[1]刘小飞,刘艳兰.美蓝染色技术在胃镜活检切片组织幽门螺杆菌检查中的应用[J].医学信息,2023,36(11):142-144,148.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2023.11.029]
　LIU Xiao-fei,LIU Yan-lan.Application of Methylene Blue Staining Technique in the Examination of Helicobacter Pylori in Endoscopic Biopsy Tissues[J].Journal of Medical Information,2023,36(11):142-144,148.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2023.11.029]
点击复制

美蓝染色技术在胃镜活检切片组织幽门螺杆菌检查中的应用()
分享到：

医学信息[ISSN:1006-1959/CN:61-1278/R]

卷:
36卷
期数:
2023年11期
页码:
142-144,148
栏目:
诊疗技术
出版日期:
2023-06-01

文章信息/Info

Title:
Application of Methylene Blue Staining Technique in the Examination of Helicobacter Pylori in Endoscopic Biopsy Tissues
文章编号:
1006-1959（2023）11-0142-04
作者:
刘小飞; 刘艳兰
（1.泰和县人民医院病理科，江西 泰和 343700；2.泰和县妇幼保健院妇产科，江西 泰和 343700）
Author(s):
LIU Xiao-fei; LIU Yan-lan
(1.Department of Pathology,Taihe County People’s Hospital,Taihe 343700,Jiangxi,China;2.Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology,Taihe County Maternal and Child Health Hospital,Taihe 343700,Jiangxi,China)
关键词:
美蓝染色技术; 胃镜活检; 幽门螺杆菌; 快速尿酶法
Keywords:
Methylene blue staining technique; Endoscopic biopsy; Helicobacter pylori; Rapid urease test
分类号:
R735.2
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2023.11.029
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的 观察美蓝染色技术在胃镜活检切片组织中检查幽门螺杆菌（Hp）的临床应用价值。方法 选取2020年7月-12月在我院进行胃镜活检的50例患者为研究对象，均在胃镜下钳取胃黏膜组织分别进行快速尿酶法（RUT）、美蓝染色技术检测，比较两组检测方法Hp检出率、敏感度、特异度以及染色效果。结果 RUT检测Hp阳性率为84.00%，低于美蓝染色检测96.00%，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；美蓝染色检测Hp敏感度、特异度均高于RUT检测，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；美蓝染色方法着色强度、细胞阳性率评分均高于RUT检测，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05），但着色背景评分与RUT检测比较，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）；2、5、10 min美蓝染色检测Hp阳性率均高于RUT检测（P＜0.05），但20 min时，两者比较差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。结论 美蓝染色技术在胃镜活检切片组织Hp检测中具有重要的作用，可提高阳性检出率，且检出敏感度、特异度均高于RUT检测。同时染色效果显著，利于镜下观察，且受显色反应时间影响相对较小，可一定程度提高Hp检出准确率，为临床早期治疗提供可靠的参考依据。
Abstract:
Objective To observe the clinical application value of methylene blue staining technique in the examination of Helicobacter pylori (Hp) in endoscopic biopsy tissue.Methods A total of 50 patients who underwent gastroscopy biopsy in our hospital from July to December 2020 were selected as the research objects. Gastric mucosal tissues were taken under gastroscopy for rapid urease test (RUT) and methylene blue staining. The detection rate, sensitivity, specificity and staining effect of Hp were compared between the two groups.Results The positive rate of Hp detected by RUT was 84.00%, which was lower than 96.00% of methylene blue staining, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). The sensitivity and specificity of Hp detection by methylene blue staining were higher than those of RUT detection, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). The staining intensity and cell positive rate scores of methylene blue staining method were higher than those of RUT detection, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05), but the staining background score was compared with that of RUT detection with no significant difference (P>0.05). The positive rate of Hp detected by methylene blue staining at 2, 5 and 10 min was higher than that detected by RUT (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between the two groups at 20 min (P>0.05).Conclusion The methylene blue staining technique plays an important role in the Hp detection of gastroscopy biopsy tissue, which can improve the positive detection rate, and the detection sensitivity and specificity are higher than those of RUT detection. At the same time, the staining effect is significant, which is conducive to microscopic observation, and is relatively less affected by the color reaction time. Meanwhile, it can improve the accuracy of Hp detection to a certain extent and provide a reliable reference for early clinical treatment.

参考文献/References:

[1]栗安刚.胃癌患者术前胃镜活检病理与外科术后病理的差异分析[J].黑龙江医学,2018,42(9):881-882.[2]段文冰,宋晓斐,王子娥,等,幽门螺旋杆菌IgG抗体及13C-尿素呼气试验在查体中的临床应用[J].贵州医药,2016,28(11):225-227.[3]钟玉全,张旭,杨丽,等.180例胃癌术前胃镜病理活检结果及误漏诊因素分析[J].西南国防医药,2018,28(7):615-617.[4]易智君,黄卓雅,冯得财,等.胃癌术前胃镜病理与术后切除组织病理检查异同分析[J].哈尔滨医药,2018,38(3):268-269.[5]冯超.幽门螺旋杆菌感染的组织病理学与内镜下表现的相关性研究[D].青岛:青岛大学,2020.[6]中华医学会病理分会消化病理学组筹备组. 慢性胃炎及上皮性肿瘤胃黏膜活检病理诊断共识[J].中华病理学杂志,2017,46(5):289-293.[7]刘洪波,祁晓莉,张勇,等.免疫组化染色在幽门螺旋杆菌病理检测中的优势与意义[J].临床与实验病理学杂志,2018,29(3):321-323.[8]孙文峰.丹东地区居民幽门螺旋杆菌感染影响因素分析[D].锦州:锦州医科大学,2017.[9]李安全,周小微.尿素13C呼气试验与血清抗体和组织病理学在检测幽门螺旋杆菌感染的比较[J].中国医药科学,2017,15(9):304-306.[10]袁世梅,杨伟,魏进武,等.不同诊断方法对消化内科幽门螺杆菌感染的诊断价值[J].检验医学与临床,2021,14(7):292-294.[11]吴赛青,欧阳劲光,窦红漫,等.三种胃幽门螺杆菌检测方法比较[J].临床与实验病理学杂志,2019,35(4):486-487.[12]方莹,韩亚楠,王敏.三种非侵入性方法检测儿童幽门螺杆菌感染的灵敏度和特异度比较[J].陕西医学杂志,2015,44(8):961-962.[13]张燕,岳玉林,张之烽,等.儿童幽门螺杆菌感染检测方法临床适用性分析[J].东南国防医药,2017,20(5):156-158.[14]王南萍,王逸云,余师师,等.改良幽门螺杆菌抗原检测试剂盒检测粪便幽门螺杆菌抗原的临床评价[J].中国微生态学杂志,2018,15(11):216-228.[15]李慧娟,樊路娟,酒康楠,等.13C尿素呼气试验在幽门螺杆菌感染诊断及预后评估中的临床价值[J].中国卫生检验杂志,2020,25(11):234-237.[16]刘捷.非侵入性检测方法在儿童幽门螺杆菌感染中的应用[J].中国妇幼保健,2019,15(12):194-196.[17]朱玉琴.实时荧光PCR检测胃黏膜组织中幽门螺杆菌的应用研究[D].福州:福建医科大学,2020.[18]彭磊,魏舒纯,张伟锋,等.幽门螺杆菌的诊断方法及其评价[J].胃肠病学,2019,24(5):308-309.[19]邓士杰,喻朝霞.硼酸钠-冰醋酸亚甲蓝染色法检测幽门螺旋杆菌效果评价[J].皖南医学院学报,2022,14(6):31-34.[20]叶铭坤,梁栋伟,邓健能,等,两种非侵入性幽门螺杆菌检测方法的比较[J].国际检验医学杂志,2017,36(20):3041-3042.

更新日期/Last Update: 1900-01-01