攀枝花地区2876例育龄妇女TORCH筛查结果调查研究
|
摘要
目的通过对攀枝花地区2 876例育龄期妇女的TORCH检测结果进行分析,了解该地区育龄期妇女TORCH的感染现状及流行特点。方法选取2017年1月至2018年12月在该院进行孕前筛查和早孕期检测的妇女2 876例,检测其血清TORCH IgM和IgG抗体,并对检测结果进行分析。结果在2 876例调查人群中,4种病原体的IgM抗体检出率从高到低依次为人抗单纯疱疹Ⅰ/Ⅱ型(anti-HSVⅠ/Ⅱ)IgM(2.23%)、人巨细胞病毒(CMV)IgM(0.83%)、人抗风疹病毒(anti-RV)IgM(0.35%)、人抗弓形虫(anti-TOX)IgM(0.10%);IgG抗体检出率从高到低分别为anti-CMV IgG(95.79%)、anti-HSVⅠ/ⅡIgG(90.82%)、antiRV IgG(90.16%)、anti-HSVⅡIgG(14.64%)、anti-TOX IgG(7.68%)。对检出率最高的anti-HSVⅠ/ⅡIgM进行季节和年龄组分析,发现秋季最容易发生感染,其次是春季,检出率为3.30%和2.37%;在年龄组比较中,以≥35岁组anti-HSVⅠ/ⅡIgM检出率最高(2.70%),但两个年龄组间差异无统计学意义(χ2=0.39,P=0.530)。比较13个地区TORCH活动性感染现状,各地区间有较大差异,以HSVⅠ/Ⅱ型差异最大;攀枝花地区的TORCH活动性感染率在13个地区中处于较低水平。结论攀枝花地区4种病原体的活动性感染率中HSVⅠ/Ⅱ型最高,TOX、RV和CMV较低。既往感染以CMV、HSVⅠ型及RV感染为主,TOX和HSVⅡ型较低。HSVⅠ/Ⅱ型感染有一定的季节性,秋、春季节高发;各年龄组差异无统计学意义。多个地区比较可见TORCH感染率受地域的影响较大,特别是HSVⅠ/Ⅱ型感染;攀枝花地区TORCH感染率处于较低水平,但孕期筛查仍有必要。
Objective To investigate the prevalence of TORCH among 2 876 women of childbearing age in Panzhihua area.Methods A total of 2 876 women who underwent prenatal screening and early pregnancy testing in Panzhihua Central Hospital from January 2017 to December 2018 were selected to detect serum TORCH IgM and IgG antibodies,and the results were analyzed.Results The detection rates of IgM antibodies against 4 pathogens were anti-HSVⅠ/ⅡIgM(2.23%),anti-CMV IgM(0.83%),anti-RV IgM(0.35%)and anti-TOX IgM(0.10%)from high to low in 2 876 investigated population.The detection rates of IgG antibodies from high to low were anti-CMV IgG(95.79%),anti-HSVⅠ/ⅡIgG(90.82%),anti-RV IgG(90.16%),anti-HSV IgG(14.64%),anti-TOX IgG(7.68%).The highest detection rate of anti-HSVⅠ/Ⅱ IgM was found in autumn,followed by spring,with the detection rate of 3.30% and 2.37%.In the age group comparison,the highest detection rate of anti-HSVⅠ/ⅡIgM was found in the group over 35 years old(2.70%),but there was no significant difference between the two age groups(χ2=0.39,P=0.530).Compared with the current situation of active TORCH infection in 13 regions,there were significant differences among regions,with HSVⅠ/Ⅱtype being the most significant;the active TORCH infection rate in Panzhihua region was at a low level in 13 regions.Conclusion Among the four pathogens in Panzhihua area,HSVⅠ/Ⅱis the highest,while TOX,RV and CMV are lower.Previous infections were mainly CMV,HSV typeⅠ and RV,while TOX and HSV Ⅱ were lower.HSV Ⅰ/Ⅱinfection is seasonal with high incidence in autumn and spring,and there is no significant difference among age groups.The infection rate of TORCH in Panzhihua is relatively low,but screening during pregnancy is still necessary.
Objective To investigate the prevalence of TORCH among 2 876 women of childbearing age in Panzhihua area.Methods A total of 2 876 women who underwent prenatal screening and early pregnancy testing in Panzhihua Central Hospital from January 2017 to December 2018 were selected to detect serum TORCH IgM and IgG antibodies,and the results were analyzed.Results The detection rates of IgM antibodies against 4 pathogens were anti-HSVⅠ/ⅡIgM(2.23%),anti-CMV IgM(0.83%),anti-RV IgM(0.35%)and anti-TOX IgM(0.10%)from high to low in 2 876 investigated population.The detection rates of IgG antibodies from high to low were anti-CMV IgG(95.79%),anti-HSVⅠ/ⅡIgG(90.82%),anti-RV IgG(90.16%),anti-HSV IgG(14.64%),anti-TOX IgG(7.68%).The highest detection rate of anti-HSVⅠ/Ⅱ IgM was found in autumn,followed by spring,with the detection rate of 3.30% and 2.37%.In the age group comparison,the highest detection rate of anti-HSVⅠ/ⅡIgM was found in the group over 35 years old(2.70%),but there was no significant difference between the two age groups(χ2=0.39,P=0.530).Compared with the current situation of active TORCH infection in 13 regions,there were significant differences among regions,with HSVⅠ/Ⅱtype being the most significant;the active TORCH infection rate in Panzhihua region was at a low level in 13 regions.Conclusion Among the four pathogens in Panzhihua area,HSVⅠ/Ⅱis the highest,while TOX,RV and CMV are lower.Previous infections were mainly CMV,HSV typeⅠ and RV,while TOX and HSV Ⅱ were lower.HSV Ⅰ/Ⅱinfection is seasonal with high incidence in autumn and spring,and there is no significant difference among age groups.The infection rate of TORCH in Panzhihua is relatively low,but screening during pregnancy is still necessary.
引文
[1] MENDELSON E,ABOUDY Y,SMETANA Z,et al.Laboratory assessment and diagnosis of congenital viral infections:Rubella,cytomegalovirus(CMV),varicella-zoster virus(VZV),herpes simplex virus(HSV),parvovirus B19and human immunodeficiency virus(HIV)[J].Reprod Toxicol,2006,21(4):350-382.
[2] RASTI S,GHASEMI F S,ABDOLI A,etal.ToRCH"coinfections"are associated with increased risk of abortion in pregnant women[J].Congenit Anom,2016,56(2):73-78.
[3] SEN M R,SHUKLA B N,TUHINA B.Prevalence of serum antibodies to TORCH infection in and around Varanasi,Northern India[J].J Clin Diagn Res,2012,6(9):1483-1485.
[4]刘瑾,顾晓慧,叶国玲,等.孕妇TORCH感染与胎儿畸形的关系[J].第四军医大学学报,2004,25(18):1682-1685.
[5]章锦曼,阮强,张宁,等.TORCH感染筛查、诊断与干预原则和工作流程专家共识[J].中国实用妇科与产科杂志,2016,32(6):535-540.
[6]倪安平,郝英英,朱晓春,等.孕产妇四种病原体感染血清学筛查的研究[J].中华检验医学杂志,2003,26(3):142-144.
[7]廖远泉.TORCH血清学检测临床意义的解读与歧见[J].医学争鸣,2018,9(5):19-22.
[8]赵英珍.TORCH感染对育龄妇女不孕不育的影响[J].中国微生态学杂志,2018,30(6):703-705.
[9]刘瑞平.对育龄女性在孕前优生检测的TORCH感染情况进行探讨与分析[J/CD].临床检验杂志(电子版),2018,7(2):283.
[10]龙彦,赵晓涛,孙媛媛,等.北京地区育龄期妇女TORCH筛查结果调查分析[J].中国全科医学,2014,17(24):2851-2854.
[11]王凌晞,康涵,吕康模.成都地区40 986例育龄妇女TORCH感染调查分析[J].解放军医学院学报,2018,39(5):415-418.
[12]郭知,肖雪,张兰.昆明地区5 219例孕妇TORCH感染情况的调查分析[J].昆明医学院学报,2008,29(z1):48-51.
[13]赵有利,张尚弟,王昱斌,等.兰州地区2 972例孕妇TORCH血清学检测结果的临床分析[J].甘肃科技,2018,34(21):143-145.
[14]李淼,唐爱国,周梅华,等.湖南省15 673例优生健康检查妇女TORCH结果分析[J].国际检验医学杂志,2018,39(10):1271-1273.
[15]张力鹏,黄修菊,林玉婷.乌鲁木齐地区正常妊娠妇女和不同次数自然流产妇女TORCH感染比较[J].医学信息,2018,31(17):155-157.
[16]米东,祁珮,陈淑琴,等.天津地区不孕妇女和孕妇TORCH感染的检测分析[J].国际检验医学杂志,2014,35(2):241-242.
[17]初文君,初慧君,李丽君,等.山东1 035例孕前妇女TORCH感染情况调查分析[J].中国生育健康杂志,2019(1):42-43.
[18]杨宁,秦卫兵,钟兴明,等.广东地区10 531例不孕症妇女TORCH检测回顾性分析[J].现代医院,2016,16(9):1255-1256.
[19]施瑞洁,刘文康,李玲,等.西安地区妊娠期妇女TORCH检测及感染特点分析[J].现代检验医学杂志,2016,31(6):23-27.
[20]连文萍,彭梦乐,陈军,等.郑州地区24 510例妊娠期妇女TORCH检测结果分析[J].医药论坛杂志,2017,38(9):29-32.
[21]郭兰英,赵文双.呼和浩特地区孕妇TORCH感染调查分析[J].中国优生与遗传杂志,2009,17(2):72.
[22]张涌,孔莹,马光娟.乌鲁木齐地区3 265例孕妇TORCH感染的调查分析[J].中国优生与遗传杂志,2007,15(3):52.
[2] RASTI S,GHASEMI F S,ABDOLI A,etal.ToRCH"coinfections"are associated with increased risk of abortion in pregnant women[J].Congenit Anom,2016,56(2):73-78.
[3] SEN M R,SHUKLA B N,TUHINA B.Prevalence of serum antibodies to TORCH infection in and around Varanasi,Northern India[J].J Clin Diagn Res,2012,6(9):1483-1485.
[4]刘瑾,顾晓慧,叶国玲,等.孕妇TORCH感染与胎儿畸形的关系[J].第四军医大学学报,2004,25(18):1682-1685.
[5]章锦曼,阮强,张宁,等.TORCH感染筛查、诊断与干预原则和工作流程专家共识[J].中国实用妇科与产科杂志,2016,32(6):535-540.
[6]倪安平,郝英英,朱晓春,等.孕产妇四种病原体感染血清学筛查的研究[J].中华检验医学杂志,2003,26(3):142-144.
[7]廖远泉.TORCH血清学检测临床意义的解读与歧见[J].医学争鸣,2018,9(5):19-22.
[8]赵英珍.TORCH感染对育龄妇女不孕不育的影响[J].中国微生态学杂志,2018,30(6):703-705.
[9]刘瑞平.对育龄女性在孕前优生检测的TORCH感染情况进行探讨与分析[J/CD].临床检验杂志(电子版),2018,7(2):283.
[10]龙彦,赵晓涛,孙媛媛,等.北京地区育龄期妇女TORCH筛查结果调查分析[J].中国全科医学,2014,17(24):2851-2854.
[11]王凌晞,康涵,吕康模.成都地区40 986例育龄妇女TORCH感染调查分析[J].解放军医学院学报,2018,39(5):415-418.
[12]郭知,肖雪,张兰.昆明地区5 219例孕妇TORCH感染情况的调查分析[J].昆明医学院学报,2008,29(z1):48-51.
[13]赵有利,张尚弟,王昱斌,等.兰州地区2 972例孕妇TORCH血清学检测结果的临床分析[J].甘肃科技,2018,34(21):143-145.
[14]李淼,唐爱国,周梅华,等.湖南省15 673例优生健康检查妇女TORCH结果分析[J].国际检验医学杂志,2018,39(10):1271-1273.
[15]张力鹏,黄修菊,林玉婷.乌鲁木齐地区正常妊娠妇女和不同次数自然流产妇女TORCH感染比较[J].医学信息,2018,31(17):155-157.
[16]米东,祁珮,陈淑琴,等.天津地区不孕妇女和孕妇TORCH感染的检测分析[J].国际检验医学杂志,2014,35(2):241-242.
[17]初文君,初慧君,李丽君,等.山东1 035例孕前妇女TORCH感染情况调查分析[J].中国生育健康杂志,2019(1):42-43.
[18]杨宁,秦卫兵,钟兴明,等.广东地区10 531例不孕症妇女TORCH检测回顾性分析[J].现代医院,2016,16(9):1255-1256.
[19]施瑞洁,刘文康,李玲,等.西安地区妊娠期妇女TORCH检测及感染特点分析[J].现代检验医学杂志,2016,31(6):23-27.
[20]连文萍,彭梦乐,陈军,等.郑州地区24 510例妊娠期妇女TORCH检测结果分析[J].医药论坛杂志,2017,38(9):29-32.
[21]郭兰英,赵文双.呼和浩特地区孕妇TORCH感染调查分析[J].中国优生与遗传杂志,2009,17(2):72.
[22]张涌,孔莹,马光娟.乌鲁木齐地区3 265例孕妇TORCH感染的调查分析[J].中国优生与遗传杂志,2007,15(3):52.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |