目的探讨血浆及支气管肺泡灌洗液中可溶性髓样细胞触发受体-1(s TREM-1)水平及急性生理学及慢性健康状况评分(APACHEⅡ)、序贯器官衰竭估计评分(SOFA)在小儿重症肺炎病情严重程度及预后判断中的意义。方法选取2017年8月至2019年10月收治...目的探讨血浆及支气管肺泡灌洗液中可溶性髓样细胞触发受体-1(s TREM-1)水平及急性生理学及慢性健康状况评分(APACHEⅡ)、序贯器官衰竭估计评分(SOFA)在小儿重症肺炎病情严重程度及预后判断中的意义。方法选取2017年8月至2019年10月收治的76例重症肺炎患儿为重症肺炎组,根据疾病转归情况分为无效组(n=34)和有效组(n=42);同时期在本院儿内科病房收治的普通肺炎患儿94例为普通肺炎组;以及同期门诊体检健康儿童100例为健康对照组。检测所有入组儿童血浆s TREM-1水平、APACHEⅡ评分及SOFA评分,并检测重症肺炎组患儿支气管肺泡灌洗液(BALF)s TREM-1水平,分析上述指标与儿童重症肺炎病情严重程度及预后的相关性。结果重症肺炎组血浆s TREM-1水平、APACHEⅡ评分及SOFA评分均明显高于普通肺炎组及健康对照组(P<0.05)。重症肺炎组患儿入院第7天时,无效组血浆s TREM-1、BALF s TREM-1水平及SOFA评分均上升,有效组上述各指标明显下降,且上述指标在两组间比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。血浆s TREM-1、BALF s TREM-1、SOFA评分两两间均呈正相关(P<0.05),APACHEⅡ评分与血浆s TREM-1、BALF s TREM-1、SOFA评分均无相关性(P>0.05)。结论血浆、BALF s TREM-1水平及SOFA评分可作为评价儿童重症肺炎病情严重程度,提示病情预后的有效指标。展开更多
目的分析急性生理和慢性健康状况评分(Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation,APACHE)Ⅱ、Ranson评分和序贯器官衰竭评分(Sequential Organ Failure Assessment,SOFA)3种评分系统对重症监护病房(intensive care unit,ICU)重...目的分析急性生理和慢性健康状况评分(Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation,APACHE)Ⅱ、Ranson评分和序贯器官衰竭评分(Sequential Organ Failure Assessment,SOFA)3种评分系统对重症监护病房(intensive care unit,ICU)重症急性胰腺炎(severe acute pancreatitis,SAP)患者病死率的预测价值,探索SAP患者病死率的独立危险因素。方法回顾性分析2014年7月-2019年7月入住四川大学华西医院ICU的SAP患者电子病历资料。搜集患者入ICU后的首次APACHEⅡ评分、Ranson评分、SOFA评分以及机械通气、血管活性药物使用、肾脏替代治疗和预后的临床资料。利用受试者工作特征(receiver operator characteristic,ROC)曲线评价APACHEⅡ评分、Ranson评分和SOFA评分对SAP患者预后的预测价值。使用logistic回归模型寻找SAP患者ICU死亡的独立危险因素。结果筛选了290例SAP患者,60例患者因无预后资料等被排除。最终纳入230例SAP患者,其中男162例,女68例,平均年龄(51.1±13.7)岁。230例SAP患者转出ICU时166例存活,64例死亡,ICU病死率为27.8%。APACHEⅡ评分、Ranson评分、APACHEⅡ联合Ranson评分、SOFA评分与ICU病死率绘制的ROC曲线下面积分别为0.769、0.741、0.802与0.625,提示APACHEⅡ联合Ranson评分对SAP患者ICU病死率预测价值较单一评分系统更高。Logistic回归分析显示APACHEⅡ评分[比值比(odds ratio,OR)=1.841,95%置信区间(confidence interval,CI)(1.022,2.651),P=0.002]、Ranson评分[OR=1.542,95%CI(1.152,2.053),P=0.004]、血糖不稳定指数[OR=1.321,95%CI(1.021,1.862),P=0.008]、有无升压药物使用[OR=15.572,95%CI(6.073,39.899),P<0.001]与有无肾脏替代治疗[OR=4.463,95%CI(1.901,10.512),P=0.001]是SAP患者ICU死亡的独立危险因素。结论与SOFA评分相比,APACHEⅡ评分联合Ranson评分对SAP患者ICU病死率的预测价值更高。APACHEⅡ评分、Ranson评分、血糖不稳定指数、有无升压药物使用和肾脏替代治疗是SAP患者ICU死亡的独立危险�展开更多
目的探讨动态监测序贯器官衰竭估计(SOFA)评分在危重病患者预后评估中的应用价值。方法选取本院重症科2010年5月—2011年9月收治的危重病患者84例为研究对象,4周内存活60例(存活组),死亡24例(死亡组)。分别于患者入ICU后第1、3、5、7天...目的探讨动态监测序贯器官衰竭估计(SOFA)评分在危重病患者预后评估中的应用价值。方法选取本院重症科2010年5月—2011年9月收治的危重病患者84例为研究对象,4周内存活60例(存活组),死亡24例(死亡组)。分别于患者入ICU后第1、3、5、7天进行急性生理学和慢性健康状况评分Ⅱ(APACHEⅡ)和SOFA评分,比较两组不同时间APACHEⅡ和SOFA评分,分析器官损伤数与病死率及最大SOFA评分的关系及两组受损器官数和最大SOFA评分的差异。采用SPSS 13.0统计软件进行数据处理,计量资料采用t检验和方差分析,计数资料采用χ2检验。结果存活组患者入住ICU内1、3、5、7 d APACHEⅡ和SOFA评分与死亡组比较,差异均有统计学意义(P=0.00)。存活组患者入住ICU内1、3、5、7 d APACHEⅡ评分比较,差异有统计学意义(F=14.76,P=0.00);其中入住ICU内3、5、7 d与1 d时比较,差异均有统计学意义(q值分别为5.95、7.84和8.39,P=0.00)。死亡组患者入住ICU内1、3、5、7 d APACHEⅡ评分比较,差异无统计学意义(F=0.15,P=0.93)。存活组患者入住ICU内1、3、5、7 d SOFA评分比较,差异有统计学意义(F=18.27,P=0.00);其中入住ICU内3、5、7 d与1 d时比较,差异均有统计学意义(q值分别为5.04、8.06和9.74,P=0.00)。死亡组患者入住ICU内1、3、5、7 d SOFA评分比较,差异有统计学意义(F=5.35,P=0.00);其中入住ICU内5、7 d与1 d时比较,差异均有统计学意义(q值分别为2.98和5.03,P=0.00)。以受损器官3个为界,分为受损器官≥3个组和受损器官<3个组。受损器官≥3个组65例,死亡24例,病死率为36.92%;受损器官<3个组19例,无死亡患者,差异有统计学意义(χ2=9.82,P=0.00)。受损器官≥3个组存活患者最大SOFA评分为(7.73±2.23)分,死亡患者最大SOFA评分为(12.70±2.82)分,差异有统计学意义(t=-7.85,P=0.00);受损器官<3个组患者最大SOFA评分为(4.63±1.30)分。存活组和死亡组患者平均器官损伤数比较,差异有展开更多
BACKGROUND:The aim of this study is to investigate the diagnostic and prognostic value of neutrophil CD64(nCD64)as a novel biomarker in sepsis patients.METHODS:One hundred fifty-one adult patients diagnosed with sepsi...BACKGROUND:The aim of this study is to investigate the diagnostic and prognostic value of neutrophil CD64(nCD64)as a novel biomarker in sepsis patients.METHODS:One hundred fifty-one adult patients diagnosed with sepsis and 20 age-matched healthy controls were enrolled in the study.Patients with sepsis were further subdivided into a sepsis group and a septic shock group.nCD64 expression,serum procalcitonin(PCT)level,C-reactive protein(CRP)level,and white blood cell(WBC)count were obtained for each patient,and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(SOFA)scores were calculated.RESULTS:nCD64 expression was higher in the sepsis group with confirmed infection than in the control group.The receiver operating characteristic(ROC)curve of nCD64 was higher than those of SOFA score,PCT,CRP and WBC for diagnosing infection.The area under the curve(AUC)of nCD64 combined with SOFA score was the highest for all parameters.The AUC of nCD64 for predicting 28-day mortality in sepsis was signifi cantly higher than those of PCT,CRP,and WBC,but slightly lower than that of SOFA score.The AUC of nCD64 or PCT combined with SOFA score was signifi cantly higher than that of any single parameter for predicting 28-day mortality.CONCLUSION:nCD64 expression and SOFA score are valuable parameters for early diagnosis of infection and prognostic evaluation of sepsis patients.展开更多
Background The prognostic power of n-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide （NT-proBNP） in sepsis is disputable and unstable among different models. We attempt to evaluate the prognostic potential of NT-proBNP in co...Background The prognostic power of n-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide （NT-proBNP） in sepsis is disputable and unstable among different models. We attempt to evaluate the prognostic potential of NT-proBNP in combination with the sequential organ failure assessment （SOFA） score in sepsis. Methods In this retrospective study, 100 consecutive sepsis patients were enrolled. Clinical data such as admission SOFA, the Acute Physiologic and Chronic Health Evaluation score, shock prevalence, use of lung protective ventilation, vasopressors, and glucocorticoids were recorded. Additionally, serum creatinine （Scrl and Scr3） and NT-proBNP （NT-proBNP1 and NT-proBNP3） were assayed and evaluated at admission and on day 3 respectively. Results ANT-proBNP （NT-proBNP3 minus NT-proBNP1） （P 〈0.001, Hazard ratio （HR）=1.245, 95% confidence interval （CI）, 1.137-1.362） and admission SOFA （P 〈0.001, HR=1.197, 95% CI, 1.106-1.295） were independently related to in-hospital mortality. Their combination was a more robust predictor for in-hospital mortality than either of them individually. Patients with high ANT-proBNP and SOFA had the poorest prognosis. Conclusions In our study, both ANT-proBNP and SOFA were independent predictors of septic patients＇ prognosis. Moreover, the combination of ,~NT-proBNP and admission SOFA provided a novel strategy that contained information regarding both the response to treatment and sepsis severity.展开更多
文摘目的探讨血浆及支气管肺泡灌洗液中可溶性髓样细胞触发受体-1(s TREM-1)水平及急性生理学及慢性健康状况评分(APACHEⅡ)、序贯器官衰竭估计评分(SOFA)在小儿重症肺炎病情严重程度及预后判断中的意义。方法选取2017年8月至2019年10月收治的76例重症肺炎患儿为重症肺炎组,根据疾病转归情况分为无效组(n=34)和有效组(n=42);同时期在本院儿内科病房收治的普通肺炎患儿94例为普通肺炎组;以及同期门诊体检健康儿童100例为健康对照组。检测所有入组儿童血浆s TREM-1水平、APACHEⅡ评分及SOFA评分,并检测重症肺炎组患儿支气管肺泡灌洗液(BALF)s TREM-1水平,分析上述指标与儿童重症肺炎病情严重程度及预后的相关性。结果重症肺炎组血浆s TREM-1水平、APACHEⅡ评分及SOFA评分均明显高于普通肺炎组及健康对照组(P<0.05)。重症肺炎组患儿入院第7天时,无效组血浆s TREM-1、BALF s TREM-1水平及SOFA评分均上升,有效组上述各指标明显下降,且上述指标在两组间比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。血浆s TREM-1、BALF s TREM-1、SOFA评分两两间均呈正相关(P<0.05),APACHEⅡ评分与血浆s TREM-1、BALF s TREM-1、SOFA评分均无相关性(P>0.05)。结论血浆、BALF s TREM-1水平及SOFA评分可作为评价儿童重症肺炎病情严重程度,提示病情预后的有效指标。
文摘目的分析急性生理和慢性健康状况评分(Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation,APACHE)Ⅱ、Ranson评分和序贯器官衰竭评分(Sequential Organ Failure Assessment,SOFA)3种评分系统对重症监护病房(intensive care unit,ICU)重症急性胰腺炎(severe acute pancreatitis,SAP)患者病死率的预测价值,探索SAP患者病死率的独立危险因素。方法回顾性分析2014年7月-2019年7月入住四川大学华西医院ICU的SAP患者电子病历资料。搜集患者入ICU后的首次APACHEⅡ评分、Ranson评分、SOFA评分以及机械通气、血管活性药物使用、肾脏替代治疗和预后的临床资料。利用受试者工作特征(receiver operator characteristic,ROC)曲线评价APACHEⅡ评分、Ranson评分和SOFA评分对SAP患者预后的预测价值。使用logistic回归模型寻找SAP患者ICU死亡的独立危险因素。结果筛选了290例SAP患者,60例患者因无预后资料等被排除。最终纳入230例SAP患者,其中男162例,女68例,平均年龄(51.1±13.7)岁。230例SAP患者转出ICU时166例存活,64例死亡,ICU病死率为27.8%。APACHEⅡ评分、Ranson评分、APACHEⅡ联合Ranson评分、SOFA评分与ICU病死率绘制的ROC曲线下面积分别为0.769、0.741、0.802与0.625,提示APACHEⅡ联合Ranson评分对SAP患者ICU病死率预测价值较单一评分系统更高。Logistic回归分析显示APACHEⅡ评分[比值比(odds ratio,OR)=1.841,95%置信区间(confidence interval,CI)(1.022,2.651),P=0.002]、Ranson评分[OR=1.542,95%CI(1.152,2.053),P=0.004]、血糖不稳定指数[OR=1.321,95%CI(1.021,1.862),P=0.008]、有无升压药物使用[OR=15.572,95%CI(6.073,39.899),P<0.001]与有无肾脏替代治疗[OR=4.463,95%CI(1.901,10.512),P=0.001]是SAP患者ICU死亡的独立危险因素。结论与SOFA评分相比,APACHEⅡ评分联合Ranson评分对SAP患者ICU病死率的预测价值更高。APACHEⅡ评分、Ranson评分、血糖不稳定指数、有无升压药物使用和肾脏替代治疗是SAP患者ICU死亡的独立危险�
文摘目的探讨动态监测序贯器官衰竭估计(SOFA)评分在危重病患者预后评估中的应用价值。方法选取本院重症科2010年5月—2011年9月收治的危重病患者84例为研究对象,4周内存活60例(存活组),死亡24例(死亡组)。分别于患者入ICU后第1、3、5、7天进行急性生理学和慢性健康状况评分Ⅱ(APACHEⅡ)和SOFA评分,比较两组不同时间APACHEⅡ和SOFA评分,分析器官损伤数与病死率及最大SOFA评分的关系及两组受损器官数和最大SOFA评分的差异。采用SPSS 13.0统计软件进行数据处理,计量资料采用t检验和方差分析,计数资料采用χ2检验。结果存活组患者入住ICU内1、3、5、7 d APACHEⅡ和SOFA评分与死亡组比较,差异均有统计学意义(P=0.00)。存活组患者入住ICU内1、3、5、7 d APACHEⅡ评分比较,差异有统计学意义(F=14.76,P=0.00);其中入住ICU内3、5、7 d与1 d时比较,差异均有统计学意义(q值分别为5.95、7.84和8.39,P=0.00)。死亡组患者入住ICU内1、3、5、7 d APACHEⅡ评分比较,差异无统计学意义(F=0.15,P=0.93)。存活组患者入住ICU内1、3、5、7 d SOFA评分比较,差异有统计学意义(F=18.27,P=0.00);其中入住ICU内3、5、7 d与1 d时比较,差异均有统计学意义(q值分别为5.04、8.06和9.74,P=0.00)。死亡组患者入住ICU内1、3、5、7 d SOFA评分比较,差异有统计学意义(F=5.35,P=0.00);其中入住ICU内5、7 d与1 d时比较,差异均有统计学意义(q值分别为2.98和5.03,P=0.00)。以受损器官3个为界,分为受损器官≥3个组和受损器官<3个组。受损器官≥3个组65例,死亡24例,病死率为36.92%;受损器官<3个组19例,无死亡患者,差异有统计学意义(χ2=9.82,P=0.00)。受损器官≥3个组存活患者最大SOFA评分为(7.73±2.23)分,死亡患者最大SOFA评分为(12.70±2.82)分,差异有统计学意义(t=-7.85,P=0.00);受损器官<3个组患者最大SOFA评分为(4.63±1.30)分。存活组和死亡组患者平均器官损伤数比较,差异有
文摘BACKGROUND:The aim of this study is to investigate the diagnostic and prognostic value of neutrophil CD64(nCD64)as a novel biomarker in sepsis patients.METHODS:One hundred fifty-one adult patients diagnosed with sepsis and 20 age-matched healthy controls were enrolled in the study.Patients with sepsis were further subdivided into a sepsis group and a septic shock group.nCD64 expression,serum procalcitonin(PCT)level,C-reactive protein(CRP)level,and white blood cell(WBC)count were obtained for each patient,and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(SOFA)scores were calculated.RESULTS:nCD64 expression was higher in the sepsis group with confirmed infection than in the control group.The receiver operating characteristic(ROC)curve of nCD64 was higher than those of SOFA score,PCT,CRP and WBC for diagnosing infection.The area under the curve(AUC)of nCD64 combined with SOFA score was the highest for all parameters.The AUC of nCD64 for predicting 28-day mortality in sepsis was signifi cantly higher than those of PCT,CRP,and WBC,but slightly lower than that of SOFA score.The AUC of nCD64 or PCT combined with SOFA score was signifi cantly higher than that of any single parameter for predicting 28-day mortality.CONCLUSION:nCD64 expression and SOFA score are valuable parameters for early diagnosis of infection and prognostic evaluation of sepsis patients.
文摘Background The prognostic power of n-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide （NT-proBNP） in sepsis is disputable and unstable among different models. We attempt to evaluate the prognostic potential of NT-proBNP in combination with the sequential organ failure assessment （SOFA） score in sepsis. Methods In this retrospective study, 100 consecutive sepsis patients were enrolled. Clinical data such as admission SOFA, the Acute Physiologic and Chronic Health Evaluation score, shock prevalence, use of lung protective ventilation, vasopressors, and glucocorticoids were recorded. Additionally, serum creatinine （Scrl and Scr3） and NT-proBNP （NT-proBNP1 and NT-proBNP3） were assayed and evaluated at admission and on day 3 respectively. Results ANT-proBNP （NT-proBNP3 minus NT-proBNP1） （P 〈0.001, Hazard ratio （HR）=1.245, 95% confidence interval （CI）, 1.137-1.362） and admission SOFA （P 〈0.001, HR=1.197, 95% CI, 1.106-1.295） were independently related to in-hospital mortality. Their combination was a more robust predictor for in-hospital mortality than either of them individually. Patients with high ANT-proBNP and SOFA had the poorest prognosis. Conclusions In our study, both ANT-proBNP and SOFA were independent predictors of septic patients＇ prognosis. Moreover, the combination of ,~NT-proBNP and admission SOFA provided a novel strategy that contained information regarding both the response to treatment and sepsis severity.
