摘要目的:探讨急性呼吸窘迫综合征（ARDS）患者粒细胞集落刺激因子（G-CSF）、粒细胞-巨噬细胞集落刺激因子（GM-CSF）的表达水平及意义。方法:回顾性分析临海市第二人民医院2018年2月至2020年7月收治的ARDS患者81例（A组）与同时间段体检的健康人69例（B组）的临床资料。比较A组治疗前与B组体检时血清G-CSF、GM-CSF水平及氧合指数（OI）；比较A组治疗前不同病情严重程度患者血清G-CSF、GM-CSF水平，分析血清G-CSF、GM-CSF水平与病情的相关性及诊断ARDS的价值。结果:治疗前，A组血清G-CSF、GM-CSF分别为（201.89±19.44）ng/L、（48.95±6.03）ng/L，均高于B组的（38.13±5.22）ng/L、（7.71±0.92）ng/L，差异均有统计学意义（ t=67.889、56.228，均 P<0.001）。A组OI为（159.09±16.81）mmHg，低于B组的（385.13±20.34）mmHg，差异有统计学意义（ t=74.519， P<0.001）。A组患者中，重度病情者（13例）血清G-CSF、GM-CSF分别为（271.99±23.15）ng/L、（65.07±8.38）ng/L，中度病情者（30例）分别为（203.14±18.36）ng/L、（50.91±7.18）ng/L，轻度病情者（38例）分别为（176.92±15.98）ng/L、（41.89±6.02）ng/L，三者差异均有统计学意义（ F=133.201、57.116，均 P<0.05）。ARDS患者血清G-CSF、GM-CSF水平与OI值均呈负相关（ r=-0.819、-0.824，均 P<0.05）。血清G-CSF、GM-CSF及两者联合检查对ARDS诊断的受试者工作特征曲线（ROC曲线）下面积分别为0.780（95% CI：0.628~0.933）、0.752（95% CI：0.590~0.913）、0.912（95% CI：0.835~0.989），约登指数分别为0.686、0.696、0.739，两者联合的ROC曲线下面积及约登指数均最高。 结论:与健康人相比，ARDS患者血清G-CSF、GM-CSF水平高，且血清G-CSF、GM-CSF水平越高，患者病情越严重，G-CSF联合GM-CSF对ARDS具有较理想的诊断价值。

abstractsObjective:To investigate the expression and significance of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).Methods:The clinical data of 81 patients with ARDS who received treatment between February 2018 and July 2020 in Linhai Second People's Hospital, China (group A) and 69 healthy controls who concurrently received physical examination (group B) were retrospectively analyzed. Serum levels of G-CSF, GM-CSF and oxygenation index (OI) measured before treatment in the group A were compared with the levels measured in the control group. Serum levels of G-CSF and GM-CSF measured before treatment were compared between patients with different disease severities in the group A. The correlation between serum G-CSF and GM-CSF levels and disease condition was analyzed. The significance of serum G-CSF and GM-CSF levels in the diagnosis of ARDS was investigated.Results:Before treatment, serum G-CSF and GM-CSF levels in the group A were (201.89 ± 19.44) ng/L, (48.95 ± 6.03) ng/L, respectively, which were significantly higher than those in the group B [(38.13 ± 5.22) ng/L, (7.71 ± 0.92) ng/L, t = 67.889, 56.228, both P < 0.001]. OI in the group A was significantly lower than that in the group B [(159.09 ± 16.81) mmHg vs. (385.13 ± 20.34) mmHg, t = 74.519, P < 0.001). In group A, serum levels of G-CSF and GM-CSF were (271.99 ± 23.15) ng/L and (65.07 ± 8.38) ng/L respectively in patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome ( n = 13), (203.14 ± 18.36) ng/L and (50.91 ± 7.18) ng/L respectively in patients with moderate acute respiratory distress syndrome ( n = 30), and (176.92 ± 15.98) ng/L and (41.89 ± 6.02) ng/L, respectively in patients with mild acute respiratory distress syndrome ( n = 38). There was significant difference among patients with severe, moderate and mild acute respiratory distress syndrome ( F = 133.201, 57.116, both P < 0.05). Serum levels of G-CSF and GM-CSF in group A were negatively correlated with OI ( r = -0.819, -0.824, both P < 0.05). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of serum levels of G-CSF and GM-CSF and their combination were 0.780 (95% CI: 0.628-0.933), 0.752 (95% CI: 0.590-0.913) and 0.912 (95% CI: 0.835-0.989), respectively. The Youden index was 0.686, 0.696 and 0.739, respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and the Youden index of the combined detection of serum levels of G-CSF and GM-CSF were highest. Conclusion:Serum levels of G-CSF and GM-CSF in patients with ARDS were higher than those in healthy controls. Higher serum levels of G-CSF and GM-CSF led to more severe disease condition. Serum levels of G-CSF and GM-CSF in combination has a higher value in the diagnosis of ARDS than serum levels of G-CSF and GM-CSF alone.