血清胶质纤维酸性蛋白及肌腱蛋白X水平对脑出血患者继发性脑损伤风险的影响

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1673-5765.2026.02.007

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的分析血清胶质纤维酸性蛋白（glial fibrillary acidic protein，GFAP）及肌腱蛋白X（tenascin-X，TNX）水平对脑出血患者继发性脑损伤风险的影响。
方法本研究为观察性研究，前瞻性连续纳入2023年1月—2025年1月在井冈山大学附属医院住院治疗且发病24 h内的脑出血患者。根据患者治疗后第5天是否发生继发性脑损伤将其分为继发性脑损伤组和无继发性脑损伤组。对比两组患者的一般资料、临床特征及治疗前和治疗第5天的血清GFAP、TNX水平。通过多因素logistic回归分析确定脑出血患者发生继发性脑损伤的独立影响因素，并构建预测模型。基于ROC曲线分析该模型对脑出血后继发性脑损伤的预测效能。
结果本研究最终纳入116例脑出血患者，年龄为44～77岁，中位年龄为61（57～67）岁，其中男性69例，发生继发性脑损伤37例，无继发性脑损伤79例。治疗前继发性脑损伤组的血清GFAP[（9.21±3.60）ng/mL vs.（8.05±1.67）ng/mL，P=0.019]、TNX[（11.52±4.71）ng/mL vs.（9.51±3.68）ng/mL，P=0.014]水平均高于无继发性脑损伤组。治疗后两组的血清GFAP、TNX水平均较本组治疗前升高，且继发性脑损伤组的血清GFAP[（11.17±2.25）ng/mL vs.（8.96±1.71）ng/mL，P＜0.001]和TNX水平[（15.47±4.27）ng/mL vs.（13.08±4.29）ng/mL，P＜0.001]均高于无继发性脑损伤组。多因素logistic回归分析提示，脑出血量大（OR 4.460，95%CI 1.430～13.908，P=0.010）、治疗前血清GFAP水平较高（OR 1.128，95%CI 1.020～1.247，P=0.019）及TNX水平较高（OR 1.092，95%CI 1.010～1.181，P=0.028）是脑出血患者发生继发性脑损伤的独立危险因素，GCS较高（OR 0.574，95%CI 0.385～0.857，P=0.007）是脑出血患者发生继发性脑损伤的独立保护因素。ROC曲线提示上述4项指标联合预测脑出血患者发生继发性脑损伤的AUC为0.819（95%CI 0.711～0.887），敏感度为89.32%，特异度为80.15%。
结论脑出血量大、治疗前血清GFAP和TNX水平较高是脑出血患者发生继发性脑损伤的独立危险因素，GCS较高是其独立保护因素。整合上述4项指标构建的预测模型对脑出血后继发性脑损伤具有较高的预测价值，可为临床早期风险评估提供参考。

文章导读： 本研究通过联合分析血清胶质纤维酸性蛋白和肌腱蛋白X水平，发现两者均对脑出血后继发性脑损伤有一定的预测价值，基于两者构建的logistic回归模型的预测效能较好。本研究结果为临床评估脑出血患者的病情变化提供了潜在的新型生物标志物。

关键词: 脑出血; 继发性脑损伤; 胶质纤维酸性蛋白; 肌腱蛋白X

Abstract: Objective To analyze the effects of serum glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) and tenascin-X (TNX) levels on the risk of secondary brain injury in patients with intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH).
Methods This observational study prospectively and consecutively enrolled patients with ICH who were admitted to the Affiliated Hospital of Jinggangshan University within 24 hours of onset between January 2023 and January 2025. Based on the occurrence of secondary brain injury on the 5th day post-treatment, patients were divided into the secondary brain injury group and the non-secondary brain injury group. The general data, clinical characteristics, and serum GFAP and TNX levels before and on the 5th day post-treatment were compared between the two groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent influencing factors associated with secondary brain injury in ICH patients and to construct a prediction model. The predictive value of the model for secondary brain injury in ICH patients was assessed using ROC curve analysis.
Results A total of 116 ICH patients were finally included in this study, with an age range of 44-77 years and a median age of 61 (57-67) years. Among them, 69 were male. Secondary brain injury occurred in 37 patients, while 79 did not develop it. Before treatment, serum GFAP levels [(9.21±3.60) ng/mL vs. (8.05±1.67) ng/mL, P=0.019] and TNX levels [(11.52±4.71) ng/mL vs. (9.51±3.68) ng/mL, P=0.014] were significantly higher in the secondary brain injury group compared to the non-secondary brain injury group. After treatment, serum GFAP and TNX levels increased in both groups compared with baseline levels, with the secondary brain injury group showing significantly higher GFAP levels [(11.17±2.25) ng/mL vs. (8.96±1.71) ng/mL, P＜0.001] and TNX levels [(15.47±4.27) ng/mL vs. (13.08±4.29) ng/mL, P＜0.001] compared to the non-secondary brain injury group. Multivariate logistic regression analysis indicated that larger hematoma volume (OR 4.460, 95%CI 1.430-13.908, P=0.010), higher pre-treatment serum GFAP level (OR 1.128, 95%CI 1.020-1.247, P=0.019), and higher pre-treatment serum TNX level (OR 1.092, 95%CI 1.010-1.181, P=0.028) were independent risk factors for secondary brain injury in ICH patients, while a higher GCS (OR 0.574, 95%CI 0.385-0.857, P=0.007) was an independent protective factor. ROC curve analysis showed that the combined prediction model using these four indicators had an AUC of 0.819 (95%CI 0.711-0.887), with a sensitivity of 89.32% and a specificity of 80.15%.
Conclusions Larger hematoma volume and higher pre-treatment serum GFAP and TNX levels are independent risk factors for secondary brain injury in ICH patients, while a higher GCS is an independent protective factor. The prediction model integrating these four indicators demonstrates high predictive value for secondary brain injury in ICH patients and can provide a reference for early clinical risk assessment.

Key words: Intracerebral hemorrhage; Secondary brain injury; Glial fibrillary acidic protein; Tenascin-X

中图分类号:

罗绳祝, 沈建忠, 彭慕建, 王继斌. 血清胶质纤维酸性蛋白及肌腱蛋白X水平对脑出血患者继发性脑损伤风险的影响[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2026, 21(2): 178-185.

LUO Shengzhu, SHEN Jianzhong, PENG Mujian, WANG Jibin. Effects of Serum Glial Fibrillary Acidic Protein and Tenascin-X Levels on the Risk of Secondary Brain Injury in Patients with Intracerebral Hemorrhage[J]. Chinese Journal of Stroke, 2026, 21(2): 178-185.

参考文献

[1] 中华人民共和国国家卫生健康委员会. 脑血管病防治指南（2024年版）[J]. 磁共振成像，2025，16（1）：1-8.
National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China. Guideline for prevention and treatment of cerebrovascular disease（2024 edition）[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imaging，2025，16（1）：1-8.
[2] 廖淑馨，陈志颖. 脑出血急性期继发性脑缺血研究进展[J]. 中国现代神经疾病杂志，2025，25（7）：661-666.
LIAO S X，CHEN Z Y. Research progress on cerebral ischemia secondary to intracerebral hemorrhage in the acute phase[J]. Chin J Contemp Neurol Neurosurg，2025，25（7）：661-666.
[3] KURIAN C，KAUR K，KAUR G，et al. Assessment of the patient with intracerebral hemorrhage：a review of the literature[J]. Cardiol Rev，2021，29（1）：20-25.
[4] SONG K P，LIU X J，ZHENG Q Y，et al. Secondary injury to distal regions after intracerebral hemorrhage influence neurological functional outcome[J]. Aging（Albany NY），2020，12（5）：4283-4298.
[5] DUAN M X，XU Y，LI Y S，et al. Targeting brain-peripheral immune responses for secondary brain injury after ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke[J/OL]. J Neuroinflammation，2024，21：102[2025-03-16]. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12974-024-03101-y.
[6] GOGISHVILI D，HONEY M I J，VERBERK I M W，et al. The GFAP proteoform puzzle：how to advance GFAP as a fluid biomarker in neurological diseases[J/OL]. J Neurochem，2025，169（1）：e16226[2025-03-16]. https://doi.org/10.1111/jnc.16226.
[7] BARK L，LARSSON I M，WALLIN E，et al. Central nervous system biomarkers GFAP and NfL associate with post-acute cognitive impairment and fatigue following critical COVID-19[J/OL]. Sci Rep，2023，13（1）：13144[2025-03-16]. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-39698-y.
[8] 吴芬，马占龙. 肌腱蛋白X在心血管疾病中的研究进展[J]. 心血管病学进展，2021，42（10）：924-927.
WU F，MA Z L. Tenascin-X in cardiovascular diseases[J]. Adv Cardiovasc Dis，2021，42（10）：924-927.
[9] MATSUMOTO K I，AOKI H. The roles of tenascins in cardiovascular，inflammatory，and heritable connective tissue diseases[J/OL]. Front Immunol，2020，11：609752[2025-03-16]. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2020.609752.
[10] 中华医学会神经病学分会，中华医学会神经病学分会脑血管病学组. 中国脑出血诊治指南（2019）[J]. 中华神经科杂志，2019，52（12）：994-1005.
Chinese Society of Neurology，Chinese Stroke Society. Chinese guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of acute intracerebral hemorrhage 2019[J]. Chin J Neurol，2019，52（12）：994-1005.
[11] MASTANDREA P，MENGOZZI S，BERNARDINI S. Systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies evaluating glial fibrillary acidic protein（GFAP）and ubiquitin C-terminal hydrolase L1（UCHL1）as blood biomarkers of mild acute traumatic brain injury（mTBI）or sport-related concussion（SRC）in adult subjects[J]. Diagnosis（Berl），2024，12（1）：1-16.
[12] GARCÍA-CABO C，RIOBOÓ-LEGASPI P，BENAVENTE-FERNÁNDEZ L，et al. Measurement of GFAP in nasal exudate in the differential diagnosis between ischemic stroke and intracerebral hemorrhage[J]. Cerebrovasc Dis，2024，53（5）：515-518.
[13] YANG S，HU C G. Prediction of recurrent hemorrhage in postoperative patients with cerebral hemorrhage by bedside GFAP combined with UCH-L1：a case report[J]. Asian J Surg，2023，46（10）：4476-4477.
[14] 何晓峰，邓文静. 血浆GFAP与NfL水平评估创伤性脑损伤患者疾病严重程度及预后的价值[J]. 中国实用神经疾病杂志，2024，27（7）：826-830.
HE X F，DENG W J. Value of plasma GFAP and NfL levels in evaluating the severity and prognosis of traumatic brain injury patients[J]. Chinese Journal of Practical Nervous Diseases，2024，27（7）：826-830.
[15] 胡志鹏，梅杨梅，叶婷，等. 血清肌腱蛋白X评估急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者预后的价值[J]. 中国医师进修杂志，2023，46（7）：645-650.
HU Z P，MEI Y M，YE T，et al. Prognostic evaluating value of serum tenascin-X level in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction[J]. Chin J Postgrad Med，2023，46（7）：645-650.
[16] WEEKS D W，BROWN R D. Nerve versus tendon transfers in the management of isolated upper extremity peripheral nerve injuries[J]. Clin Plast Surg，2024，51（4）：473-483.
[17] WEST V C，OWEN K E，INGUITO K L，et al. Actin polymerization status regulates tenocyte homeostasis through myocardin-related transcription factor-A[J]. Cytoskeleton（Hoboken），2025，82（9）：539-555.
[18] WANG S，ZHANG W，LI J J，et al. Nomogram based on pan-immune-inflammation value to predict short-term prognosis in spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage[J/OL]. Front Neurol，2025，16：1606436[2025-10-16]. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2025.1606436.
[19] DIAO X J，CUI Q，TIAN N，et al. Hemorrhage-induced sphingosine kinase 1 contributes to ferroptosis-mediated secondary brain injury in intracerebral hemorrhage[J]. Mol Neurobiol，2022，59（3）：1381-1397.
[20] AKERET K，THOMSON B R，GHOSH S，et al. C1-inhibitor to prevent intracerebral hemorrhage-related secondary brain injury[J/OL]. Fluids Barriers CNS，2024，21：91[2025-03-16]. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12987-024-00594-w.
[21] ALSBROOK D L，DI NAPOLI M，BHATIA K，et al. Neuroinflammation in acute ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke[J]. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep，2023，23（8）：407-431.
[22] ARIES P，OGNARD J，CADIEU A，et al. Secondary neurologic deterioration after moderate traumatic brain injury：development of a multivariable prediction model and proposition of a simple triage score[J]. Anesth Analg，2024，138（1）：171-179.
[23] MAHAJAN C，SENGUPTA D，KAPOOR I，et al. Evaluation of the GCS-pupils score for prognosis in traumatic brain injury—the COMA study[J]. Brain Inj，2023，37（9）：1041-1047.