查看更多>>摘要:目的 探讨戊型肝炎病毒(HEV)感染患者的流行情况及其血清学指标对HEV感染患者的筛查价值。 方法 回顾分析北京市解放军总医院第五医学中心和佑安医院2018年1月1日至2023年8月31日同时检测抗-HEV IgM和IgG的数据97 440例,其中男性61 005例,女性36 435例,年龄(51.65±13.05)岁。根据抗-HEV特异性抗体阴阳性分为抗-HEV IgM阳性组(3 588例)、抗-HEV IgG阳性组(18 083例)和抗-HEV 抗体阴性组(78 892例),收集其患者的HEV RNA、肝功能、AFP、PIVKA-Ⅱ和PT检测结果及基本临床资料,统计HEV感染患者的流行情况,以及抗-HEV特异性抗体阴阳性与患者的各年龄段、HEV RNA及临床特征的关系。 结果 97 440例同时检测抗-HEV IgM和IgG患者中,抗-HEV IgM阳性率为3.68%(3 588/97 440),抗-HEV IgG阳性率为18.56%(18 083/97 440)。2018—2023年间,北京2家医院整体来看抗-HEV IgM的阳性率依次为2.51%、2.53%、3.02%、4.59%、5.72%和4.26%(χ²=1 401.73,P<0.001),抗-HEV IgG阳性率依次为12.56%、12.32%、12.85%、22.65%、27.42%和26.66%(χ²=1 058.29,P<0.001),均是缓慢上升至2023年开始下降。就诊患者在1~30岁、>30~60岁和>60岁的抗-HEV IgM阳性率(2.28%、3.60%、4.47%)(χ²=89.62,P<0.001)和IgG的阳性率(4.71%、17.86%、25.94%)(χ²=2 017.32,P<0.001)均随着年龄的增加而升高。抗-HEV IgM阳性组患者的年龄和ALB值低于IgG阳性组,而男性比例、TBIL、ALT、AFP和PT值高于IgG阳性组,差异有统计学意义(P均<0.05);抗-HEV IgM和IgG阳性组患者的年龄、男性比例、TBIL、ALT、AFP、PIVKA-Ⅱ和PT值均高于抗-HEV阴性组,两组ALB值均低于抗-HEV阴性组,都具有统计学意义(P均<0.05)。2 162例HEV感染患者根据HEV RNA阴阳性分组,HEV RNA阳性组患者抗-HEV IgM单阳性、IgG单阳性、IgM+IgG双阳性和抗体阴性比例分别为5.42%(18/332)、3.62%(12/332)、90.36%(300/332)和0.60%(2/332);其中,HEV RNA阳性组抗-HEV IgM+IgG双阳性患者比例高于HEV RNA阴性组(χ²=302.87,P<0.001),抗-HEV IgG单阳性(χ²=174.36,P<0.001)和抗-HEV抗体阴性(χ²=59.28,P<0.001)患者比例低于HEV RNA阴性组。此外,抗-HEV IgM阳性、IgG阳性和抗体阴性患者的HEV RNA的阳性率依次为29.23%(318/1 088)、17.59%(312/1 774)和0.65%(2/306)。 结论 就诊患者HEV感染率在2023年开始下降。HEV感染与年龄相关,老年人更易感。HEV感染时肝功能异常,黄疸多见。抗-HEV特异性抗体阴性不能说明没有HEV感染,还需检测HEV RNA和/或HEVAg来诊断。 Objective This study aims to explore the prevalence of hepatitis E virus (HEV) infection in patients and the screening value of serological indicators for HEV infection patients. Methods Retrospective analysis was conducted on 97 440 cases of anti-HEV IgM and IgG simultaneously tested in two Beijing hospitals from January 1, 2018 to August 31, 2023. Among them, there were 61 005 males and 36 435 females, with an average age of 51.65±13.05 years old. According to the positivity of anti HEV specific antibodies, they were divided into anti-HEV IgM positive group (3 588 cases), anti-HEV IgG positive group (18 083 cases), and anti-HEV antibody negative group (78 892 cases). Results of HEV RNA, liver function, AFP, PIVKA-Ⅱ and PT were collected, and their basic clinical information were recorded. The prevalence of HEV infection in patients, as well as the relationship between the positivity of anti-HEV specific antibodies and the patient′s age group, HEV RNA, and clinical characteristics were analyzed. Results Among 97 440 patients who tested anti-HEV IgM and IgG simultaneously, the positivity rate of anti-HEV IgM was 3.68% (3 588/97 440), and was 18.56% for anti-HEV IgG (18 083/97 440). The overall positivity rates of anti-HEV IgM in two Beijing hospitals from 2018 to 2023 were 2.51%, 2.53%, 3.02%, 4.59%, 5.72%, and 4.26% (χ²=1 401.73, P<0.001), while the positivity rates of anti-HEV IgG were 12.56%, 12.32%, 12.85%, 22.65%, 27.42%, and 26.66% (χ²=1 058.29, P<0.001). These rates showed a gradual increase until 2023 when a decline was observed. The positivity rates of anti-HEV IgM (2.28%, 3.60%, 4.47%) (χ²=89.62, P<0.001) and IgG (4.71%, 17.86%, 25.94%) (χ²=2 017.32, P<0.001) increased with age in patients who aged 1-30, >30-60, and over 60 years old. The age and ALB values of patients in the anti-HEV IgM positive group were lower than the IgG-positive group, while the proportion of males, TBIL, ALT, AFP and PT values were higher than the IgG-positive group, and the differences were statistically significance (P<0.05). Furthermore, patients in both the anti-HEV IgM and IgG positive groups had higher age, male proportion, TBIL, ALT, AFP, PIVKA-Ⅱ, and PT values than the anti-HEV negative group. Additionally, both groups had lower ALB values than the anti-HEV negative group, all of which were statistically significant (P<0.05). 2 162 HEV infected patients were grouped based on HEV RNA positivity. The proportion of anti-HEV IgM single positive, IgG single positive, IgM+IgG double positive, and antibody negative patients in the HEV RNA positive group were 5.42% (18/332), 3.62% (12/332), 90.36% (300/332), and 0.60% (2/332), respectively. Among them, the proportion of anti-HEV IgM+IgG double positive patients in the HEV RNA positive group was higher than that in the HEV RNA negative group (χ²=302.87, P<0.001), while the proportion of anti-HEV IgG single positive (χ²=174.36, P<0.001) and anti-HEV antibody negative patients (χ²=59.28, P<0.001) were lower than that in the HEV RNA negative group, both of which were statistically significant (P<0.001). In addition, the positive rates of HEV RNA in anti-HEV IgM positive, IgG positive, and antibody negative patients were 29.23% (318/1 088), 17.59% (312/1 774), and 0.65% (2/306), respectively. Conclusion The HEV infection rate among patients declined in 2023. HEV infection is age-related, with older individuals being more susceptible. Abnormal liver function and jaundice were commonly observed during HEV infection. It is crucial to note that the absence of anti-HEV specific antibodies cannot rule out HEV infection therefore, additional testing for HEV RNA and/or HEV Ag is necessary for accurate diagnosis.