Suppr超能文献

在一个接受医学毒理学评估的前瞻性患者队列中,螯合剂引起的尿液检测结果未能预测重金属毒性。

Failure of chelator-provoked urine testing results to predict heavy metal toxicity in a prospective cohort of patients referred for medical toxicology evaluation.

机构信息

Addiction Medicine Research Program, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.

American College of Medical Toxicology, Phoenix, AZ, USA.

出版信息

Clin Toxicol (Phila). 2022 Feb;60(2):191-196. doi: 10.1080/15563650.2021.1941626. Epub 2021 Jun 29.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Provoked urine testing (PUT), involving chelating agent administration prior to measuring urine metal excretion levels, is used by some alternative health care practitioners to diagnose patients with heavy metal poisoning. Multiple medical societies have advised against this practice due to its presumed unreliability, expense, and lack of validation. However, no prospective study of the predictive value of PUT for heavy metal poisoning has been undertaken.

METHODS

This study utilized the Toxicology Consortium's prospective case registry to evaluate the reliability of PUT for diagnosing heavy metal poisoning. Inclusion criteria were toxicology clinic patients with PUT results who were subsequently evaluated by a board-certified medical toxicologist and had a determination made regarding whether their signs and symptoms were likely related or unrelated to toxicologic exposures. The primary outcome was the positive predictive value of PUT for heavy metal toxicity as diagnosed by the evaluating medical toxicologist. Patients presenting to participating toxicology clinics without PUT served as a comparison group.

RESULTS

74 of 106 cases presenting with PUT results met inclusion criteria and were analyzed. 15 cases were determined by the examining toxicologist to be likely related to a toxicologic exposure. Only three cases were found to be related to heavy metal exposure, giving a positive predictive value of 4.3%. 20.2% of patients with PUT were found to have signs or symptoms related to any toxicologic exposure, compared to 14.3% of clinic patients without PUT. Demographics of toxicology clinic patients with and without PUT results were not significantly different except for age.

DISCUSSION

Our results provide empiric support that PUT is an inaccurate predictor of a diagnosis of heavy metal poisoning by a board-certified medical toxicologist. Given the inability to properly interpret PUT results along with the increased cost burden and risk of false positives, PUT should not be performed.

摘要

简介

激发尿检测(PUT),即在测量尿液金属排泄水平之前使用螯合剂给药,被一些替代医疗保健从业者用于诊断重金属中毒患者。由于其假定的不可靠性、费用和缺乏验证,多个医学协会都建议不要使用这种方法。然而,对于 PUT 诊断重金属中毒的预测价值,尚未进行前瞻性研究。

方法

本研究利用毒理学联合会的前瞻性病例登记处,评估 PUT 对重金属中毒诊断的可靠性。纳入标准是具有 PUT 结果的毒理学诊所患者,随后由经过委员会认证的医学毒理学家进行评估,并确定其症状是否可能与毒理学暴露有关或无关。主要结局是评估医学毒理学家诊断的重金属毒性的 PUT 阳性预测值。没有 PUT 结果的就诊毒理学诊所患者作为对照组。

结果

106 例有 PUT 结果的患者中,有 74 例符合纳入标准并进行了分析。15 例由检查毒理学家确定与毒理学暴露有关。只有 3 例被发现与重金属暴露有关,阳性预测值为 4.3%。20.2%的 PUT 患者被发现有与任何毒理学暴露相关的症状或体征,而无 PUT 结果的诊所患者为 14.3%。有毒理学 PUT 结果和无 PUT 结果的患者的人口统计学特征除年龄外无显著差异。

讨论

我们的结果提供了经验支持,即 PUT 是经过委员会认证的医学毒理学家诊断重金属中毒的不准确预测指标。鉴于无法正确解释 PUT 结果,以及增加的成本负担和假阳性的风险,不应进行 PUT。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验