目的:探讨大鼠外耳道腺的正常组织结构及年龄组间,雌雄动物间有无差异,以期为药物评价过程中药物对耳腺影响的评价提供客观的依据。方法:将20只同龄SD大鼠随即分为A和B两组,每组均雌雄各半,分别与12周和17周龄处死,取外耳道腺进行病理学分析。观察外耳道腺在不同年龄组间、雌雄组间有无区别。结果:A组动物雌雄组间外耳道腺的组织结构无明显差异。B组动物雌雄动物间外耳道腺的组织结构无明显差异。A组雌性动物与B组雌性动物间外耳道腺的组织结构无明显差异。A组雄性动物与B组雄性动物间外耳道腺的组织结构无明显差异。结论:SD大鼠外耳道腺的组织结构在雌雄动物间及年龄在12周及17周间无明显差异,因此在进行药物对耳腺的影响的评价过程中12周龄和17周龄的受试大鼠所得到的结果应具备可比性。
通过与首都医科大学、南京医科大学、中山医科大学、四川大学的康复医学研究人员2000年1月至2008年3月止发表在康复医学主要五种杂志上的期刊论文,从论文年代分布、领域论文分布、核心期刊发文率、基金资助研究情况、主题分布情况等方面进行了全面的统计分析,比较客观地揭示和描述了新世纪初四川大学华西医院康复医学中心康复医学研究与发展的基本状况,并提出发展的可能策略。
摘要:目的:采用Meta分析的方法评价甲状腺球蛋白在甲状腺良性疾病和甲状腺癌中的临床意义。方法:通过检索MEDLINE、EMBASE、The Cochrane Library, 中国生物医学文献数据库、中国学术期刊全文数据库和其他方式广泛收集文献。根据QUADAS质量评价标准评价纳入文献的质量,用MetaDisc软件对其敏感度、特异度、阳性似然比、阴性似然比等进行合并分析,并进行异质性检验,绘制综合受试者工作特征曲线(summary receiver operator characteristic curve,SROC)。结果:最终纳入5篇文献。合并敏感度0.60,合并特异度0.83,合并比值比2.68, SROC下面积(AUC)=0.645 4。结论:现有研究证实:甲状腺球蛋白在甲状腺癌中的阳性率是甲状腺良性疾病中的2.68倍,有统计学差异,但敏感度不高。尚需更多设计严谨、科学的临床试验进一步证实。Abstract: Objective: To evaluate the quality of the current studies involving the value of serum thyroglobulin in the diagnosis of thyroid benign diseases and thyroid carcinoma. Methods: We comprehensive collected current studies about serum thyroglobulin in thyroid benign diseases and thyroid carcinoma by computer and manual searches. QUADAS items were used for quality assessment in our systematic review. Metadisc software was used to analyze pooled sensitivity, pooled specificity,pooled positive likelihood ratio and pooled negative likelihood ratio,pooled diagnostic test odds ratio and heterogeneity test,and draw summary receiver operator characteristic curve (SROC). Results: Totally 5 studies were included. To identify thyroid benign diseases and thyroid carcinoma, pooled sensitivity was 0.60, pooled specificity was 0.83,pooled odds ratio was 2.68, the area under curve (AUC) was 0.645 4.Conclusion: The results of statistic alanalysis showed that the positive rate of thyroglobulin in thyroid carcinoma is 2.68 times more than in benign thyroid diseases. There was significant difference. But sensitivity was not high and reporting quality of the studies was relatively poor. The conclusion still need more clinical trials to confirm.