
天津医药 ›› 2025, Vol. 53 ›› Issue (5): 503-508.doi: 10.11958/20242396
收稿日期:2025-01-06
修回日期:2025-03-21
出版日期:2025-05-15
发布日期:2025-05-28
通讯作者:
△ E-mail:xu_monica@163.com
作者简介:王欣欣(1990),女,主治医师,主要从事妊娠期糖尿病、妊娠期肝内胆汁淤积症研究。E-mail:
WANG Xinxin(
), XU Hui(
), WU Xiao
Received:2025-01-06
Revised:2025-03-21
Published:2025-05-15
Online:2025-05-28
Contact:
△ E-mail:xu_monica@163.com
王欣欣, 许慧, 吴晓. 妊娠期肝内胆汁淤积症合并GDM孕妇不良妊娠结局的影响因素及预测模型构建[J]. 天津医药, 2025, 53(5): 503-508.
WANG Xinxin, XU Hui, WU Xiao. Influencing factors and prediction model construction of adverse pregnancy outcomes in pregnant women with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy complicated with GDM[J]. Tianjin Medical Journal, 2025, 53(5): 503-508.
摘要:
目的 分析妊娠期肝内胆汁淤积症(ICP)合并妊娠期糖尿病(GDM)孕妇不良妊娠结局的影响因素并构建风险预测模型。方法 选择214例ICP合并GDM孕妇,按3∶1比例分为建模组(161例)和验证组(53例),建模组根据妊娠结局分为结局良好组(96例)和结局不良组(65例)。对比结局良好组与结局不良组的一般临床资料和实验室指标水平,采用多因素Logistic回归分析ICP合并GDM孕妇发生不良妊娠结局的危险因素,并建立风险预测模型,利用验证组对模型进行验证。结果 多因素Logistic回归分析显示,年龄≥35岁、妊娠期血糖管理未达标、妊娠晚期阴道微生态失调、高水平总胆汁酸(TBA)、高水平白细胞介素(IL)-12是ICP合并GDM孕妇发生不良妊娠结局的独立危险因素(P<0.05)。基于多因素分析结果构建Logistic回归模型,Logit(P)=1.338×年龄+2.196×妊娠期血糖管理+2.640×妊娠晚期阴道微生态+0.112×TBA+0.090×IL-12-14.898。受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线分析示,模型的曲线下面积(AUC)为0.930,敏感度为89.23%,特异度为83.33%;Hosmer-Lemeshow拟合优度检验χ2=4.625,P=0.797。预测模型外部验证的AUC为0.939,敏感度为80.95%,特异度为96.87%;Hosmer-Lemeshow拟合优度检验χ2=6.379,P=0.605。结论 ICP合并GDM孕妇发生不良妊娠结局的影响因素包括年龄、妊娠期血糖管理情况、妊娠晚期阴道微生态情况、TBA和IL-12水平,基于此建立的风险预测模型的预测能力良好。
中图分类号:
| 组别 | n | 年龄≥35岁 | 民族 | 产妇类型 | 孕前BMI≥ 24.0 kg/m2 | 早发型ICP | 妊娠期血糖管理未达标 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 汉族 | 其他民族 | 初产妇 | 经产妇 | ||||||
| 结局良好组 | 96 | 8(8.3) | 91(94.8) | 5(5.2) | 40(41.7) | 56(58.3) | 16(16.7) | 8(8.3) | 9(9.4) |
| 结局不良组 | 65 | 26(40.0) | 61(93.8) | 4(6.2) | 31(47.7) | 34(52.3) | 15(23.1) | 12(18.5) | 22(33.9) |
| χ2 | 23.331** | 0.066 | 0.571 | 1.024 | 3.654 | 14.928** | |||
表1 结局良好组与结局不良组的一般临床资料比较 [例(%)]
Tab.1 Comparison of general clinical data between the good outcome group and the poor outcome group
| 组别 | n | 年龄≥35岁 | 民族 | 产妇类型 | 孕前BMI≥ 24.0 kg/m2 | 早发型ICP | 妊娠期血糖管理未达标 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 汉族 | 其他民族 | 初产妇 | 经产妇 | ||||||
| 结局良好组 | 96 | 8(8.3) | 91(94.8) | 5(5.2) | 40(41.7) | 56(58.3) | 16(16.7) | 8(8.3) | 9(9.4) |
| 结局不良组 | 65 | 26(40.0) | 61(93.8) | 4(6.2) | 31(47.7) | 34(52.3) | 15(23.1) | 12(18.5) | 22(33.9) |
| χ2 | 23.331** | 0.066 | 0.571 | 1.024 | 3.654 | 14.928** | |||
| 组别 | n | TBA/(μmol/L) | ALT/(U/L) | AST/(U/L) | TBIL/(μmol/L) | TNF-α/(ng/L) | IFN-γ/(ng/L) | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 结局良好组 | 96 | 33.65±8.67 | 90.91±7.33 | 61.95±7.63 | 17.93±1.78 | 89.82±12.94 | 167.92±16.82 | ||||||||||||||
| 结局不良组 | 65 | 47.35±10.81 | 96.79±7.27 | 63.68±5.00 | 18.18±2.32 | 91.87±15.23 | 169.88±22.71 | ||||||||||||||
| t | 8.899** | 5.012** | 1.737 | 0.756 | 0.919 | 0.594 | |||||||||||||||
| 组别 | IL-12/(ng/L) | FIB/(g/L) | D-D/(mg/L) | WBC/(×109/L) | NEU/(×109/L) | PLT/(×109/L) | |||||||||||||||
| 结局良好组 | 40.68±10.07 | 4.67±0.74 | 0.92±0.26 | 9.06±1.20 | 6.71±1.32 | 166.92±31.21 | |||||||||||||||
| 结局不良组 | 51.45±5.34 | 4.83±0.60 | 0.97±0.29 | 9.32±1.39 | 6.97±0.47 | 159.65±29.66 | |||||||||||||||
| t | 8.809** | 1.452 | 1.032 | 1.291 | 1.738 | 1.479 | |||||||||||||||
| 组别 | 阴道微生态失调 | ACA/CU | β2GP Ⅰ/CU | ||||||||||||||||||
| 妊娠早期 | 妊娠晚期 | IgG | IgM | IgA | IgG | IgM | IgA | ||||||||||||||
| 结局良好组 | 8(8.3) | 9(9.4) | 8.28±1.54 | 8.59±1.33 | 8.20±1.34 | 8.25±0.89 | 8.37±1.34 | 8.54±1.19 | |||||||||||||
| 结局不良组 | 10(15.4) | 19(29.2) | 8.61±1.01 | 8.66±0.92 | 8.29±0.93 | 8.48±0.76 | 8.52±0.85 | 8.60±0.84 | |||||||||||||
| χ2或t | 1.941 | 10.636** | 1.661 | 0.391 | 0.506 | 1.668 | 0.856 | 0.418 | |||||||||||||
表2 结局良好组与结局不良组的实验室指标比较
Tab.2 Comparison of laboratory indicators between the good outcome group and the poor outcome group
| 组别 | n | TBA/(μmol/L) | ALT/(U/L) | AST/(U/L) | TBIL/(μmol/L) | TNF-α/(ng/L) | IFN-γ/(ng/L) | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 结局良好组 | 96 | 33.65±8.67 | 90.91±7.33 | 61.95±7.63 | 17.93±1.78 | 89.82±12.94 | 167.92±16.82 | ||||||||||||||
| 结局不良组 | 65 | 47.35±10.81 | 96.79±7.27 | 63.68±5.00 | 18.18±2.32 | 91.87±15.23 | 169.88±22.71 | ||||||||||||||
| t | 8.899** | 5.012** | 1.737 | 0.756 | 0.919 | 0.594 | |||||||||||||||
| 组别 | IL-12/(ng/L) | FIB/(g/L) | D-D/(mg/L) | WBC/(×109/L) | NEU/(×109/L) | PLT/(×109/L) | |||||||||||||||
| 结局良好组 | 40.68±10.07 | 4.67±0.74 | 0.92±0.26 | 9.06±1.20 | 6.71±1.32 | 166.92±31.21 | |||||||||||||||
| 结局不良组 | 51.45±5.34 | 4.83±0.60 | 0.97±0.29 | 9.32±1.39 | 6.97±0.47 | 159.65±29.66 | |||||||||||||||
| t | 8.809** | 1.452 | 1.032 | 1.291 | 1.738 | 1.479 | |||||||||||||||
| 组别 | 阴道微生态失调 | ACA/CU | β2GP Ⅰ/CU | ||||||||||||||||||
| 妊娠早期 | 妊娠晚期 | IgG | IgM | IgA | IgG | IgM | IgA | ||||||||||||||
| 结局良好组 | 8(8.3) | 9(9.4) | 8.28±1.54 | 8.59±1.33 | 8.20±1.34 | 8.25±0.89 | 8.37±1.34 | 8.54±1.19 | |||||||||||||
| 结局不良组 | 10(15.4) | 19(29.2) | 8.61±1.01 | 8.66±0.92 | 8.29±0.93 | 8.48±0.76 | 8.52±0.85 | 8.60±0.84 | |||||||||||||
| χ2或t | 1.941 | 10.636** | 1.661 | 0.391 | 0.506 | 1.668 | 0.856 | 0.418 | |||||||||||||
| 变量 | 非标准化系数 | 标准化系数 | t | P | VIF | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| β | 标准误 | Beta | ||||
| 年龄 | 0.149 | 0.075 | 0.124 | 1.973 | 0.050 | 1.253 |
| 妊娠期血糖管理 | 0.247 | 0.072 | 0.198 | 3.432 | 0.001 | 1.067 |
| TBA | 0.013 | 0.003 | 0.311 | 4.205 | <0.001 | 1.742 |
| ALT | 0.007 | 0.004 | 0.107 | 1.754 | 0.081 | 1.190 |
| IL-12 | 0.012 | 0.003 | 0.241 | 3.471 | 0.001 | 1.540 |
| 妊娠晚期阴道微生态 | 0.320 | 0.074 | 0.247 | 4.313 | <0.001 | 1.048 |
表3 影响ICP合并GDM孕妇发生不良妊娠结局的变量间的线性回归分析
Tab.3 Linear regression analysis of variables affecting adverse pregnancy outcomes in pregnant women with ICP complicated with GDM
| 变量 | 非标准化系数 | 标准化系数 | t | P | VIF | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| β | 标准误 | Beta | ||||
| 年龄 | 0.149 | 0.075 | 0.124 | 1.973 | 0.050 | 1.253 |
| 妊娠期血糖管理 | 0.247 | 0.072 | 0.198 | 3.432 | 0.001 | 1.067 |
| TBA | 0.013 | 0.003 | 0.311 | 4.205 | <0.001 | 1.742 |
| ALT | 0.007 | 0.004 | 0.107 | 1.754 | 0.081 | 1.190 |
| IL-12 | 0.012 | 0.003 | 0.241 | 3.471 | 0.001 | 1.540 |
| 妊娠晚期阴道微生态 | 0.320 | 0.074 | 0.247 | 4.313 | <0.001 | 1.048 |
| 变量 | β | SE | Wald χ2 | P | OR(95%CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 年龄 | 1.338 | 0.650 | 4.233 | 0.040 | 3.813(1.066~13.643) |
| 妊娠期血糖 管理 | 2.196 | 0.628 | 12.225 | <0.001 | 8.990(2.625~30.792) |
| 妊娠晚期 阴道微生态 | 2.640 | 0.716 | 13.579 | <0.001 | 14.016(3.441~57.079) |
| TBA | 0.112 | 0.033 | 11.483 | 0.001 | 1.119(1.049~1.194) |
| ALT | 0.049 | 0.034 | 2.039 | 0.153 | 1.050(0.982~1.123) |
| IL-12 | 0.090 | 0.032 | 8.133 | 0.004 | 1.094(1.029~1.165) |
| 常数项 | -14.898 | 3.459 | 18.547 | <0.001 | 0.000 |
表4 ICP合并GDM孕妇发生不良妊娠结局的多因素分析
Tab.4 Multivariate analysis of adverse pregnancy outcomes in ICP pregnant women with GDM
| 变量 | β | SE | Wald χ2 | P | OR(95%CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 年龄 | 1.338 | 0.650 | 4.233 | 0.040 | 3.813(1.066~13.643) |
| 妊娠期血糖 管理 | 2.196 | 0.628 | 12.225 | <0.001 | 8.990(2.625~30.792) |
| 妊娠晚期 阴道微生态 | 2.640 | 0.716 | 13.579 | <0.001 | 14.016(3.441~57.079) |
| TBA | 0.112 | 0.033 | 11.483 | 0.001 | 1.119(1.049~1.194) |
| ALT | 0.049 | 0.034 | 2.039 | 0.153 | 1.050(0.982~1.123) |
| IL-12 | 0.090 | 0.032 | 8.133 | 0.004 | 1.094(1.029~1.165) |
| 常数项 | -14.898 | 3.459 | 18.547 | <0.001 | 0.000 |
图3 ICP合并GDM孕妇发生不良妊娠结局的预测模型的校准曲线
Fig.3 Calibration curve of prediction model for adverse pregnancy outcomes in pregnant women with ICP complicated with GDM
图5 验证组ICP合并GDM孕妇发生不良妊娠结局的校准曲线
Fig.5 Calibration curve of prediction model for adverse pregnancy outcomes in ICP pregnant women with GDM in the validation group
| [1] | HOBSON S, GANDHI S, SOBEL M. Intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy[J]. CMAJ, 2022, 194(48):E1650. doi:10.1503/cmaj.220334. |
| [2] | KOSTKA L, HRUBAN L, MORÁVKOVÁ P. Intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy[J]. Ceska Gynekol, 2024, 89(5):405-410. doi:10.48095/cccg2024405. |
| [3] | KAUTZKY-WILLER A, WINHOFER Y, KISS H, et al. Gestationsdiabetes(GDM)(Update 2023)[Gestational diabetes mellitus(Update 2023)][J]. Wien Klin Wochenschr, 2023, 135(Suppl 1):115-128. doi:10.1007/s00508-023-02181-9. |
| [4] | OZSVÁRI-VIDÁKOVICH M, SOMOGYI A, ROSTA K. A terhességi intrahepaticus cholestasis és a gestatiós diabetes mellitus összefüggése [Association between intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy and gestational diabetes mellitus][J]. Orv Hetil, 2023, 164(21):831-835. doi:10.1556/650.2023.32778. |
| [5] | LI X, CAI Q Y, LUO X, et al. Gestational diabetes mellitus aggravates adverse perinatal outcomes in women with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy[J]. Diabetol Metab Syndr, 2024, 16(1):57. doi:10.1186/s13098-024-01294-z. |
| [6] | 中华医学会妇产科学分会产科学组. 妊娠期肝内胆汁淤积症诊疗指南(2015)[J]. 中华妇产科杂志, 2015, 50(7):481-485. |
| Obstetrics Group of Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology of Chinese Medical Association. Guidelines for the management of intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy(2015)[J]. Chin J Obstetr Gynecol, 2015, 50(7):481-485. doi:10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-567x.2015.07.001. | |
| [7] | 中华医学会妇产科学分会产科学组, 中华医学会围产医学分会妊娠合并糖尿病协作组. 妊娠合并糖尿病诊治指南(2014)[J]. 中华妇产科杂志, 2014, 49(8):561-569. |
| Obstetrics Group of Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology of Chinese Medical Association, Pregnancy and Diabetes Cooperation Group of Society of Perinatal Medicine of Chinese Medical Association. Guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus(2014)[J]. Chin J Obstetr Gynecol, 2014, 49(8):561-569. doi:10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-567x.2014.08.001. | |
| [8] | 中华医学会妇产科学分会感染性疾病协作组. 阴道微生态评价的临床应用专家共识[J]. 中华妇产科杂志, 2016, 51(10):721-723. |
| Infectious Diseases Cooperation Group of Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics of Chinese Medical Association. Expert consensus on clinical application of vaginal microecological evaluation[J]. Chin J Obstetr Gynecol, 2016, 51(10):721-723. doi:10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-567x.2016.10.001. | |
| [9] | 金彩凤, 吴玮, 吴轲. B族链球菌感染及阴道微生态变化与不良妊娠结局的关系[J]. 天津医药, 2024, 52(8):858-862. |
| JIN C F, WU W, WU K. Relationship between GBS infection,vaginal microecological changes and adverse pregnancy outcomes of pregnant women[J]. Tianjin Med J, 2024, 52(8):858-862. doi:10.11958/20231696. | |
| [10] | GIRLING J, KNIGHT C L, CHAPPELL L, et al. Intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy:Green-top Guideline No. 43 June 2022[J]. BJOG, 2022, 129(13):e95-e114. doi:10.1111/1471-0528.17206. |
| [11] | TANG M, XIONG L, CAI J, et al. Intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy:insights into pathogenesis and advances in omics studies[J]. Hepatol Int, 2024, 18(1):50-62. doi:10.1007/s12072-023-10604-y. |
| [12] | 朱媛媛, 丁丽云, 陆玮. 妊娠期肝内胆汁淤积症流行病学调查及危险因素分析[J]. 实用预防医学, 2021, 28(10):1258-1260. |
| ZHU Y Y, DING L Y, LU W. Epidemiological survey and risk factor analysis of intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy[J]. Pract Prev Med, 2021, 28(10):1258-1260. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-3110.2021.10.028. | |
| [13] | AXELSEN S M, KAMPMANN U, KOEFOED A S, et al. Intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy:association with glycaemic control in gestational diabetes[J]. Diabet Med, 2021, 38(8):e14574. doi:10.1111/dme.14574. |
| [14] | ZHANG L, TANG C, YE C, et al. Intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy can increase the risk of metabolic disorders:a meta-analysis[J]. J Med Biochem, 2022, 41(4):549-558. doi:10.5937/jomb0-33222. |
| [15] | 宋对对, 牛丽娜, 张小娟, 等. 妊娠期肝内胆汁淤积症患者不良妊娠结局影响因素[J]. 中国计划生育学杂志, 2024, 32(7):1586-1590. |
| SONG D D, NIU L N, ZHANG X J, et al. Influencing factors of the adverse pregnancy outcomes of patients with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy[J]. Chin J Fam Plan, 2024, 32(7):1586-1590. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-8189.2024.07.024. | |
| [16] | 计静, 魏君香, 米阳, 等. 妊娠期糖尿病不良妊娠结局相关危险因素分析[J]. 中国妇幼健康研究, 2021, 32(11):1574-1578. |
| JI J, WEI J X, MI Y, et al. Analysis of related risk factors of adverse pregnancy outcomes of pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus[J]. Chin J Woman Child Heal Res, 2021, 32(11):1574-1578. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1673-5293.2021.11.005. | |
| [17] | DI MASCIO D, QUIST-NELSON J, RIEGEL M, et al. Perinatal death by bile acid levels in intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy:a systematic review[J]. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 2021, 34(21):3614-3622. doi:10.1080/14767058.2019.1685965. |
| [18] | 秦芬, 王权, 程飞. 血清学检测对妊娠合并肝内胆汁淤积症病人病情严重程度的评估价值[J]. 中南医学科学杂志, 2020, 48(1):56-58,92. |
| QIN F, WANG Q, CHENG F. Value of serum test in evaluating the severity in patients with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy[J]. Medical Science Journal of Central South China, 2020, 48(1):56-58,92. doi:10.15972/j.cnki.43-1509/r.2020.01.016. | |
| [19] | LI J, YAN J, JIANG W. The role of maternal age on adverse pregnancy outcomes among primiparous women with singleton birth:a retrospective cohort study in urban areas of China[J]. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 2023, 36(2):2250894. doi:10.1080/14767058.2023.2250894. |
| [20] | 谭冰, 曾巧莉, 方凌燕, 等. 妊娠期糖尿病孕妇发生不良妊娠结局的危险因素分析及Nomogram预测模型构建[J]. 中国性科学, 2024, 33(2):66-70. |
| TAN B, ZENG Q L, FANG L Y, et al. Analysis of risk factors for adverse pregnancy outcomes in pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus and construction of a Nomogram prediction model[J]. Chin J Human Sex, 2024, 33(2):66-70. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1672-1993.2024.02.017. | |
| [21] | XIE Y, ZHAO H, ZHAO M, et al. Effects of resistance exercise on blood glucose level and pregnancy outcome in patients with gestational diabetes mellitus:a randomized controlled trial[J]. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care, 2022, 10(2):e002622. doi:10.1136/bmjdrc-2021-002622. |
| [22] | 杨昕晖, 彭笑笑, 马丽丽, 等. 妊娠期糖尿病孕妇不同孕周阴道菌群变化及对妊娠结局的影响:前瞻性队列研究[J]. 中国全科医学, 2024, 27(29):3587-3594. |
| YANG X H, PENG X X, MA L L, et al. Vaginal microbiota changes of gestational diabetes mellitus pregnant women at different gestational weeks and the impact on pregnancy outcome:a prospective cohort study[J]. Chin Gen Prac, 2024, 27(29):3587-3594. doi:10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2024.0191. | |
| [23] | 虞杨, 申洁, 石中华. 妊娠期肝内胆汁淤积症孕妇血清炎性因子与凝血功能4项检测[J]. 中国计划生育学杂志, 2021, 29(11):2425-2427,2431. |
| YU Y, SHEN J, SHI Z H. Detections of serum inflammatory factors and coagulation function of pregnant women with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy[J]. Chin J Fam Plann, 2021, 29(11):2425-2427,2431. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-8189.2021.11.039. | |
| [24] | 刘爱红, 解梅林, 王磊, 等. 妊娠期糖尿病患者白介素12的测定及其临床意义[J]. 中国妇产科临床杂志, 2013, 14(2):171-173. |
| LIU A H, XIE M L, WANG L, et al. Determination and clinical significance of interleukin-12 in patients with gestational diabetes mellitus[J]. Chin J Clin Obstetr Gynecol, 2013, 14(2):171-173. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1672-1861.2013.02.022. |
| [1] | 阿曼古丽·苏力唐, 铁玲, 马静, 马丽. 温通活血乳膏通过抑制mTOR/4E-BP1通路改善糖尿病周围神经病变[J]. 天津医药, 2026, 54(8): 796-801. |
| [2] | 肖凡, 黄会萍, 张冬梅, 李莉, 杨玉侠. 妊娠期糖尿病患者B族链球菌定植风险因素及围产结局分析[J]. 天津医药, 2026, 54(8): 848-853. |
| [3] | 牛晓霞, 牛旭东. 围产期甲状腺疾病特征及新生儿甲状腺功能异常的危险因素分析[J]. 天津医药, 2026, 54(7): 721-726. |
| [4] | 何紫叶, 祖洁, 郝倩, 贾志旸. 抗VEGF治疗应答异质性在糖尿病性黄斑水肿中的研究进展[J]. 天津医药, 2026, 54(7): 779-784. |
| [5] | 张婧, 张明, 卫玮, 宁海虹, 韦红梅, 李海燕, 吴宾. miR-194-5p抑制剂对2型糖尿病心肌病小鼠心肌损伤的保护作用及机制探讨[J]. 天津医药, 2026, 54(6): 577-584. |
| [6] | 焦宇兵, 雷晓娟, 郭武华. 自发性门体分流对乙型肝炎肝硬化失代偿期患者预后的影响及预测模型构建[J]. 天津医药, 2026, 54(6): 612-617. |
| [7] | 许正杰, 李田, 畅立斌. DEX-I联合雷珠单抗治疗视网膜血管性疾病继发黄斑水肿的疗效观察[J]. 天津医药, 2026, 54(6): 647-652. |
| [8] | 黄斐, 王利航, 孙官文, 包呼和, 杨鹏波, 张雅兴. 糖尿病足溃疡患者住院期间小截肢的预测模型构建及验证[J]. 天津医药, 2026, 54(5): 478-483. |
| [9] | 彭静, 余小倩. 结直肠癌术后患者肠内营养喂养不耐受的影响因素及预警模型的构建[J]. 天津医药, 2026, 54(5): 484-488. |
| [10] | 于波, 蒲肖琳, 刘乃婷, 李雅滨, 吴志茹. 消化道黏膜肿瘤患者EMR术后迟发性出血危险因素分析[J]. 天津医药, 2026, 54(5): 522-527. |
| [11] | 宋金萍, 崔彦杰, 王昌敏. miR-493-3p通过lncRNA CCAT2/TCF7L2轴对高糖诱导的心肌细胞损伤和凋亡的影响[J]. 天津医药, 2026, 54(4): 344-351. |
| [12] | 赵政委, 许文艳, 郭晓敏, 王敏, 李建丽, 李志海, 沈东琼, 涂云贵. 脓毒症患者血清LRG1、suPAR水平对并发急性肾损伤的预测价值[J]. 天津医药, 2026, 54(4): 374-378. |
| [13] | 王景艳, 王彦, 王敬, 苏维, 王红蕾. 金黄色葡萄球菌在皮肤软组织感染中的耐药性及危险因素分析[J]. 天津医药, 2026, 54(4): 390-394. |
| [14] | 冯小艳, 张文倩, 方自红, 张广辉. NRP-1和CXCR4对卵巢子宫内膜异位囊肿患者妊娠结局的预测价值[J]. 天津医药, 2026, 54(4): 402-406. |
| [15] | 张婧, 魏玉英, 宁海虹, 韦红梅, 王嘉玮, 曹薇, 吴宾. DUSP9在2型糖尿病心肌病小鼠心肌损伤中的保护作用及其机制[J]. 天津医药, 2026, 54(3): 238-244. |
| 阅读次数 | ||||||
|
全文 |
|
|||||
|
摘要 |
|
|||||