中文English
ISSN 1001-5256 (Print)
ISSN 2097-3497 (Online)
CN 22-1108/R

Correlation between systemic immune-inflammation index and prognosis in patients with hepatic alveolar echinococcosis

DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2021.02.025
  • Received Date: 2020-08-20
  • Accepted Date: 2020-10-30
  • Published Date: 2021-02-20
  •   Objective  To investigate the correlation between systemic immune-inflammation index (SⅡ) and prognosis in patients with hepatic alveolar echinococcosis.  Methods  A retrospective analysis was performed for the clinical data of 242 patients who were admitted to Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Qinghai University Affiliated Hospital, from January 2015 to December 2018 and underwent surgery for hepatic alveolar echinococcosis, and SⅡ was calculated. The chi-square test was used for comparison of categorical data between two groups, and a Spearman correlation analysis was performed. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to determine the optimal cut-off value of SⅡ; the Kaplan-Meier method was used to plot survival curves and analyze overall survival time in the two groups, and the log-rank test was used for comparison of survival rates between the two groups; univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were used to identify the influencing factors for the prognosis of patients with hepatic alveolar echinococcosis.  Results  The Spearman correlation analysis showed that SⅡ was positively correlated with the postoperative fatality rate of patients with hepatic alveolar echinococcosis (r=0.267, P < 0.001). The ROC curve showed that the optimal cut-off value of SⅡ before surgery was 758.92, and based on this, 242 patients with hepatic alveolar echinococcosis were divided into low SⅡ (SⅡ ≤758.92) group with 126 patients and high SⅡ (SⅡ >758.92) group with 116 patients. The low SⅡ group had 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates of 98.20%, 88.47%, and 66.10%, respectively, and the high SⅡ group had 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates of 90.80%, 53.05%, and 27.40%, respectively. The low SⅡ group had a cumulative survival rate of >50% and a mean survival time of 55.584 months (95% confidence interval[CI]: 53.550-57.617), while the high SⅡ group had a cumulative survival rate of < 50%, a mean survival time of 39.384 months (95% CI: 35.070-43.698), and a median survival time of 43 months (95% CI: 34.694-51.306). The low SⅡ group had a significantly better survival rate than the high SⅡ group, and there was a significant difference in overall survival rate between the two groups (χ2=46.979, P < 0.05). The univariate analysis showed that SⅡ >758.92 (hazard ratio [HR]=5.907, 95% CI: 3.386-10.306, P=0.001) was an influencing factor for the overall survival time of patients with hepatic alveolar echinococcosis, and the multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that preoperative peripheral blood SⅡ (HR=3.507, 95% CI: 1.911-6.435, P=0.001) was an independent risk factor for the overall survival rate of patients with hepatic alveolar echinococcosis.  Conclusion  Preoperative SⅡ level is clearly correlated with the prognosis of patients with hepatic alveolar echinococcosis and can thus be used as a clinical indicator to evaluate the prognosis of patients. The higher the peripheral blood SⅡ before surgery, the worse the prognosis of patients.

     

  • 不明原因肝损伤指的是通过病史询问、体格检查、血清学检查、影像学检查手段后仍难以诊断的持续反复肝功能异常和/或影像学异常,常常导致诊治延误。目前,肝穿刺活检仍然被认为是多种肝病明确诊断和评估纤维化阶段的“金标准”。本文通过回顾分析本中心近年不明原因肝损伤患者的临床资料及超声引导下肝活检结果,旨在为提高临床诊断不明原因肝损伤的诊治水平提供参考。

    选取厦门大学附属中山医院2018年1月—2023年2月入院的不明原因肝损伤患者共94例,其中男37例,女57例,男女比例约为2∶3,平均年龄(52.7±12.6)岁,最小年龄为17岁,最大年龄为76岁。纳入标准:反复检测肝功能异常和/或影像学异常的患者。排除标准:常规病毒学检查明确甲型、乙型、丙型、丁型、戊型肝炎患者;具有明确饮酒史(长期饮酒>5年,摄入酒精量男≥40 g/d,女≥20 g/d)且AST/ALT>2、GGT升高患者;通过血清学、影像学检查可明确诊断的肝损伤患者。所有患者入院后均进行超声引导下肝穿刺活检。

    采用回顾性调查的方法,采集研究对象的年龄、性别、身高、体质量指数等基本资料;血糖、血脂、肝功能、自身免疫抗体谱、肝抗原谱、体液免疫、遗传代谢相关指标等实验室指标,肝胆胰脾彩超或腹部CT检查、磁共振胰胆管造影等影像学检查,以及超声引导下肝活检组织病理学结果。

    采用SPSS 25.0进行数据处理,正态分布的计量资料多组间比较采用单因素方差分析,进一步两两比较采用Bonferroni分析或Dunnett’ T3检验;非正态分布的计量资料用MP25P75)表示,多组间比较采用Kruskal-Wallis H秩和检验。计数资料多组间比较采用Fisher确切检验。P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。

    94例不明原因肝损伤患者中90例(95.7%)结合临床特征和肝穿刺病理检查后可明确诊断,其中自身免疫性肝病(AILD)43例(45.7%),包括原发性胆汁性胆管炎(PBC)23例(24.5%),PBC-自身免疫性肝炎(AIH)重叠综合征(PBC-AIH OS)14例(14.9%),AIH 3例(3.2%),IgG4相关肝病3例(3.2%);代谢相关脂肪性肝病(MAFLD)21例(22.3%);药物性肝损伤(DILI)15例(16.0%);酒精性肝病(ALD)6例(6.4%);AILD合并MAFLD 1例(1.1%);血色病1例(1.1%);布加综合征1例(1.1%);先天性肝纤维化1例(1.1%);特发性门静脉高压1例(1.1%),肝活检后病因仍不明确4例(4.3%)。明确诊断的90例患者中,病理诊断与临床诊断相比,诊断结果一致的有74例(82.2%)。

    2.2.1   症状

    多数患者临床表现为乏力、皮肤瘙痒、黄疸、腹胀、下肢水肿、纳差等,部分AILD患者同时合并有其他自身免疫性疾病,其中干燥综合征最常见(9例,20.9%),表现为口干、眼干。在21例MAFLD患者中,16例(76.2%)患者入院时无任何不适,仅为体检发现肝功能异常或肝硬化,少数患者表现为乏力、腹胀、黄疸。

    2.2.2   致DILI的药物种类

    导致DILI的可疑药物最常见的为中草药(5例,33.3%),其他包括秋水仙碱、双氯芬酸钠、氨氯地平、缬沙坦、恩他卡朋、司来吉兰、美多巴、莫西沙星、退热药物、他汀类药物、尘肺治疗药、中成药。

    2.2.3   人口学特征

    不同病因在年龄、BMI方面比较均有统计学意义(F值分别为4.457、3.245,P值均<0.05)(图1a、b)。在年龄方面,60岁以上的老年人以AILD为主,45~60岁的中年人中AILD、DILI较为常见,<45岁的青年人MAFLD较为常见,ALD、MAFLD的平均年龄相较于AILD、DILI低;在BMI方面,MAFLD患者平均BMI为(25.4±3.3)kg/m2,其中超重者(24 kg/m2≤BMI<28 kg/m2)11例(52.4%)、肥胖(BMI≥28 kg/m2)者4例(19.0%)、合并高血压者5例(23.8%)、2型糖尿病4例(19.0%)、高脂血症3例(14.3%),明显高于其他疾病(P值均<0.05)。性别方面,DILI与MAFLD的男女比例约为1∶1,ALD患者均为男性,AILD患者以女性居多,男女比例约1∶4,不同病因在性别中的分布情况见图1c。

    注: a,年龄分布情况;b,BMI分布情况;c,不同病因在性别中的分布情况。
    图  1  不明原因肝损伤患者人口学特征
    Figure  1.  Demographic characteristics of patients with liver injury of unknown origin
    2.2.4   实验室资料分析

    疾病谱排名前5位的疾病中,入院时AST、GGT、ALP在AILD中升高最显著,在MAFLD中最不显著,且差异具有统计学意义;AILD患者IgG、IgM较MAFLD、DILI患者升高,抗线粒体抗体M2亚型(AMA-M2)与抗核抗体(ANA)抗体阳性率较其他疾病明显升高(P值均<0.05)(表1)。

    表  1  不同病因肝损害患者实验室资料分析
    Table  1.  Laboratory data analysis of patients with liver injury of different etiology
    指标 AILD(n=43) MAFLD(n=21) DILI(n=15) ALD(n=6) 病因不明(n=4) H P
    TG(mmol/L) 1.4(1.0~1.9) 1.5(1.0~1.7) 1.6(1.1~2.9) 1.6(1.0~3.0) 1.3(0.9~1.5) 2.452 0.653
    总胆固醇(mmol/L) 5.4(4.6~6.4) 4.5(3.8~5.3) 4.5(3.4~5.4) 5.6(3.6~6.4) 4.3(3.3~6.4) 7.904 0.095
    GLU(mmol/L) 5.3(4.8~6.0) 5.2(4.8~5.8) 5.4(4.6~6.7) 5.6(5.1~7.2) 5.4(4.8~6.8) 0.650 0.957
    ALT(U/L) 84.0(45.8~200.0) 53.9(36.8~127.2) 126.0(33.0~553.6) 46.3(18.7~101.3) 38.6(16.7~122.9) 6.414 0.170
    AST(U/L) 90.6(57.3~174.3)1) 44.9(33.9~76.5) 54.7(34.7~366.6) 65.3(24.3~165.8) 36.1(22.7~119.0) 11.128 0.025
    GGT(U/L) 312.6(163.1~514.5)1) 59.1(47.0~128.4) 117.2(48.9~354.1) 111.1(28.5~521.0) 66.5(41.6~135.4) 24.789 < 0.001
    ALP(U/L) 202.3(138.0~451.5)1) 98.5(80.9~130.9) 174.5(95.7~303.9) 123.5(89.5~138.7) 102.8(82.8~122.4) 26.013 < 0.001
    TBil(μmol/L) 20.2(12.8~35.7) 18.4(9.9~22.3) 36.3(13.4~167.4) 32.8(15.6~141.6) 10.0(9.4~16.3) 12.455 0.014
    IgG(g/L) 17.3(14.9~21.3)1)2) 14.3(11.3~16.4) 14.2(11.4~16.4) 16.3(12.3~16.9) 15.7(13.4~18.1) 19.099 0.001
    IgM(g/L) 3.4(1.9~5.4)1)2) 1.5(1.0~2.5) 1.4(1.0~1.7) 1.8(0.8~2.7) 1.3(0.7~2.5) 21.263 < 0.001
    AMA-M2(阳性/阴性,例) 18/25 0/21 2/13 0/6 0/4 < 0.001
    ANA(阳性/阴性,例) 34/9 4/17 4/11 0/6 0/4 < 0.001
    注:与MAFLD比较,1)P<0.05;与DILI比较,2)P<0.05。
    下载: 导出CSV 
    | 显示表格
    2.2.5   不同类型肝损害分析

    根据肝损伤特点可将不同类型肝损伤分为胆汁淤积型、肝细胞损伤型、混合型。国际医学组织理事会将R值定义为(ALT/ALT ULN)/(ALP/ALP ULN),用于鉴别不同类型DILI1。本研究基于该法区分肝损伤类型并进行病因分析,其中胆汁淤积型最常见(71.3%),病因排名前3的分别为AILD、MAFLD、DILI;肝细胞损伤型约占12.8%,DILI最常见;混合型约占15.9%,AILD最常见。

    本研究不明原因肝损伤患者通过超声引导下肝穿刺活检后能够明确诊断的有90例(95.7%),仍有4例患者最终不能确定病因,这4例患者的穿刺病理表现无特异性,结果均提示“慢性活动性肝炎,轻度炎症”,提示肝穿刺活检也存在一定的局限性,如肝组织取样误差致汇管区数目不足、未取到代表性病变区等。有16例(17.8%)病理诊断与临床诊断不一致,原因可能有以下两点:(1)临床资料提供不完整,病理医生难以判断;(2)肝脏代偿功能强大,早期隐匿的临床表现有时可出现较重的病理损伤,提示肝穿刺病理诊断结果与临床资料结合的必要性。

    本研究中不明原因肝损伤占比最多的为AILD,多发生于中年女性,部分患者合并有干燥综合征、自身免疫性甲状腺疾病等其他自身免疫疾病。体液免疫指标升高、自身抗体阳性对诊断有重要参考意义。体液免疫方面,IgG升高多见于AIH,而IgM升高多见于PBC。自身抗体方面,AMA-M2对诊断PBC具有高敏感度和特异度,但临床上仍有一部分AMA-M2阴性的不典型PBC,国外有数据2显示PBC患者中ANA阳性率为56%,而在AMA-M2阴性的PBC患者中ANA阳性率可提升至74%,本研究的结果与之相似(阳性率75%)。ANA在PBC患者中常以特征性的形式出现(如抗gp210、抗sp100,分别对应核周型、核点型),并不同于AIH多样的滴度和荧光模型,故其可作为补充手段识别不同类型AILD3。另有相当比例的PBC患者重叠了AIH,称为PBC-AIH OS,目前尚未发现相关的特异性自身抗体及血清标志物,此类患者疾病进展速度较PBC更快4,因此中年女性若出现不明原因肝损伤,尤其是合并有其他系统自身免疫疾病时应警惕AILD的可能,自身抗体阴性者更应引起重视,早期肝穿刺活检明确,以免延误诊治。

    本研究中不明原因肝损伤占比第2位的为MAFLD,目前MAFLD已取代病毒性肝炎成为全球最常见的慢性肝病5-6。MAFLD发病隐匿、临床表现不特异,通过单一方法检测方法或指标早期诊断较为困难。影像学检查因其无创优势在临床上诊断MAFLD应用较为广泛,但当肝脂肪变<20%时彩超难以检出;瞬时弹性成像诊断肝活检组织学>5%肝脂肪变的诊断价值中等7,很难取代肝穿刺活检在诊断MAFLD的地位。MAFLD与代谢综合征、2型糖尿病等互为因果,并且可以与其他肝病共同存在8,当代快节奏生活方式及饮食结构改变使得MAFLD发病趋于年轻化,故BMI较高且合并2型糖尿病、高血压等代谢异常因素的不明原因肝损伤青年患者需考虑MAFLD,同时注意排除合并其他类型肝病。治疗上积极处理原发病,调整生活方式、饮食结构。

    本研究中不明原因肝损伤占比第3、4位的分别为DILI、ALD,DILI多发生于中老年人,可能与其用药情况复杂、肝脏代谢功能降低相关。不同于欧美国家,我国引起DILI的药物主要是中草药和抗结核药9,这与本研究结果一致。急性DILI在临床上更为常见,通常在使用新药的短期内发生(如莫西沙星),但也有一些药物(如他汀类)在较长潜伏期后有引起DILI的倾向10,因此详细的病史采集是诊断DILI的必要前提。治疗上应注重预防,合理用药。ALD多发生于中青年男性,明确的饮酒史结合典型的肝功能异常和/或典型的影像学表现通常可以诊断,但存在混杂因素(如服用过肝损伤药物、不确定的酒精评估)的情况下仍然有必要行肝穿刺以确诊。

    除了上述4种病因外,本研究还包括血色病、先天性肝纤维化、特发性门静脉高压等较少见肝损伤原因。血色病为遗传性疾病,以转铁蛋白饱和度、血清铁蛋白升高为特点,肝穿刺活检提示肝铁沉积,结合基因检测多能进一步确诊11;非肝硬化性门静脉高压病包括先天性肝纤维化、特发性门静脉高压、布加综合征等,以门静脉高压相关症状体征为主要表现,肝功能正常或轻度异常12,容易漏诊误诊,肝穿刺活检是诊断“金标准”,但最终诊断还必须结合临床与影像学,若早期诊治,可能改善患者的预后。因此,有必要提高对罕见疾病的认知,注意到非常见病因致不明原因肝损伤患者的可能。

    明确肝损伤类型对鉴别诊断及判断预后同样有重要意义,上海一项大型研究13显示慢性肝病中胆汁淤积型肝病发病率从高到低依次为原发性硬化性胆管炎、PBC、肝肿瘤、AIH、DILI、ALD和MAFLD,本研究与之大致相符。胆汁淤积型肝病的ALP、GGT明显升高,病情进展者可出现高胆红素血症,常见病因需重点考虑AILD、DILI,罕见病因中需警惕GGT不高者,如良性复发性肝内胆汁淤积、进行性家族性肝内胆汁淤积14-15,对于不明原因高胆红素者可考虑行全外显子基因检测辅助诊断16。有研究17表明与胆汁淤积型或混合型DILI相比,肝细胞损伤型DILI更容易进展为急性肝衰竭,而R值判断肝细胞损伤型DILI敏感度较高18,故临床上可通过R值结合肝组织病理早期判断,指导治疗。

    综上所述,超声引导下肝穿刺活检在诊断不明原因肝损伤中发挥重要作用,但是对临床医生提出了一些新的要求,临床医生必须加强自身对肝脏病理知识的掌握,做好与病理医生的沟通,结合临床病史、实验室指标及影像学资料,必要时还需结合基因检测结果,做到“依据病理但不唯病理”,争取早期病因诊断、早期干预治疗。

  • [1]
    WANG WT, YANG C, YAN LN. New concept and strategy of surgical radical treatment of hepatic alveolar echinococcosis[J]. Natl Med J China, 2018, 98(38): 3049-3051. (in Chinese) DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0376-2491.2018.38.001

    王文涛, 杨闯, 严律南.肝泡型包虫病外科根治性治疗的新理念与策略[J].中华医学杂志, 2018, 98(38): 3049-3051. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0376-2491.2018.38.001
    [2]
    GERAMIZADEH B, BAGHERNEZHAD M. Hepatic alveolar hydatid cyst: A brief review of published cases from Iran in the last 20 years[J]. Hepat Mon, 2016, 16(10): e38920. DOI: 10.5812/hepatmon.38920
    [3]
    FANG D, CHEN ZY. Diagnosis and treatment of hepatic alveolar echinococcosis[J]. J Clin Hepatol, 2017, 33(5): 990-993. (in Chinese) DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2017.05.042

    方丹, 陈哲宇.肝泡状棘球蚴病的诊断和治疗[J].临床肝胆病杂志, 2017, 33(5): 990-993. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2017.05.042
    [4]
    LIU R, HE J, WANG H, et al. Accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound versus contrast-enhanced computed tomography in measuring hepatic alveolar echinococcosis lesions: A comparative study[J]. Clin J Med Offic, 2019, 47(7): 750-751. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JYGZ201907037.htm

    刘荣, 赫娟, 王辉, 等.超声造影及增强CT测量肝泡型包虫病病灶对比研究[J].临床军医杂志, 2019, 47(7): 750-751. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JYGZ201907037.htm
    [5]
    SHAO J, WANG ZX, WANG H, et al. Antibody microarray analysis of the serum inflammatory cytokines in patients with hepatic alveolar echinococcosis[J]. Chin J Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2017, 26(5): 566-569. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-WCBX201705024.htm

    邵军, 王志鑫, 王虎, 等.泡型肝包虫病患者血清炎症因子的抗体芯片检测及分析[J].胃肠病学和肝病学杂志, 2017, 26(5): 566-569. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-WCBX201705024.htm
    [6]
    LI YF, SHAO J, WANG ZX, et al. Effects of hydatid cyst fluid on the expression of TGF-β1, IL-6 and TNF-α in rat hepatic stellate cells[J]. Chin J Bases Clin Gen Surg, 2016, 23(12): 1500-1502. (in Chinese) DOI: 10.7507/1007-9424.20160378

    李衍飞, 邵军, 王志鑫, 等.泡球蚴囊液对大鼠肝星状细胞TGF-β1、IL-6及TNF-α表达的影响[J].中国普外基础与临床杂志, 2016, 23(12): 1500-1502. DOI: 10.7507/1007-9424.20160378
    [7]
    TURGUN TS, SHAN JY, LI T, et al. Effect of Th17 cells and Treg cells on immune evasion in patients with hepatic hydatid disease[J]. Chin J Dig Surg, 2010, 9(4): 283-286. (in Chinese) DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1673-9752.2010.04.015

    吐尔洪江·吐逊, 单骄宇, 李涛, 等. Th17细胞和调节性T细胞在肝包虫病免疫逃避中的作用[J].中华消化外科杂志, 2010, 9(4): 283-286. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1673-9752.2010.04.015
    [8]
    LABELLE M, BEGUM S, HYNES RO. Direct signaling between platelets and cancer cells induces an epithelial-mesenchymal-like transition and promotes metastasis[J]. Cancer Cell, 2011, 20(5): 576-590. DOI: 10.1016/j.ccr.2011.09.009
    [9]
    GAO Y, GUO W, CAI S, et al. Systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) is useful to predict survival outcomes in patients with surgically resected esophageal squamous cell carcinoma[J]. J Cancer, 2019, 10(14): 3188-3196. DOI: 10.7150/jca.30281
    [10]
    WANG P, YUE W, LI W, et al. Systemic immune-inflammation index and ultrasonographic classification of breast imaging-reporting and data system predict outcomes of triple-negative breast cancer[J]. Cancer Manag Res, 2019, 11: 813-819. DOI: 10.2147/CMAR.S185890
    [11]
    HU B, YANG XR, XU Y, et al. Systemic immune-inflammation index predicts prognosis of patients after curative resection for hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Clin Cancer Res, 2014, 20(23): 6212-6222. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-0442
    [12]
    AZIZ MH, SIDERAS K, AZIZ NA, et al. The systemic-immune-inflammation index independently predicts survival and recurrence in resectable pancreatic cancer and its prognostic value depends on bilirubin levels: A retrospective multicenter cohort study[J]. Ann Surg, 2019, 270(1): 139-146. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002660
    [13]
    BEAL EW, WEI L, ETHUN CG, et al. Elevated NLR in gallbladder cancer and cholangiocarcinoma - making bad cancers even worse: Results from the US extrahepatic biliary malignancy consortium[J]. HPB (Oxford), 2016, 18(11): 950-957. DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2016.08.006
    [14]
    PINATO DJ, NORTH BV, SHARMA R. A novel, externally validated inflammation-based prognostic algorithm in hepatocellular carcinoma: The prognostic nutritional index (PNI)[J]. Br J Cancer, 2012, 106(8): 1439-1445. DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2012.92
    [15]
    LI C, TIAN W, ZHAO F, et al. Systemic immune-inflammation index, SII, for prognosis of elderly patients with newly diagnosed tumors[J]. Oncotarget, 2018, 9(82): 35293-35299. DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.24293
    [16]
    YANG R, CHANG Q, MENG X, et al. Prognostic value of systemic immune-inflammation index in cancer: A meta-analysis[J]. J Cancer, 2018, 9(18): 3295-3302. DOI: 10.7150/jca.25691
    [17]
    WANG K, DIAO F, YE Z, et al. Prognostic value of systemic immune-inflammation index in patients with gastric cancer[J]. Chin J Cancer, 2017, 36(1): 75. DOI: 10.1186/s40880-017-0243-2
    [18]
    ZHANG GJ. Parasitic infection and neutrophils[J]. Foreign Med Sci (Parasitosis), 1999, 26(1): 1-5. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GWJC199901000.htm

    张桂筠.寄生虫感染与中性粒细胞[J].国外医学(寄生虫病分册), 1999, 26(1): 1-5. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GWJC199901000.htm
    [19]
    ZHOU WL, ZHAO WX, WU GL, et al. Immune function of red blood cells and platelets and parasitic infection[J]. Chin J Parasitic Dis, 1992, 5(2): 140-142. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZISC199202034.htm

    周维立, 赵慰先, 吴观陵, 等.红细胞、血小板免疫功能与寄生虫感染[J].中国寄生虫病防治杂志, 1992, 5(2): 140-142. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZISC199202034.htm
    [20]
    YIN SH. The preliminary study of TGF-β inhibiting the natural killer cells functions in the immune escape of Echinococcus granulosus[D]. Shihezi: Shihezi University, 2014. (in Chinese)

    印双红. TGF-β抑制自然杀伤细胞在细粒棘球蚴免疫逃逸作用中的初步探讨[D].石河子: 石河子大学, 2014.
    [21]
    ZHANG F, PANG N, ZHU Y, et al. CCR7(lo)PD-1(hi) CXCR5(+) CD4(+) T cells are positively correlated with levels of IL-21 in active and transitional cystic echinococcosis patients[J]. BMC Infect Dis, 2015, 15: 457. DOI: 10.1186/s12879-015-1156-9
  • Cited by

    Periodical cited type(1)

    1. 杨勇. 肝脏穿刺组织病理检验中免疫组化检验技术的应用价值分析. 现代诊断与治疗. 2024(20): 3111-3112+3115 .

    Other cited types(0)

  • 加载中

Catalog

    通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
    • 1. 

      沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

    1. 本站搜索
    2. 百度学术搜索
    3. 万方数据库搜索
    4. CNKI搜索

    Figures(2)  / Tables(2)

    Article Metrics

    Article views (411) PDF downloads(22) Cited by(1)
    Proportional views
    Related

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return