切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版) ›› 2023, Vol. 18 ›› Issue (01) : 16 -24. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-9450.2023.01.003

论著

甘肃省某三甲医院糖尿病足患者创面感染病原菌及相关因素分析
杨晓宇1, 付倩倩1, 张苗苗2, 赵雅玫2, 余小平3, 周军利4,()   
  1. 1. 750000 银川,宁夏医科大学临床医学院
    2. 730030 兰州,甘肃中医药大学第一临床医学院
    3. 730030 兰州,甘肃省人民医院烧伤科
    4. 523000 东莞市人民医院烧伤整形科
  • 收稿日期:2022-11-14 出版日期:2023-02-01
  • 通信作者: 周军利
  • 基金资助:
    甘肃省自然科学基金资助项目(21JR7RA609); 临床医学研究中心建设项目(21JR7RA674)

Analysis of pathogenic bacteria and relevant factors of diabetes foot wound infection in a third-class hospital in Gansu Province

Xiaoyu Yang1, Qianqian Fu1, Miaomiao Zhang2, Yamei Zhao2, Xiaoping Yu3, Junli Zhou4,()   

  1. 1. Clinical Medical School of Ningxia Medical University, Yinchuan 750000, China
    2. First Clinical Medical School, Gansu University of Chinese Medicine, Lanzhou 730030, China
    3. Department of Burn, Gansu Provincial Hospital, Lanzhou 730030, China
    4. Department of Burns and Plastic Surgery, Dongguan City Hospital, Dongguan 523000, China
  • Received:2022-11-14 Published:2023-02-01
  • Corresponding author: Junli Zhou
引用本文:

杨晓宇, 付倩倩, 张苗苗, 赵雅玫, 余小平, 周军利. 甘肃省某三甲医院糖尿病足患者创面感染病原菌及相关因素分析[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2023, 18(01): 16-24.

Xiaoyu Yang, Qianqian Fu, Miaomiao Zhang, Yamei Zhao, Xiaoping Yu, Junli Zhou. Analysis of pathogenic bacteria and relevant factors of diabetes foot wound infection in a third-class hospital in Gansu Province[J]. Chinese Journal of Injury Repair and Wound Healing(Electronic Edition), 2023, 18(01): 16-24.

目的

探讨甘肃省某三甲医院收治的糖尿病足患者创面感染病原菌情况,分析创面感染的相关因素,为后期临床救治提供理论依据。

方法

选择2017年1月至2021年12月甘肃省人民医院收治的符合入选标准的糖尿病足患者,收集并分析患者的人口信息(年龄、性别)、糖尿病足创面特征(糖尿病病程、创面持续时间、创面部位)、抗生素应用数量、实验室检测指标(红细胞计数、白细胞计数、血红蛋白、白蛋白、肌酐、胆固醇、甘油三脂、高密度脂蛋白、低密度脂蛋白、空腹血糖、糖化血红蛋白、白细胞介素-6、降钙素原)、创面细菌培养结果及药物敏感试验结果。数据比较采用χ2检验、单因素分析、多因素Logistic回归分析。

结果

(1)本研究共纳入糖尿病足患者173例,其中51~60岁人数最多,有53例,占比30.6%,其次为61~70岁、41~50岁、71~80岁,分别占24.3%、20.2%、16.8%;男性总体多于女性,男性138例,占比79.8%,女性35例,占比20.2%。(2)糖尿病足患者糖尿病病程10~14年人数最多,38例,占比为22.0%,创面持续时间中人数最多为15~30 d,53例,占比为30.1%。173例患者共185个创面,其中位于足趾部位最多,有68例,占比36.8%,其次为足底52例,占比28.1%。(3)患者的实验室检测指标结果显示,红细胞计数低于正常值范围的患者占比60.1%,白细胞计数高于正常值范围的患者占比34.7%,血红蛋白低于正常值范围的患者占比42.8%,白蛋白低于正常值范围的患者占比86.1%,肌酐高于正常值范围的患者占比20.8%,胆固醇高于正常值范围的患者占比11.6%,甘油三酯高于正常值范围的患者占比23.7%,高密度脂蛋白低于正常值范围的患者占比73.4%,低密度脂蛋白高于正常值范围的患者占比12.7%,空腹血糖高于正常值范围的患者占比82.1%,糖化血红蛋白高于正常值范围的患者占比77.5%,白细胞介素-6高于正常值范围的患者占比77.5%,降钙素原高于正常值范围的患者占比68.2%。(4)173例患者共送检标本257份,其中阳性210份,阴性47份,阳性率81.7%;其中革兰阳性菌共120株,占比57.1%,革兰阴性菌共89株,占比42.4%,真菌1株,占比0.5%;革兰阳性菌中金黄色葡萄球菌65株,占比最高,为31.0%,其次是粪肠球菌16株,占比7.6%;革兰阴性菌中阴沟肠杆菌24株,占比最高,为11.4%,其次是大肠埃希菌21株,占比10.0%;药物敏感试验结果显示,金黄色葡萄球菌对甲氧苄啶/磺胺甲恶唑、万古霉素、利奈唑胺等抗生素较为敏感,敏感率均为100.0%;其对青霉素耐药率高,耐药率为89.2%,其次为克林霉素和红霉素,耐药率分别为78.5%、76.9%;阴沟肠杆菌对美洛培南、厄他培南、头孢哌酮/舒巴坦、左旋氧氟沙星等较为敏感,敏感率均为100.0%,其次为阿米卡星、亚胺培南、头孢吡肟,敏感率均为95.8%;大肠埃希菌对美洛培南、厄他培南、亚胺培南、替加环素、头孢西丁、阿米卡星等较为敏感,敏感率均为100.0%。173例患者中,抗生素应用数量为0的有19例,占比11.0%;1种及2种的均有61例,占比均为35.3%;3种的有25例,占比14.4%;4种以上7例,占比4.0%。(5)对糖尿病足患者感染的17个相关因素进行单因素分析,结果显示,创面持续时间、抗生素应用数量、白细胞计数、血红蛋白、白蛋白、高密度脂蛋白、肌酐、糖化血红蛋白、白细胞介素-6、降钙素原等相关因素差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);进一步行多因素Logistic回归分析结果显示,与创面感染相关的因素有创面持续时间、抗生素应用数量,高密度脂蛋白(OR=1.530、1.923、2.587,P<0.05)。

结论

糖尿病足患者创面病原菌培养中,革兰阳性菌中以金黄色葡萄球菌、粪肠球菌为主,而革兰阴性菌以阴沟肠杆菌、大肠埃希菌为主;糖尿病足患者感染的独立危险因素为创面形成时间长、抗生素滥用,高密度脂蛋白低。

Objective

To investigate the pathogenic bacteria affecting the wound infection of diabetic foot patients in a third-class hospital in Gansu Province, and analyze the relevant factors of wound infection, so as to provide theoretical basis for the later clinical treatment.

Methods

The case data of diabetes foot patients hospitalized in Gansu Provincial People′s Hospital from January 2017 to December 2021 were selected. Demographic information (age, gender), wound characteristics (diabetes course, wound duration, wound site), number of antibiotics applied, laboratory test indicators (red blood cell count, white blood cell count, hemoglobin, albumin, creatinine, cholesterol, triglyceride, high-density lipoprotein, low-density lipoprotein, blood glucose, glycosylated hemoglobin, interleukin-6 and procalcitonin), wound bacterial culture results and drug sensitivity test results of the patients were collected and analyzed. Data were compared with chi-square test, single factor analysis and the multi-factor Logistic regression analysis.

Results

(1)A total of 173 patients with diabetic foot were included in this study, of which 53 were in the age group of 51-60, it was the most of them, followed by 61-70 years old, 41-50 years old and 71-80 years old, accounting for 24.3%, 20.2% and 16.8% respectively. There were more men than women, 138 cases of males, accounting for 79.8%, and 35 cases of females, accounting for 20.2%. (2) In diabetic foot patients, the maximum duration of diabetes was 10-14 years (38 cases, accounting for 22.0%), and the maximum duration of wound was 15-30 days (53 cases, accounting for 30.1%). There were 185 wounds in 173 patients, of which the largest number were located in the toe (68 cases, accounting for 36.8%), followed by the sole (52 cases, accounting for 28.1%). (3) Laboratory test indicators results of patients showed that 60.1% of patients had red blood cell count below the normal range, 34.7% had white blood cell count above the normal range, 42.8% had hemoglobin below the normal range, and 86.1% had albumin below the normal range. Patients with creatinine above the normal range accounted for 20.8%, cholesterol above the normal range accounted for 11.6%, triglyceride above the normal range accounted for 23.7%, high density lipoprotein below the normal range accounted for 73.4%, low density lipoprotein above the normal range accounted for 12.7%, blood glucose above the normal range accounted for 82.1%, glycosylated hemoglobin above the normal range accounted for 77.5%, interleukin-6 above the normal range accounted for 77.5%, and procalcitonin above the normal range accounted for 68.2%. (4) A total of 257 samples were collected from 173 patients, of which 210 were positive and 47 were negative, with a positive rate of 81.7%. There were 120 strains of Gram-positive bacteria, accounting for 57.1%, 89 strains of Gram-negative bacteria, accounting for 42.4%, and 1 strain of fungus, accounting for 0.5%. Among Gram-positive bacteria, Staphylococcus aureus accounted for the highest proportion, 65 strains, 31.0%, followed by Enterococcus faecalis, 16 strains, accounting for 7.6%. Among Gram-negative bacteria, Enterobacter cloacae accounted for the highest proportion, 24 strains, 11.4%, followed by Escherichia coli, 21 strains, accounting for 10.0%. The results of drug sensitivity test showed that Staphylococcus aureus wassensitive to trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole, vancomycin, linezolid and other antibiotics, and the sensitivity rate was 100.0%. The resistance rate to penicillin was 89.2%, followed by clindamycin (78.5%) and erythromycin (76.9%) respectively. Enterobacter cloacae was sensitive to meropenem, ertapenem, cefoperazone/sulbactam and levofloxacin with sensitivity rate of 100.0%, followed by amicacin, imipenem and cefepime with sensitivity rate of 95.8%. Escherichia coli was sensitive to meropenem, ertapenem, imipenem, tigacycline, cefoxitin and Amika magnitude, and the sensitivity rate was 100.0%. Among the 173 patients, 19 cases (11.0%) were treated with non antibiotics; there were 61 cases of 1 and 2 antibiotics, accounting for 35.3%; there were 25 cases of 3 antibiotics, accounting for 14.4%; 7 cases more than 4 antibiotics, accounting for 4.0%. (5) Analysis of 17 factors related to infection in diabetic foot patients showed that there were significant differences in wound duration, number of antibiotics applied, white blood cell count, hemoglobin, albumin, high-density lipoprotein, creatinine, glycosylated hemoglobin, interleukin-6, and procalcitonin (P<0.05). Further Logistic regression analysis showed that the factors related to wound infection were wound duration, antibiotic use and high density lipoprotein (OR=1.530, 1.923, 2.587, P<0.05).

Conclusion

Staphylococcus aureus and Enterococcus faecalis are the main Gram-positive bacteria, while Enterobacter cloacae and Escherichia coli are the main Gram-negative bacteria in the culture of wound pathogens in patients with diabetes foot; the independent risk factors of infection in patients with diabetes foot were long wound formation time, abuse of antibiotics and low high-density lipoprotein.

表1 不同年龄段糖尿病足患者性别分布情况[例(%)]
表2 糖尿病足患者实验室检测指标情况[例(%)]
表3 糖尿病足患者病原菌分布情况
表4 金黄色葡萄球菌药物敏感试验结果(n=65)[株(%)]
表5 阴沟肠杆菌和大肠埃希菌药物敏感试验结果[株(%)]
表6 糖尿病足患者创面感染的相关因素的单因素分析
相关因素 例数 感染例数 非感染例数 感染率(%) χ2 P
性别 2.625 0.105
138 100 38 72.46
35 30 5 85.71
年龄(岁) 2.962 0.831
20~30 2 2 0 100.00
31~40 7 6 1 85.71
41~50 35 27 8 77.14
51~60 53 42 11 79.25
61~70 42 30 12 71.43
71~80 29 19 10 65.52
≥81 5 4 1 80.00
糖尿病病程(年) 3.871 0.697
0~5 32 20 12 62.50
5~9 32 26 6 81.25
10~14 38 29 9 76.32
15~19 36 27 9 75.00
20~24 26 20 6 76.92
25~29 3 3 0 100.00
≥30 6 5 1 83.33
创面持续时间(d) 16.920 0.005
0~7 33 16 17 48.48
8~14 29 21 8 72.41
15~30 53 44 8 84.91
31~60 24 20 4 83.33
61~90 12 10 2 83.33
>90 22 18 4 81.82
抗生素应用数量(种) 17.117 0.001
0 19 8 11 42.11
1 61 42 19 68.85
2 61 52 9 85.25
3 25 21 4 84.00
4种以上 7 7 0 100.00
白细胞计数 6.529 0.011
60 52 8 86.67
113 78 35 69.03
血红蛋白 8.906 0.003
74 64 10 86.49
99 66 33 66.67
白蛋白 12.818 0.001
149 119 30 79.87
24 11 13 45.83
胆固醇 2.777 0.096
20 12 8 60.00
153 118 35 77.12
甘油三脂 0.821 0.365
41 33 8 80.49
132 97 35 73.48
高密度脂蛋白 13.713 <0.05
127 104 23 81.89
43 23 20 59.18
低密度脂蛋白 3.478 0.062
22 13 9 59.09
151 117 34 77.48
肌酐 5.574 0.018
36 33 3 91.67
137 97 40 70.80
空腹血糖 0.024 0.876
142 107 35 75.35
31 23 8 74.19
糖化血红蛋白 7.441 0.006
144 114 30 79.17
29 16 13 55.17
白细胞介素-6 15.350 <0.05
134 110 24 82.09
39 20 19 51.28
降钙素原 12.422 <0.05
118 98 20 83.05
55 32 23 58.18
表7 影响糖尿病足患者创面感染的多因素Logistic回归分析
[1]
Apelqvist J, Bakker K, van Houtum WH, et al. Practical guidelines on the management and prevention of the diabetic foot: based upon the International Consensus on the Diabetic Foot (2007) Prepared by the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot[J]. Diabetes Metab Res Rev, 2008, 24 Suppl 1: S181-187.
[2]
Wei R, Chen HL, Zha ML, et al. Diabetes and pressure ulcer risk in hip fracture patients: a meta-analysis[J]. J Wound Care, 2017, 26(9): 519-527.
[3]
Falanga V. Wound healing and its impairment in the diabetic foot[J]. Lancet, 2005, 366(9498): 1736-1743.
[4]
van Battum P, Schaper N, Prompers L, et al. Differences in minor amputation rate in diabetic foot disease throughout Europe are in part explained by differences in disease severity at presentation[J]. Diabet Med, 2011, 28(2): 199-205.
[5]
中华医学会糖尿病学分会,中华医学会感染病学分会,中华医学会组织修复与再生分会. 中国糖尿病足防治指南(2019版)(Ⅰ)[J]. 中华糖尿病杂志2019, 11(2): 92-108.
[6]
中华医学会糖尿病学分会,中华医学会感染病学分会,中华医学会组织修复与再生分会. 中国糖尿病足防治指南(2019版)(Ⅱ)[J]. 中华糖尿病杂志2019, 11(3): 161-189.
[7]
中华医学会糖尿病学分会,中华医学会感染病学分会,中华医学会组织修复与再生分会. 中国糖尿病足防治指南(2019版)(Ⅲ)[J]. 中华糖尿病杂志2019, 11(4): 238-247.
[8]
中华医学会糖尿病学分会,中华医学会感染病学分会,中华医学会组织修复与再生分会. 中国糖尿病足防治指南(2019版)(Ⅳ)[J]. 中华糖尿病杂志2019, 11(5): 316-327.
[9]
中华医学会糖尿病学分会,中华医学会感染病学分会,中华医学会组织修复与再生分会. 中国糖尿病足防治指南(2019版)(Ⅴ)[J]. 中华糖尿病杂志2019, 11(6): 387-397.
[10]
王宁,鞠上,杨博华,等. 糖尿病足患者大截肢危险因素的Meta分析[J]. 中华糖尿病杂志2018, 10(7): 465-470.
[11]
Armstrong DG, Swerdlow MA, Armstrong AA, et al. Five year mortality and direct costs of care for people with diabetic foot complications are comparable to cancer[J]. J Foot Ankle Res, 2020, 13(1): 16.
[12]
中华医学会糖尿病学分会糖尿病慢性并发症调查组,向红丁. 全国住院糖尿病患者慢性并发症及其相关危险因素10年回顾性调查分析[J]. 中国糖尿病杂志2003(4): 5-10.
[13]
Bus SA, van Netten JJ. A shift in priority in diabetic foot care and research: 75% of foot ulcers are preventable[J]. Diabetes Metab Res Rev, 2016, 32 Suppl 1: 195-200.
[14]
Kwon OY, Minor SD, Maluf KS, et al. Comparison of muscle activity during walking in subjects with and without diabetic neuropathy[J]. Gait Posture, 2003, 18(1): 105-113.
[15]
Maluf KS, Mueller MJ, Strube MJ, et al. Tendon Achilles lengthening for the treatment of neuropathic ulcers causes a temporary reduction in forefoot pressure associated with changes in plantar flexor power rather than ankle motion during gait[J]. J Biomech, 2004, 37(6): 897-906.
[16]
Bus SA, Maas MK, de Lange A, et al. Elevated plantar pressures in neuropathic diabetic patients with claw/hammer toe deformity[J]. J Biomech, 2005, 38(9): 1918-1925.
[17]
Lord M, Hosein R. A study of in-shoe plantar shear in patients with diabetic neuropathy[J]. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon), 2000, 15(4): 278-283.
[18]
Gooding GA, Stess RM, Graf PM, et al. Sonography of the sole of the foot. Evidence for loss of foot pad thickness in diabetes and its relationship to ulceration of the foot[J]. Invest Radiol, 1986, 21(1): 45-48.
[19]
Lavery LA, Peters EJG, Armstrong D-G. What are the most effective interventions in preventing diabetic foot ulcers?[J]. Int Wound J, 2008, 5(3): 425-433.
[20]
Peter-Riesch B. The Diabetic Foot: The Never-Ending Challenge[J]. Endocr Dev, 2016, 31: 108-134.
[21]
倪俊,许献荣,孙建文,等. 老年患者难愈性创面的病原菌分布及耐药性[J]. 中国微生态学杂志2016, 28(2): 177-180.
[22]
Wu WX, Liu D, Wang YW, et al. Empirical Antibiotic Treatment in Diabetic Foot Infection: A Study Focusing on the Culture and Antibiotic Sensitivity in a Population From Southern China[J]. Int J Low Extrem Wounds, 2017, 16(3): 173-182.
[23]
蔡玉兰,邹梦晨,范新钊,等. 糖尿病足感染微生物分布特点的研究进展[J]. 中国糖尿病杂志2020, 28(1): 71-73.
[24]
欧阳喜光,邓强,仝钰洁,等. 我国金黄色葡萄球菌耐药性现状、产生机制及防治措施初探[J]. 中国奶牛2021(11): 27-31.
[25]
冯婷婷,王佳贺. 阴沟肠杆菌感染与耐药机制的研究进展[J]. 中国人兽共患病学报2017, 33(10): 938-942.
[26]
杨文霞,成豫,理云,等. 大肠埃希菌耐药性研究进展[J]. 畜禽业2021, 32(9): 11, 14.
[27]
Faymonville C, Andermahr J, Seidel U, et al. Compartments of the foot: topographic anatomy[J]. Surg Radiol Anat, 2012, 34(10): 929-933.
[28]
Richard JL, Lavigne JP, Sotto A. Diabetes and foot infection: more than double trouble[J]. Diabetes Metab Res Rev, 2012, 28 Suppl 1: 46-53.
[29]
Costache G, Popov D, Georgescu A, et al. The effects of simultaneous hyperlipemia-hyperglycemia on the resistance arteries, myocardium and kidney glomeruli[J]. J Submicrosc Cytol Pathol, 2000, 32(1): 47-58.
[30]
Arkensteijn BW, Berbée JF, Rensen PC, et al. The Apolipoprotein M-Sphingosine-1-Phosphate Axis: Biological Relevance in Lipoprotein Metabolism, Lipid Disorders and Atherosclerosis[J]. Int J Mol Sci, 2013, 14(3): 4419-4431.
[31]
Dai J, Yu M, Chen H, et al. Association Between Serum 25-OH-Vitamin D and Diabetic Foot Ulcer in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes[J]. Front Nutr, 2020, 7: 109.
[32]
Pai YW, Lin CH, Lee IT, et al. Prevalence and biochemical risk factors of diabetic peripheral neuropathy with or without neuropathic pain in Taiwanese adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus[J]. Diabetes Metab Syndr, 2018, 12(2): 111-116.
[1] 何金梅, 尹立雪, 谭静, 张文军, 王锐, 任梅, 廖明娇. 超声心肌做功技术对2型糖尿病患者潜在左心室心肌收缩功能损伤的评价[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(10): 1029-1035.
[2] 王珏, 陈赛君, 贲志飞, 詹锦勇, 徐开颖. 剪切波弹性成像联合极速脉搏波技术评估颈动脉弹性对糖尿病性视网膜病变的预测价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(06): 636-641.
[3] 王洁, 丁泊文, 尹健. 糖尿病性乳腺病52例临床分析[J]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 285-289.
[4] 陈絮, 詹玉茹, 王纯华. 孕妇ABO血型联合甲状腺功能检测对预测妊娠期糖尿病的临床价值[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 604-610.
[5] 张健, 刘小龙, 查天建, 姚俊杰, 王傑. 富含血小板血浆联合异种脱细胞真皮基质修复糖尿病足缺血性创面的临床效果[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2023, 18(06): 503-506.
[6] 赵雅玫, 谢斌, 陈艳, 吴健. 抗生素骨水泥联合负压封闭引流对糖尿病足溃疡临床疗效的荟萃分析[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2023, 18(05): 427-433.
[7] 李琛, 张惟佳, 潘亚萍. 牙周炎与系统性疾病之间关系的应用思考:2022年EFP和WONCA欧洲分部联合研讨会共识报告的解读及启示[J]. 中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 322-327.
[8] 叶弘, 吕婧喆, 钟良军. 白藜芦醇治疗牙周炎和糖尿病的新进展[J]. 中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 376-380.
[9] 中国康复医学会器官移植康复专业委员会. 成人实体器官移植后糖尿病管理专家共识[J]. 中华移植杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 205-220.
[10] 李京珂, 张妍春, 武佳懿, 任秀瑜. 深度学习在糖尿病视网膜病变筛查、评级及管理中的研究进展[J]. 中华眼科医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(04): 241-246.
[11] 黄岩, 刘晓巍, 杨春玲, 兰烨. 急性胰腺炎合并糖尿病患者的临床特征及血糖代谢与病情严重度的相关性[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 439-442.
[12] 张政赢, 鞠阳, 刘晓宁. 二甲双胍对2型糖尿病患者大肠腺瘤术后复发的影响[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 485-488.
[13] 薛念余, 张盛敏, 吴凌恒, 沙蕾, 童揽月, 沈崔琴, 李朝军, 杜联芳. 研究血清胆红素对2型糖尿病患者心脏结构发生改变前心肌功能的影响[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(9): 1004-1009.
[14] 谭睿, 王晶, 於江泉, 郑瑞强. 脓毒症中高密度脂蛋白、载脂蛋白A-I和血清淀粉样蛋白A的作用研究进展[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 749-753.
[15] 谢国晓, 赵凌霞, 薛雪花. 慢性病管理模式在糖尿病社区管理中的应用[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 587-590.
阅读次数
全文


摘要