ABSTRACT
Liver， as a critical organ of metabolism and detoxification， can be damaged by viral infection， drug abuse， and heavy drinking. Liver diseases pose a serious threat to people's health and life in China.At present， drug therapy has been primarily adopted clinically in the treatment of the liver injury.In-depth investigation of the mechanism of liver-protective drugs is of great significance to the prevention and treatment of clinical liver diseases.In recent years， with the development of the medical industry in China， an increasing number of studies have focused on the treatment of liver injury with Chinese medicine.Compared with western medicine， Chinese medicine is advantageous in few side effects and overall regulation， which plays a pivotal role in liver protection.However， its underlying mechanism in liver protection still needs to be further studied due to its complex compositions and diverse targets.Metabolomics， a new approach to studying the metabolic pathway of biological systems， provides integral and systematic views in the investigation of liver protection with Chinese medicine. By virtue of metabolomics， the mechanism of Chinese medicine in multi-target and multi-pathway liver protection can be analyzed comprehensively， and the corresponding biomarkers can also be screened out. The authors analyzed the studies of the treatment of chemical liver injury models induced by carbon tetrachloride （CCl4）， dimethylnitrosamine （DMN）， α-naphthyl isothiocyanate （ANIT）， and alcohol by Chinese medicinal compounds， single herbal medicines， and monomers of Chinese medicine based on metabolomics， and summarized the biomarkers and related metabolic pathways of Chinese medicine in the intervention of each type of liver injury， aiming at providing a reference for the further research and clinical application in the treatment of different types of liver injuries by Chinese medicine.
ABSTRACT
Objective To establish the proper review rules for the microscopic screening of urine samples tested by automatic urinalysis work station.Methods A total of 3 154 random urine samples were enrolled to establish and validate review rules .All the samples were collected from the inpatients and outpatients of Shanghai First People′s Hospital from March to May 2013 and tested by urinalysis work station.Three thousands one hundred and fifty four urine samples were firstly tested by urinalysis work station,including both urine dry chemical analyzer and urine sediments analyzer .Then each urine sample was examined microscopically by two technicians-in-charge using double-blind method.The average results from the two technicians were used as review results .Compared with review results ,the review rules were set up.According to different test methods by automatic urinalysis work station , four microscopic review protocols were defined:(1)Protocol 1:based on chemistry results only ,microscopy review was performed when any of WBC,RBC,PRO and NIT was positive;(2)Protocol 2:based on urine sedimental analysis only ,microscopy review was performed when any of WBC ,RBC and CAST count was over upper limit of the reference range;(3)Protocol 3:if any of BLD ,RBC,LEU,WBC was different between two systems ,or quantitative results had two or more than two gradient differences ,microscopy review was performed;(4) Protoco1 4:if any of BLD, RBC,LEU ,WBC was different between two systems , or CAST was over upper limit of the reference range , or alarm appeared , microscopic review was performed .400 randomly selected urine samples were tested to validate the review rules .Omission diagnostic rate and review rate were used to evaluate the rules .Results According to the review rules,the positive samples rate was 43.47%(1 371/3 154) and the negative rate was 56.53%( 1 783/3 154 );Positive samples were composed of RBC ( 55.58%) , WBC ( 59.66%) and CAST(6.42%).The review rates of four protocols were 44.48%(1 403/3 154),45.69%(1 441/3 154), 26.09%(823/3 154),28.95%(913/3 154),respectively.The false negative rates (omission diagnostic rates)were 7.13%(225/3 154),4.53%(143/3 154),2.73%(86/3 154) and 1.02%(32/3 154), respectively .Protocol 4 was selected as an ideal plan.Additional 400 urine samples were tested using protocol 4 in order to confirm the review rule.The review rate, false negative rate were 26.25%(105/400), 0.75%( 3/400 ), respectively.After image review revised, the review rate was 14.50%(58/400).Conclusion This study formulates that the automatic urine analysis workstation review rules have clinical maneuverability and validity.