泌尿器科領域におけるポーラログラフ的研究 第2篇: 泌尿生殖器系疾患のポーラログラフ蛋白波の成績について (その1)直接法による血清蛋白波の成績

Abstract

According to the modified method of Brdieka and Mu ller, Polarographic serum reactions were carried out on 109 patients with urogenital diseases, which were divided into. the following six groups : Group A—malignant tumors, Group B—benign tumors, Group C—tuberculous diseases, Grcup D—urolithiasis, Group E—inflammation and other pathological condition in urogenital organs, Control Group—normal individuals. The protein waves were determined and their clinical usefulness for diagnosis of cancer was examined. Method A.: Direct Test (Total protein Reaction) i) The First Method To 0.05 cc. n a tive serum was added 10 cc. ammoniacal cobaltous solution (A, solution) and the mixture was polarographed. ii) The Second Meth od To 0.3 cc. seru m were added 0.3 cc. distilled water and 0.15 cc. of IM.KOH, the mixture shaken, and after standing for 20 minutes at room temperature, to 0.1 cc. of the mixture 20 cc. of A solution was added and polarographed. B Filtrate Test (Filtrate Reaction) iii) Third Method To 0.5 cc. serum were added 1.0 cc. distilled water, and 1.0 cc. of 20Yo sulfosalicylic acid solution (S.S.A.), the mixture thoroughly shaken and left standing at room temperature. Exactly after 10 minutes the mixture was filtered through a 5.5 cm. NO.5 Toyo filter-paper. To 0.5 cc. of the filtrate was added 5.0cc. ammoniacal cobaltous solution (B solution) and polarographed. iv) The Fourth Method To 0.5 cc. seru m 1.0 cc. distilled water and 0.1 cc. of 1M. KOH were added, the mixture shaken and allowed to stand for 30 minutes at room temperature. Then 1.0 cc. of 20% S.S.A. solution was added, the contents of the tube shaken, and after standing exactly 10 minutes was filtered. To 0.5cc. of the filtrate was added 5.0 cc. B solution and polarographed. v) The Fifth Method This is a way according to Sato's method. To 0.1 cc. serum was added 5.0 cc. of 60% methanol solution, the mixture shaken in a tube with tightly fitting stopper, left standing at room temperature for 30 minutes and then filtered. To 0.3 cc. of the filtrate was added 4.7 cc. of B solution and polarographed. ammonia cal cobaltous solution A solution B solution 8 x 10-3 M • COC12• 6H20 5 cc. 5 cc. 1M • NH4C1 5 cc. 5 c c. 1M • NH4oH 5 cc. 30 c c . distilled water 35 cc. 10 c c . Conclusion 1. From the experimental data of the first and the second waves (W1, W2) and their middvlea lue(sW 1±Win2 t)h ef irstm ethoidt , w ass howtnh atp ositivreea dingwse rea 2 few in any of the malignant tumors, benign tumors, and non-tumorous diseases. Consequently, the diagnostic usefulness of this method for carcinoma seems to be very little and there is almost no significant difference among these groups. Both of the values of wave height rate (W2/W1 and W1/W2) in each group were distributed within a normal range and no significant difference was found. Finally, it seems difficult to find any clinical significance by means of the first method alone. 2. In the second mothod, the highest positive percentages were seen in t h e second wav(eW 2)n, e xtw asi n them iddlvea lue(W ±1W 2)'antdh el oweswt asi nt hef irstw ave 2 (W1). Clinical application of the second method seems to be more useful than the first method, although this reaction is not specific for carcinoma. Malignant tumors showed 83% of positive result, and nearly the same percentage was seen in urolithiasis and pyonephrosis, but other urogenital diseases generally showed lower positive percentages than malignant tumors. Percentages of positive rasults, however, were somewhat different among the urogenital organs even in cancer. In wave height rate only one case of e ssential renal hamaturia showed a value of 1.1 in W2/W1 which was remarkably lower than that of the control group and 1.0 in W1/W2w hich was higher. The values in all the other diseases were distributed withi n the normal range and neither significant difference between those diseases and control group nor clinical significance of this test was recognized. Both of the values of the changed ratio o f the first wave and the second wave W2 (Wb1yt hefi rsmt ethoWdb, 2 y t hef irsmt ethod)wdeisretr ibuwteitdh itnh en ormal range, and neither significant difference between the diseases and the control group nor diagnostic significance of this test was recognized.