

张静怡; 唐映梅; 杨娴; 杨文霞

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2022.02.014

尿α1-微球蛋白及N-乙酰-β-D-氨基葡萄糖苷酶/尿肌酐在慢性HBV感染相关肝病患者早期肾损伤中的检测价值

DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2022.02.014

昆明医科大学第二附属医院消化内科，昆明 650000

基金项目:

国家自然科学基金 (81660102);

国家自然科学基金 (81360072);

云南省卫生科技计划项目基金资助项目 (2017NS280);

云南省自然科学基金资助项目 (2018FE001[-051])

利益冲突声明：本研究不存在研究者、伦理委员会成员、受试者监护人以及与公开研究成果有关的利益冲突。

作者贡献声明：张静怡负责课题设计，数据收集，资料分析，拟定写作思路，撰写论文；杨娴、杨文霞参与收集数据及分析；唐映梅负责指导撰写文章并最后定稿。

详细信息

通信作者:
唐映梅，tangyingmei_med@kmmu.edu.cn

计量
- 文章访问数: 417
- HTML全文浏览量: 116
- PDF下载量: 39
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2021-07-02
- 录用日期: 2021-08-10
- 出版日期: 2022-02-20

Value of urinary α1-microglobulin and N-acetyl-β-D-glucosaminidase/urinary creatinine in monitoring early renal injury in patients with chronic hepatitis B virus-related liver diseases

Department of Gastroenterology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Kunming 650000, China

Research funding:

Research funding: National Natural Science Foundation of China (81660102);

Research funding: National Natural Science Foundation of China (81360072);

Yunnan Provincial Health Science and Technology Program Project Fund Grant (2017NS280);

Natural Science Foundation of Yunnan Province (2018FE001[-051])

More Information

Corresponding author: TANG Yingmei, tangyingmei_med@kmmu.edu.cn

摘要

摘要: 目的探究尿α1-微球蛋白(α1-MG)、N-乙酰-β-D-氨基葡萄糖苷酶/尿肌酐(NAG/UCr)在慢性HBV感染相关肝病患者肾损伤中的临床价值。方法纳入2019年8月—2020年8月就诊于昆明医科大学第二附属医院的慢性HBV感染相关肝病患者85例，根据患者核苷(酸)类似物(NUC)治疗史，将患者分为NUC治疗组(n=57)和未经NUC治疗组(n=28)，根据使用NUC种类，将患者分为ETV治疗组(n=32)和TDF治疗组(n=25)；根据HBV血清抗原、抗体标志物检测结果，将患者分为HBeAg阴性组(n=57)和HBeAg阳性组(n=28)；根据血清HBV DNA定量检测，将患者分为HBV DNA阴性组(n=47)和HBV DNA阳性组(n=38)；根据腹部影像学检查结果，将患者分为非肝硬化组(n=47)和肝硬化组(n=38)，收集纳入患者的病史资料及实验室指标，并进行组间比较。计量资料符合正态分布的两组间比较采用t检验；偏态分布两组间比较采用Mann-Whitney U检验。计数资料两组间比较采用χ²检验。采用McNemar检验比较不同指标检测的优劣性。采用Spearman相关性分析探讨各因素与α1-MG、NAG/UCr之间的相关性。采用多元线性回归分析α1-MG、NAG/UCr的独立影响因素。结果未经NUC治疗组、HBeAg阳性组、HBV DNA阳性组的尿α1-MG水平分别较NUC治疗组(Z=-2.054, P=0.04)、HBeAg阴性组(Z=-2.293, P=0.022)、HBV DNA阴性组(Z=-2.229, P=0.026)明显升高。HBV DNA阳性组、肝硬化组的NAG、NAG/UCr水平分别较HBV DNA阴性组(Z值分别为-2.908、-2.824，P值均＜0.05)、非肝硬化组(Z值分别为-3.204、-3.412，P值均＜0.05)患者明显升高。α1-MG异常患者占比(31.8%)与eGFR异常占比(20.0%)相比较，二者差异有统计学意义(χ²=7.178，P=0.007)；α1-MG联合NAG/UCr检测异常占比(35.3%)较eGFR检测异常占比高，差异有统计学意义(χ²=8.049，P=0.005)。α1-MG联合NAG/UCr检测与eGFR检测优劣性比较，差异有统计学意义(P=0.015)。年龄(β=0.246)、HBeAg阳性(β=0.284)、合并肝癌(β=0.291)是α1-MG升高的独立危险因素(P值均＜0.05)；FIB-4值升高(β=0.352)、合并腹水(β=0.260)、食管胃底静脉曲张(β=-0.248)、HBV DNA阳性(β=0.197)、高水平TBil(β=0.257)均是NAG/UCr升高的独立危险因素(P值均＜0.05)。结论慢性HBV感染相关肝病患者的肾损伤可能发生在病毒复制活跃期、肝硬化以及肝脏功能恶化的整个病程进展中，使用NUC抗病毒治疗可以缓解HBV对肾功能的损伤，在一定治疗疗程内是安全可靠的；联合检测尿α1-MG、NAG/UCr诊断早期肾功能损伤较eGFR更具优势，是慢性HBV感染相关肝病患者更有效的肾功能监测方法。
- 乙型肝炎，慢性 /
- 肝硬化 /
- 肾功能不全 /
- α1-微球蛋白 /
- N-乙酰-β-D-氨基葡萄糖苷酶 /
- 肌酐
Abstract: Objective To investigate the value of urinary α1-microglobulin (α1-MG) and N-acetyl-β-D-glucosaminidase/urinary creatinine (NAG/UCr) in monitoring renal injury in patients with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related liver diseases. Methods A total of 85 patients with HBV-related liver diseases who attended The Second Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University from August 2019 to August 2020 were enrolled, and according to the history of treatment with nucleos(t)ide analogues (NUC), they were divided into NUC treatment group with 57 patients and non-NUC treatment group with 28 patients; according to the type of NUC used, the NUC treatment group was further divided into entecavir (ETV) treatment group with 32 patients and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) treatment group with 25 patients; according to the results of HBV serum antigen and antibody markers, the patients were divided into HBeAg-negative group with 57 patients and HBeAg-positive group with 28 patients; according to the results of serum HBV DNA quantification, the patients were divided into HBV DNA-negative group with 47 patients and HBV DNA-positive group with 38 patients; according to abdominal imaging findings, the patients were divided into non-liver cirrhosis group with 47 patients and liver cirrhosis group with 38 patients. The data on medical history and laboratory markers were collected for comparison between two groups. The t-test was used for comparison of normally distributed continuous data between two groups, and the Mann-Whitney U test was used for comparison of data with skewed distribution between two groups; the chi-square test was used for comparison of categorical data between two groups. The McNemar test was used to compare the diagnostic merit of each index; a Spearman correlation analysis was used to investigate the correlation of each factor with α1-MG, and NAG/UCr; the multiple linear regression analysis was used to analyze the independent influencing factors for α1-MG and NAG/UCr. Results The non-NUC treatment group, the HBeAg-positive group, and the HBV DNA-positive group had significantly higher levels of urinary α1-MG than the NUC treatment group (Z=-2.054, P=0.04), the HBeAg-negative group (Z=-2.293, P=0.022), and the HBV DNA-negative group (Z=-2.229, P=0.026), respectively. The HBV DNA-positive group and the liver cirrhosis group had significantly higher levels of NAG and NAG/UCr than the HBV DNA-negative group (Z=-2.908 and -2.824, both P < 0.05) and the non-liver cirrhosis group (Z=-3.204 and -3.412, both P < 0.05), respectively. There was a significant difference in the proportion of patients with abnormal α1-MG and that of patients with abnormal estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (31.8% vs 20.0%, χ²=7.178, P=0.007), and the proportion of patients with abnormal α1-MG and NAG/UCr was significantly higher than that of patients with abnormal eGFR (35.3% vs 20.0%, χ²=8.049, P=0.005). There was a significant difference in diagnostic merit between α1-MG+NAG/UCr and eGFR (P=0.015). Age (β=0.246, P < 0.05), positive HBeAg (β=0.284, P < 0.01), and liver cancer (β=0.291, P < 0.01) were independent risk factors for the increase in α1-MG, while the increase in FIB-4 value (β=0.352, P < 0.05), ascites (β=0.260, P < 0.05), esophagogastric varices(β=-0.248, P < 0.05), positive HBV DNA (β=0.197, P < 0.05), and high total bilirubin (β=0.257, P < 0.05) were independent risk factors for the increase in NAG/UCr. Conclusion In patients with chronic HBV-related liver diseases, renal injury may occur during the whole course of active viral replication, liver cirrhosis, and deterioration of liver function. Antiviral therapy with NUC can alleviate renal impairment caused by HBV and is safe and reliable within a certain course of treatment. Combined measurement of urinary α1-MG and NAG/UCr has more advantages over eGFR in the diagnosis of early renal injury, and it is an effective method for renal function monitoring in patients with chronic HBV-related liver diseases.
- Hepatitis B, Chronic /
- Liver Cirrhosis /
- Renal Insufficiency /
- α1-microglobulin /
- N-acetyl-β-D-glucosaminidase /
- Creatinine

HTML全文

表 1 85例慢性HBV感染相关肝病患者基线资料

项目	结果
病史(年)	10.0(1.5~20.0)
用药疗程(月)	12.0(5.5~36.0)
肝硬化[例(%)]	38(44.7)
肝癌[例(%)]	6(7.1)
食管胃底静脉曲张[例(%)]	22(25.9)
脾大[例(%)]	33(38.8)
腹水[例(%)]	20(23.5)
HBeAg阳性[例(%)]	28(32.9)
HBV DNA阳性[例(%)]	38(44.7)
高血压[例(%)]	8(9.4)
糖尿病[例(%)]	14(16.5)

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 NUC治疗与未治疗的慢性HBV感染相关肝病患者肾功能指标比较

组别	例数	血磷(mmol/L)	血肌酐(μmol/L)	eGFR(mL·min^-1·1.73 m^-2)	α1-MG(mg/dL)	NAG(U/L)	NAG/UCr(U/g cr)
未经NUC治疗	28	1.06±0.21	69(57~78)	103(90~113)	1.11(0.76~2.37)	9.70(4.30~13.80)	7.80(3.65~16.33)
NUC治疗	57	1.10±0.20	74(58~80)	101(91~110)	0.68(0.52~1.77)	6.40(4.30~11.70)	6.61(3.35~10.64)
统计值		t=-0.799	Z=-1.268	Z=-0.594	Z=-2.054	Z=-1.239	Z=-0.888
P值		0.427	0.205	0.552	0.040	0.215	0.374

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 ETV与TDF治疗的慢性HBV感染相关肝病患者肾功能指标比较

组别	例数	血磷(mmol/L)	血肌酐(μmol/L)	eGFR(mL·min^-1·1.73 m^-2)	α1-MG(mg/dL)	NAG(U/L)	NAG/UCr(U/g cr)
ETV	32	1.06±0.20	73.40±13.50	99.00(89.78~110.25)	0.67(0.52~1.20)	6.75(4.95~11.55)	6.44(3.40~10.05)
TDF	25	1.15±0.19	68.50±13.20	102.50(94.00~109.25)	0.91(0.52~2.62)	5.40(3.58~13.30)	6.92(3.13~12.75)
统计值		t=-1.637	t=1.310	Z=-0.869	Z=-1.022	Z=-0.764	Z=-0.080
P值		0.107	0.195	0.385	0.307	0.445	0.936

下载: 导出CSV

表 4 HBeAg阳性与HBeAg阴性慢性HBV感染相关肝病患者肾功能指标比较

组别	例数	血磷(mmol/L)	血肌酐(μmol/L)	eGFR(mL·min^-1·1.73 m^-2)	α1-MG(mg/dL)	NAG(U/L)	NAG/UCr(U/g cr)
HBeAg阴性	57	1.12±0.19	70.94±14.29	100(90~108)	0.76(0.52~1.36)	6.5(4.5~11.0)	6.96(3.58~10.42)
HBeAg阳性	28	1.02±0.21	70.04±15.51	105(95~116)	1.39(0.55~2.58)	10.2(4.2~19.6)	8.21(3.26~15.66)
统计值		t=1.949	t=0.300	Z=-1.198	Z=-2.293	Z=-1.230	Z=-1.103
P值		0.055	0.765	0.231	0.022	0.219	0.270

下载: 导出CSV

表 5 HBV DNA阳性与HBV DNA阴性慢性HBV感染相关肝病患者肾功能指标比较

组别	例数	血磷(mmol/L)	血肌酐(μmol/L)	eGFR(mL·min^-1·1.73 m^-2)	α1-MG(mg/dL)	NAG(U/L)	NAG/UCr(U/g cr)
HBV DNA阴性	47	1.10±0.19	71.45±14.68	100(89~111)	0.65(0.52~1.74)	5.25(3.33~10.45)	5.55(2.78~9.81)
HBV DNA阳性	38	1.07±0.22	69.60±14.71	103(96~110)	1.11(0.76~2.37)	9.80(5.70~16.60)	8.40(5.53~17.69)
统计值		t=0.693	t=0.680	Z=-0.783	Z=-2.229	Z=-2.908	Z=-2.824
P值		0.491	0.498	0.434	0.026	0.004	0.005

下载: 导出CSV

表 6 合并肝硬化与非肝硬化慢性HBV感染相关肝病患者肾功能相关指标比较

组别	例数	血磷(mmol/L)	血肌酐(μmol/L)	eGFR(mL·min^-1·1.73 m^-2)	α1-MG(mg/dL)	NAG(U/L)	NAG/UCr(U/g cr)
非肝硬化	47	1.08±0.19	73.5(57.8~79.3)	99.0(89.3~114.5)	0.93(0.60~1.97)	5.15(3.18~10.05)	4.36(2.67~10.58)
肝硬化	38	1.08±0.22	70.0(58.5~79.5)	103.0(97.5~109.0)	0.91(0.51~1.95)	9.80(6.10~18.70)	8.61(6.21~17.84)
统计值		t=-0.028	Z=-0.553	Z=-0.491	Z=-0.380	Z=-3.204	Z=-3.412
P值		0.978	0.580	0.624	0.704	0.001	0.001

下载: 导出CSV

表 7 慢性HBV感染相关肝病患者α1-MG、NAG/UCr与eGFR异常情况比较

项目	eGFR	α1-MG	NAG/UCr	α1-MG+NAG/UCr
异常[例(%)]	17(20.0)	27(31.8)	13(15.3)	30(35.3)
正常[例(%)]	68(80.0)	58(68.2)	72(84.7)	55(64.7)

下载: 导出CSV

表 8 各影响因素与α1-MG、NAG/UCr的相关性分析

影响因素	α1-MG		NAG/UCr
影响因素	r值	P值	r值	P值
年龄	0.261	0.016	0.498	＜0.001
是否用药	-0.224	0.039	-0.097	0.387
肝癌	0.245	0.024	0.324	0.002
肝硬化	-0.042	0.706	0.372	＜0.001
食管胃底静脉曲张	0.111	0.311	0.229	0.035
脾大	0.040	0.714	0.373	＜0.001
腹水	0.221	0.042	0.390	＜0.001
Child评分	0.106	0.336	0.550	＜0.001
水肿	-0.123	0.261	0.231	0.033
FIB-4	0.142	0.205	0.545	＜0.001
HBeAg	0.250	0.040	0.120	0.272
HBV DNA	0.243	0.025	0.308	0.004
ALT	0.121	0.269	0.345	0.001
AST	0.162	0.141	0.546	＜0.001
ALP	0.104	0.351	0.493	＜0.001
GGT	0.289	0.008	0.464	＜0.001
Alb	-0.147	0.182	-0.626	＜0.001
TBil	0.098	0.376	0.373	＜0.001

下载: 导出CSV

表 9 各相关因素与α1-MG的多元线性回归分析

影响因素	Β值	标准误	β值	t值	P值	VIF
常数	-1.126	0.873		-1.289	0.201
年龄	0.036	0.015	0.246	2.422	0.018	1.166
是否用药	-0.104	0.425	-0.027	-0.245	0.807	1.345
HBeAg	1.114	0.377	0.284	2.952	0.004	1.041
HBV DNA	0.647	0.419	0.175	1.544	0.127	1.448
肝癌	2.067	0.699	0.291	2.958	0.004	1.091
腹水	0.454	0.438	0.106	1.037	0.303	1.170
GGT	0.001	0.003	0.024	0.240	0.811	1.109
注：VIF, 方差膨胀系数。

下载: 导出CSV

表 10 各相关因素与NAG/UCr的多元线性回归分析

影响因素	Β值	标准误	β值	t值	P值	VIF
常数	1.242	2.271		0.547	0.586
食管胃底静脉曲张	-9.640	3.865	-0.248	-2.494	0.015	1.358
FIB-4	1.307	0.399	0.352	3.278	0.002	1.581
腹水	10.431	3.963	0.260	2.632	0.010	1.342
HBV DNA	6.870	3.061	0.197	2.245	0.028	1.056
TBil	0.081	0.030	0.257	2.690	0.009	1.250

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(12)

[1]	SCHWEITZER A, HORN J, MIKOLAJCZYK RT, et al. Estimations of worldwide prevalence of chronic hepatitis B virus infection: A systematic review of data published between 1965 and 2013[J]. Lancet, 2015, 386(10003): 1546-1555. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)61412-X.
[2]	TERRAULT NA, LOK A, MCMAHON BJ, et al. Update on prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of chronic hepatitis B: AASLD 2018 hepatitis B guidance[J]. Hepatology, 2018, 67(4): 1560-1599. DOI: 10.1002/hep.29800.
[3]	YANG YT, WANG X, ZHANG YY, et al. The histone demethylase LSD1 promotes renal inflammation by mediating TLR4 signaling in hepatitis B virus-associated glomerulonephritis[J]. Cell Death Dis, 2019, 10(4): 278. DOI: 10.1038/s41419-019-1514-4.
[4]	YANG YT, WANG X, ZHANG YY, et al. Hepatitis B virus X protein and proinflammatory cytokines synergize to enhance TRAIL-induced apoptosis of renal tubular cells by upregulation of DR4[J]. Int J Biochem Cell Biol, 2018, 97: 62-72. DOI: 10.1016/j.biocel.2018.02.006.
[5]	CHEN J, LI D, LUO E. Telbivudine antagonizes TLR4 to inhibit the epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition in human proximal tubular epithelial cells in vitro[J]. Int Immunopharmacol, 2019, 74: 105683. DOI: 10.1016/j.intimp.2019.105683.
[6]	WANG X, ZHOU Y, ZHU N, et al. The deposition of Notch1 in hepatitis B virus-associated nephropathy and its role in hepatitis B virus X protein-induced epithelial-mesenchymal transdifferentiation and immunity disorder in renal tubular epithelial cells[J]. J Viral Hepat, 2014, 21(10): 734-743. DOI: 10.1111/jvh.12244.
[7]	KAYAASLAN B, GUNER R. Adverse effects of oral antiviral therapy in chronic hepatitis B[J]. World J Hepatol, 2017, 9(5): 227-241. DOI: 10.4254/wjh.v9.i5.227.
[8]	BOCK P, NEL K, FATTI G, et al. Renal dysfunction by baseline CD4 cell count in a cohort of adults starting antiretroviral treatment regardless of CD4 count in the HIV Prevention Trials Network 071[HPTN 071; Population Effect of Antiretroviral Therapy to Reduce HIV Transmission (PopART)] study in South Africa[J]. HIV Med, 2019, 20(6): 392-403. DOI: 10.1111/hiv.12729.
[9]	WENG Q, ZHOU Q, TONG J, et al. New risk score for predicting steroid resistance in patients with focal segmental glomerulosclerosis or minimal change disease[J]. Clin Proteomics, 2020, 17: 18. DOI: 10.1186/s12014-020-09282-x.
[10]	ZHANG H, LI X, XU H, et al. The significance of the hemalexin C1q, RBP, and urinary NAG levels in the diagnosis and prognosis of children with purpura nephritis[J]. Am J Transl Res, 2021, 13(6): 7065-7070.
[11]	HOJS R, EKART R, BEVC S, et al. Biomarkers of renal disease and progression in patients with diabetes[J]. J Clin Med, 2015, 4(5): 1010-1024. DOI: 10.3390/jcm4051010.
[12]	KIM YJ, CHO HC, SINN DH, et al. Frequency and risk factors of renal impairment during long-term adefovir dipivoxil treatment in chronic hepatitis B patients[J]. J Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2012, 27(2): 306-312. DOI: 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2011.06852.x.