天津医药 ›› 2016, Vol. 44 ›› Issue (12): 1472-1475.doi: 10.11958/20160073

• 临床研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

PR 治疗慢性丙型肝炎患者营养风险的影响因素分析

张弘1,2,3 , 李菲2,3 , 衡明莉1 , 卢诚震2,3 , 孙云红2,3 , 王泓午1 , 曹武奎2,3△   

  1. 1 天津中医药大学公共卫生教研室 (邮编 300193); 2天津市第二人民医院; 3 天津肝病研究所
  • 收稿日期:2016-02-24 修回日期:2016-10-25 出版日期:2016-12-15 发布日期:2017-01-26
  • 通讯作者: 曹武奎 △通讯作者 E-mail:tjcaowk@sina.com E-mail:tjcaowk@sina.com
  • 作者简介:张弘 (1972), 女, 博士在读, 主要从事急慢性肝病临床研究
  • 基金资助:
    国家科技重大专项课题 (2012ZX10005004-003)

The influence factor analysis of nutritional risk in treatment of pegylated interferon and ribavirin in patients with chronic hepatitis C

ZHANG Hong1,2,3 , LI Fei 2,3 , HENG Mingli 1 , LU Chengzhen2,3 , SUN Yunhong2,3 , WANG Hongwu1 , CAO Wukui 2,3△   

  1. 1 Department of Epidemiology, Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin 300193, China; 2 Tianjin Secondary People’ s Hospital; 3 Tianjin Liver Disease Research Institute
  • Received:2016-02-24 Revised:2016-10-25 Published:2016-12-15 Online:2017-01-26
  • Contact: CAO Wukui △Corresponding Author E-mail: tjcaowk@sina.com E-mail:tjcaowk@sina.com

摘要: 摘要: 目的 探讨使用聚乙二醇干扰素联合利巴韦林 (PR) 治疗的慢性丙型肝炎 (丙肝) 患者出现营养风险的影响因素。方法 选取接受 PR 治疗的慢性丙肝患者 175 例, 测量身高、 体质量, 计算体质指数 (BMI), 用营养风险筛查 2002 (NRS 2002) 来进行营养风险评估, 并分为有风险组 (140 例) 和无风险组 (35 例)。结果 2 组间年龄、 HCV 基因型、 临床类型、 治疗时间及干扰素或利巴韦林是否减量差异有统计学意义 (P<0.05)。Logistic 回归分析显示: 高龄(OR 值 16.068, β 值 2.777)、 干扰素减量 (OR 值 3.096, β 值 1.130)、 利巴韦林减量 (OR 值 3.382, β 值 1.219) 以及进展至肝硬化的慢性丙肝 (OR 值 5.092, β 值 1.628) 为营养风险的危险因素; 而 HCV 基因型为非 1b 型者 (OR 值 0.384, β 值-0.957) 为营养风险的保护因素。结论 接受 PR 治疗的慢性丙肝患者营养风险发生率高。高龄、 对 PR 不耐受、慢性丙肝进展为肝硬化的患者为发生营养风险的独立危险因素, 而非 1b型 HCV 感染者不易发生营养风险。

关键词: 肝炎, 丙型, 慢性, 干扰素α-2a, 聚乙烯二醇类, 利巴韦林, Logistic 模型, 营养风险

Abstract: Abstract:Objective To explore the nutritional risk factors in patients with chronic hepatitis C (CHC), who have been accepted pegylated interferon (IFN) and ribavirin (RVB) therapy (PR). Methods A total of 175 CHC patients treated with PR were included in this study. Data of heights, body weights, and calculated body mass index (BMI) were recorded in patients. At the same time, patients were evaluated nutritional risk with Nutritional Risk Screen 2002 (NRS 2002), and divided into risk group (n=35) and non-risk group (n=140). Results There were significant differences in age, HCV genotype (1b type and not 1b), clinical type (CHC/cirrhosis), the length of treatment time and the tolerance degree for PR therapy between two groups (P<0.05). Logistic regression analysis showed that age (OR=16.068, β=2.777), IFN dosage (OR=3.096, β=1.130), RVB dosage (OR=3.382, β=1.219) and clinical type (OR=5.092, β=1.628) were nutritional risk factors. The HCV genotype (OR=0.384; β =- 0.957) was protective factors for nutritional risk. Conclusion There is higher occurrence rate of nutritional risk for CHC patients accepted PR therapy. The dependant nutritional risk factors are advanced age, intolerance for PR therapy and cirrhosis associated CHC. HCV without genotypes 1b is not a nutritional risk factor.

Key words: hepatitis C, chronic, interferon alfa-2a, polyethylene glycols, ribavirin, Logistic models, nutritional risk