| Literature DB >> 35656464 |
Yanling Miao1, Ying Liu1, Chao Liu1, Lei Yao1, Xiaoning Kang1, Maoting Lv1.
Abstract
Objective: To explore the value of color Doppler echocardiography (CDE) combined with serum heart-type fatty acid-binding protein (h-FABP) and cardiac troponin I (cTnI) in the diagnosis of myocardial infarction and its evaluation value in left ventricular function.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35656464 PMCID: PMC9155908 DOI: 10.1155/2022/8809708
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.650
Comparison of baseline features of the two groups of patients (n (%)).
| Observation group ( | Control group ( |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | 0.096 | 0.756 | ||
| Male | 23 | 25 | ||
| Female | 21 | 20 | ||
| Mean age | 54.57 ± 10.38 | 54.61 ± 10.29 | −0.018 | 0.986 |
| Infarct site | — | — | ||
| Lower wall | 20 | — | ||
| Front wall | 24 | — | ||
| Cardiac function grades | — | — | ||
| I | 11 | |||
| II | 12 | |||
| III | 12 | |||
| IV | 9 |
Comparison of serum h-FABP and cTnI levels between the two groups (x ± s).
| Groups |
| h-FABP (ng/ml) | cTnI (ng/ml) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Observation group | 44 | 79.21 ± 9.35 | 31.28 ± 9.84 |
| Control group | 45 | 1.72 ± 0.51 | 0.18 ± 0.06 |
|
| — | 55.518 | 21.204 |
|
| — | <0.001 | <0.001 |
Echocardiography, serum h-FABP, and cTnI levels alone and hybrid detection of myocardial infarction (n (%)).
| Indexes | Sensitivity | Specificity | Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|
| h-FABP | 77% (34/44) | 73% (33/45) | 75% (67/89) |
| cTnI | 75% (33/44) | 76% (34/45) | 75% (67/89) |
| ECD | 80% (35/44) | 71% (32/45) | 75% (67/89) |
| Hybrid detection | 95% (42/44) | 93% (42/45) | 94% (84/89) |
|
| 6.175/0.013 | 6.48/0.011 | 12.618/<0.001 |
|
| 7.311/0.007 | 5.414/0.02 | 12.618/<0.001 |
|
| 5.091/0.024 | 7.601/0.006 | 12.618/<0.001 |
Comparison of echocardiographic parameters in patients with myocardial infarction with different cardiac function grades (x ± s).
| Cardiac function grades |
| LVEF (%) | LVEDD (mm) |
|---|---|---|---|
| I | 11 | 49.15 ± 9.13 | 49.81 ± 6.32 |
| II | 12 | 48.28 ± 8.05 | 49.74 ± 6.28 |
| III | 12 | 42.36 ± 7.25①② | 60.06 ± 11.33①② |
| IV | 9 | 37.62 ± 5.66①②③ | 61.48 ± 11.56①② |
|
| — | 4.976 | 5.284 |
|
| — | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Cardiac function grades |
| LVESD (mm) | LVESV (mL) |
| I | 11 | 33.76 ± 6.95 | 1.52 ± 0.27 |
| II | 12 | 33.79 ± 7.01 | 1.64 ± 0.28 |
| III | 12 | 48.24 ± 11.30①② | 1.84 ± 0.36①② |
| IV | 9 | 50.53 ± 11.42①② | 1.92 ± 0.26①② |
|
| — | 10.162 | 3.933 |
|
| — | <0.001 | 0.015 |
| Cardiac function grades |
| LVEDV (mL) | SV (mL) |
| I | 11 | 91.64 ± 33.56 | 49.12 ± 19.30 |
| II | 12 | 98.69 ± 33.21 | 51.84 ± 21.28 |
| III | 12 | 120.17 ± 58.55 | 58.97 ± 28.03 |
| IV | 9 | 117.43 ± 43.38 | 53.29 ± 17.66 |
|
| — | 1.134 | 0.405 |
|
| — | 0.347 | 0.75 |
| Cardiac function grades |
| CI | E/A |
| I | 11 | 2.16 ± 0.86 | 1.18 ± 0.23 |
| II | 12 | 2.21 ± 0.91 | 1.21 ± 0.27 |
| III | 12 | 2.69 ± 0.82 | 1.96 ± 0.32①② |
| IV | 9 | 2.56 ± 0.66 | 2.04 ± 0.34①② |
|
| — | 1.123 | 27.752 |
|
| — | 0.351 | <0.001 |
①Compared with grade I, P < 0.05. ②Compared with grade II, P < 0.05. ③Compared with grade III, P < 0.05.
Comparison of serum h-FABP and cTnI levels in patients with myocardial infarction with different cardiac function grades (x ± s).
| Cardiac function grades |
| h-FABP (ng/ml) | cTnI (ng/ml) |
|---|---|---|---|
| I | 11 | 4.64 ± 1.16 | 0.92 ± 0.18 |
| II | 12 | 4.94 ± 1.22① | 3.15 ± 0.61① |
| III | 12 | 9.38 ± 1.82①② | 8.63 ± 1.74①② |
| IV | 9 | 9.83 ± 1.96①② | 12.78 ± 2.54①②③ |
|
| — | 34.638 | 131.032 |
|
| — | <0.001 | <0.001 |
①Compared with grade I, P < 0.05. ②Compared with grade II, P < 0.05. ③Compared with grade III, P < 0.05.