内科理论与实践 ›› 2024, Vol. 19 ›› Issue (03): 174-179.doi: 10.16138/j.1673-6087.2024.03.04
收稿日期:
2023-12-18
出版日期:
2024-06-28
发布日期:
2024-09-09
通讯作者:
张晓霞 E-mail:jtr2007@sina.com基金资助:
GONG Hao1, CHI Cheng2, ZHANG Xiaoxia1()
Received:
2023-12-18
Online:
2024-06-28
Published:
2024-09-09
摘要:
目的:研究外周灌注指数(periphral perfusion index,PPI)联合急性生理与慢性健康评价Ⅱ(acute physi-ology and chronic evaluation Ⅱ,APACHEⅡ)评分对预测脓毒性休克患者预后的价值。方法:前瞻性纳入2023年1月至8月新疆医科大学第一附属医院急诊科确诊脓毒性休克患者200例,根据患者28 d预后情况分为存活组(84例)与死亡组(116例),记录患者姓名、年龄、性别、入院后生命体征、格拉斯哥昏迷评分量表(Glasgow coma scale,GCS)、脓毒症相关性器官功能衰竭评价(sepsis-related organ failure assessment,SOFA)、APACHEⅡ、感染部位、入院24 h补液量、抗菌药物使用情况、既往史、血管活性药物使用种类及24 h剂量、机械通气情况、血常规、肝功能、肾功能、凝血指标、发病时间、28 d预后结局等相关资料。分别测定2组患者入院即刻(0 h)、入院后6 h和入院后12 h的乳酸值及PPI值,并计算患者0~6 h、0~12 h乳酸清除率。利用COX回归筛选预测脓毒性休克患者预后的独立因素,绘制受试者操作特征曲线(receiver operator characteristic curve,ROC曲线),分析PPI参数联合APACHEⅡ评分预测患者预后的曲线下面积(area under the curve,AUC)。结果:与死亡组患者相比,存活组GCS评分、0 hPPI、6 hPPI、12 hPPI、0~12 h乳酸清除率较高,年龄、SOFA评分、APACHEⅡ评分、0 h乳酸、12 h乳酸较低(均P<0.05);COX回归发现12 hPPI为患者预后的独立预测因子,预测脓毒性休克患者预后AUC为0.945,12 hPPI联合预测APACHEⅡ评分预测患者预后AUC为0.996。结论:入院后12 h PPI联合APACHEⅡ评分对脓毒性休克患者28 d预后具有良好的预测价值。
中图分类号:
巩皓, 迟骋, 张晓霞. 外周灌注指数联合APACHE Ⅱ评分预测脓毒性休克患者28天预后的价值[J]. 内科理论与实践, 2024, 19(03): 174-179.
GONG Hao, CHI Cheng, ZHANG Xiaoxia. Value of peripheral perfusion index combined with APACHEⅡ score in predicting 28-day prognosis of patients with septic shock[J]. Journal of Internal Medicine Concepts & Practice, 2024, 19(03): 174-179.
表1
2组患者基线资料比较[$\bar{x}±s$/n(%)/M(Q1,Q3)]
指标 | 存活组(n=84) | 死亡组(n=116) | t/Z/χ2 | P |
---|---|---|---|---|
年龄(岁) | 57(49,69) | 67(59,77) | -3.753 | <0.001 |
男性[n(%)] | 48(57.1) | 76(65.5) | 1.450 | 0.228 |
GCS(分) | 15(5,15) | 3(3,3) | -9.749 | <0.001 |
SOFA(分) | 6(4,8) | 12(10,14) | -10.351 | <0.001 |
APACHEⅡ(分) | 19(16,24) | 37(32,40) | -11.525 | <0.001 |
体温(℃) | 36(36,39) | 36(36,38) | -0.806 | 0.420 |
脉搏(次/min) | 126±41 | 114±42 | 1.823 | 0.358 |
MAP(mmHg) | 61(51,65) | 61(51,66) | -0.773 | 0.440 |
呼吸(次/min) | 26±8 | 25±8 | 0.818 | 0.701 |
氧合指数(mmHg) | 185±97 | 195±98 | -0.692 | 0.927 |
白细胞(×109/L) | 11(7,16) | 11(7,16) | -0.124 | 0.901 |
血红蛋白(g/L) | 112±40 | 108±39 | 0.686 | 0.982 |
血小板(×109/L) | 165(125,244) | 166(127,236) | -0.288 | 0.773 |
胆红素(μmol/L) | 16(10,27) | 16(11,27) | -0.067 | 0.947 |
ALT(>2 ULN)[n(%)] | 7(17.5) | 33(82.5) | 12.320 | <0.001 |
AST(>2 ULN)[n(%)] | 8(11.4) | 62(88.6) | 41.318 | <0.001 |
肌酐(μmol/L) | 100(65,255) | 99(69,252) | -0.203 | 0.839 |
白介素-6(ng/L) | 104(30,1 878) | 102(38,1 507) | -0.188 | 0.851 |
降钙素原(μg/L) | 1.5(0.3,11.8) | 1.0(0.2,9.3) | -0.594 | 0.552 |
24 h补液量(mL) | 3 386±1 914 | 4 895±2 090 | -5.218 | <0.001 |
24 h去甲肾上腺素剂量(mL) | 0(0,50) | 100(50,200) | -7.774 | <0.001 |
24 h多巴酚丁胺剂量(mL) | 0.5±5.4 | 4.3±14.0 | -2.584 | <0.001 |
24 h多巴胺剂量(mL) | 0(0,50) | 50(0,100) | -4.928 | <0.001 |
PT(s) | 13(11,15) | 14(12,21) | -4.017 | <0.001 |
APTT(s) | 28±3 | 33±6 | -7.303 | <0.001 |
D-二聚体(μg/L) | 1 076(471,3 427) | 1 159(262,5 588) | -0.498 | 0.619 |
感染部位[n(%)] | 0.141 | 0.932 | ||
肺部 | 59(70.2) | 81(69.8) | ||
腹盆腔 | 16(19.0) | 24(20.7) | ||
其他(颅内、肠道、 透析管路、足部) | 9(10.7) | 11(9.5) | ||
发病时间(h) | 8(2,48) | 5(0,20) | -3.442 | <0.001 |
机械通气[n(%)] | 21(25.0) | 91(78.4) | 56.485 | <0.001 |
表4
2组患者特殊资料对比[M(Q1,Q3)]
指标 | 存活组(n=84) | 死亡组(n=116) | Z | P |
---|---|---|---|---|
0 h乳酸(mmol/L) | 2.30(2.00,4.40) | 4.15(3.03,6.40) | -6.278 | <0.001 |
6 h乳酸(mmol/L) | 1.50(1.20,2.30) | 4.15(2.70,7.25) | -7.946 | <0.001 |
12 h乳酸(mmol/L) | 1.20(1.00,1.98) | 2.95(2.20,6.20) | -7.835 | <0.001 |
0 hPPI | 0.84(0.60,1.74) | 0.44(0.27,0.82) | -4.996 | <0.001 |
6 hPPI | 1.92(0.87,2.62) | 0.76(0.42,1.35) | -7.298 | <0.001 |
12 hPPI | 3.24(2.22,4.08) | 0.92(0.46,1.53) | -10.272 | <0.001 |
0~6 h乳酸清除率(%) | 38.10(18.44,54.37) | 15.84(-34.00,38.62) | -4.926 | <0.001 |
0~12 h乳酸清除率(%) | 91.29(62.96,142.86) | 40.37(-27.12,118.59) | -4.450 | <0.001 |
表5
单因素COX回归分析结果
指标 | β | SE | Wald | HR | 95%CI | P |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
年龄 | 0.017 | 0.006 | 9.485 | 1.017 | 1.006~1.029 | 0.002 |
SOFA | 0.248 | 0.025 | 94.654 | 1.281 | 1.219~1.347 | <0.001 |
APACHE Ⅱ | 0.106 | 0.010 | 107.473 | 1.112 | 1.090~1.134 | <0.001 |
24 h补液量 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 36.181 | 1.000 | 1.000~1.000 | <0.001 |
24 h去甲肾上腺素剂量 | 0.007 | 0.001 | 65.880 | 1.007 | 1.005~1.009 | <0.001 |
24 h多巴酚丁胺剂量 | 0.013 | 0.007 | 3.567 | 1.013 | 1.000~1.026 | 0.059 |
24 h多巴胺剂量 | 0.005 | 0.001 | 25.312 | 1.005 | 1.003~1.007 | <0.001 |
0 h乳酸 | 0.082 | 0.023 | 12.436 | 1.085 | 1.037~1.136 | <0.001 |
6 h乳酸 | 0.125 | 0.020 | 40.194 | 1.133 | 1.090~1.178 | <0.001 |
12 h乳酸 | 0.160 | 0.021 | 60.350 | 1.174 | 1.127~1.222 | <0.001 |
0 hPPI | -0.903 | 0.184 | 24.103 | 0.405 | 0.282~0.581 | <0.001 |
6 hPPI | -0.921 | 0.139 | 44.193 | 0.398 | 0.303~0.522 | <0.001 |
12 hPPI | -1.237 | 0.126 | 96.614 | 0.290 | 0.227~0.371 | <0.001 |
0~12 h乳酸清除率 | -0.003 | 0.001 | 9.103 | 0.997 | 0.995~0.999 | 0.003 |
[1] |
Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, et al. The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (sepsis-3)[J]. JAMA, 2016, 315(8):801-810.
doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.0287 pmid: 26903338 |
[2] | Zampieri FG, Bagshaw SM, Semler MW. Fluid therapy for critically ill adults with sepsis[J]. JAMA, 2023, 329(22):1967-1980. |
[3] |
Yajnik V, Maarouf R. Sepsis and the microcirculation: the impact on outcomes[J]. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol, 2022, 35(2):230-235.
doi: 10.1097/ACO.0000000000001098 pmid: 35081058 |
[4] |
De Backer D, Ricottilli F, Ospina-Tascón GA. Septic shock: a microcirculation disease[J]. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol, 2021, 34(2):85-91.
doi: 10.1097/ACO.0000000000000957 pmid: 33577205 |
[5] | Duranteau J, De Backer D, Donadello K, et al. The future of intensive care: the study of the microcirculation will help to guide our therapies[J]. Crit Care, 2023, 27(1):190. |
[6] | Elshal MM, Hasanin AM, Mostafa M, et al. Plethysmographic peripheral perfusion index: could it be a new vital sign?[J]. Front Med (Lausanne), 2021, 8:651909. |
[7] | Coutrot M, Dudoignon E, Joachim J, et al. Perfusion index: physical principles, physiological meanings and clinical implications in anaesthesia and critical care[J]. Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med, 2021, 40(6):100964. |
[8] | Rudd KE, Johnson SC, Agesa KM, et al. Global, regional, and national sepsis incidence and mortality, 1990-2017[J]. Lancet, 2020, 395(10219):200-211. |
[9] | Bauer M, Gerlach H, Vogelmann T, et al. Mortality in sepsis and septic shock in Europe, North America and Australia between 2009 and 2019- results from a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Crit Care, 2020, 24(1):239. |
[10] | Liu YC, Yao Y, Yu MM, et al. Frequency and mortality of sepsis and septic shock in China: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. BMC Infect Dis, 2022, 22(1):564. |
[11] | Quintairos A, Pilcher D, Salluh JIF. ICU scoring systems[J]. Intensive Care Med, 2023, 49(2):223-225. |
[12] | Schertz AR, Lenoir KM, Bertoni AG, et al. Sepsis prediction model for determining sepsis vs SIRS, qSOFA, and SOFA[J]. JAMA Netw Open, 2023, 6(8):e2329729. |
[13] | Qiu X, Lei YP, Zhou RX. SIRS, SOFA, qSOFA, and NEWS in the diagnosis of sepsis and prediction of adverse outcomes[J]. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther, 2023, 21(8):891-900. |
[14] |
Janotka M, Ostadal P. Biochemical markers for clinical monitoring of tissue perfusion[J]. Mol Cell Biochem, 2021, 476(3):1313-1326.
doi: 10.1007/s11010-020-04019-8 pmid: 33387216 |
[15] |
Hariri G, Joffre J, Leblanc G, et al. Narrative review: clinical assessment of peripheral tissue perfusion in septic shock[J]. Ann Intensive Care, 2019, 9(1):37.
doi: 10.1186/s13613-019-0511-1 pmid: 30868286 |
[16] | Guven G, Hilty MP, Ince C. Microcirculation: physiology, pathophysiology, and clinical application[J]. Blood Purif, 2020, 49(1-2):143-150. |
[17] |
Mesquida J. Non-invasive tools for guiding hemodynamic resuscitation in septic shock: the perfusion vs metabolic issue[J]. J Clin Monit Comput, 2021, 35(3):431-433.
doi: 10.1007/s10877-020-00622-8 pmid: 33258027 |
[18] |
Hasanin A, Mukhtar A, Nassar H. Perfusion indices revisited[J]. J Intensive Care, 2017, 5:24.
doi: 10.1186/s40560-017-0220-5 pmid: 28331621 |
[19] |
Lima AP, Beelen P, Bakker J. Use of a peripheral perfusion index derived from the pulse oximetry signal as a noninvasive indicator of perfusion[J]. Crit Care Med, 2002, 30(6):1210-1213.
doi: 10.1097/00003246-200206000-00006 pmid: 12072670 |
[20] | Rasmussen PS, Aasvang EK, Olsen RM, et al. Continuous peripheral perfusion index in patients admitted to hospital wards[J]. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand, 2021, 65(2):257-265. |
[21] | Agerskov M, Thusholdt ANW, Holm-Sørensen H, et al. Association of the intraoperative peripheral perfusion index with postoperative morbidity and mortality in acute surgical patients[J]. Br J Anaesth, 2021, 127(3):396-404. |
[22] |
Ren Y, Zhang L, Xu F, et al. Risk factor analysis and nomogram for predicting in-hospital mortality in ICU patients with sepsis and lung infection[J]. BMC Pulm Med, 2022, 22(1):17.
doi: 10.1186/s12890-021-01809-8 pmid: 34991569 |
[23] | Makkar N, Soneja M, Arora U, et al. Prognostic utility of biomarker levels and clinical severity scoring in sepsis[J]. J Investig Med, 2022, 70(6):1399-1405. |
[1] | 朱维维, 李倩, 吴凡, 翟志敏. 100例骨髓增生异常性肿瘤患者基因突变及其与临床特征间的关系[J]. 诊断学理论与实践, 2024, 23(03): 305-312. |
[2] | 林起柱, 刘红枝, 黄霆峰, 范瑞林, 周伟平, 郑树国, 楼健颖, 曾永毅. 基于肝内胆管癌预后模型筛选辅助化疗受益人群[J]. 外科理论与实践, 2024, 29(02): 170-178. |
[3] | 宋庆杰, 汤娟娟, 赵健全, 宋辉, 杨军. 高脂血症对乙肝相关肝细胞癌病人预后的影响[J]. 外科理论与实践, 2024, 29(02): 143-147. |
[4] | 莫建涛, 曹瑞奇, 任加强, 耿智敏, 仵正, 程亚丽. 意外胆囊癌病人预后列线图模型的构建[J]. 外科理论与实践, 2024, 29(01): 40-45. |
[5] | 王书奎, 顾心亮. tsRNA作为肿瘤诊断和预后标志物的研究进展[J]. 诊断学理论与实践, 2023, 22(05): 413-420. |
[6] | 李岳峰, 洪进, 李志安, 阮国栋, 陈伟国. HER2阳性乳腺癌接受曲妥珠单抗辅助治疗病人预后分析(附1 246例报告)[J]. 外科理论与实践, 2023, 28(05): 469-476. |
[7] | 张兰兰, 杨巧, 聂尊珍, 郭英. 胸膜SMARCA4缺失未分化肿瘤1例报告[J]. 诊断学理论与实践, 2023, 22(04): 389-392. |
[8] | 刘英婷, 易红梅, 王雪, 杨春雪, 欧阳斌燊, 许海敏, 王朝夫. 十二指肠型滤泡性淋巴瘤17例临床病理特征及预后分析[J]. 诊断学理论与实践, 2023, 22(04): 362-368. |
[9] | 李一林, 陈杨, 李艳艳, 冯旭娇, 章程, 李健, 沈琳. 循环肿瘤细胞检测在常见恶性肿瘤精准医学中的应用和展望[J]. 诊断学理论与实践, 2023, 22(04): 332-340. |
[10] | 杨奕, 杨兴霞, 金思励, 张旭, 朱娟英, 陈小松. 术前MRI检查在乳腺导管原位癌保乳手术的临床应用研究[J]. 外科理论与实践, 2023, 28(04): 378-382. |
[11] | 白娅娅, 唐碧雯, 胡月亮, 左君丽, 姚玮艳. 71例嗜酸细胞性胃肠炎的临床特征和预后分析[J]. 内科理论与实践, 2023, 18(04): 270-277. |
[12] | 胡静静, 沈银忠, 刘莉, 卢洪洲. 艾滋病合并播散性非结核分枝杆菌病诊治现状及研究进展[J]. 诊断学理论与实践, 2023, 22(04): 402-406. |
[13] | 徐莉, 高华杰, 杨梦歌, 李悦, 季苏琼. 合并抗TRIM21/Ro52抗体阳性的抗SRP阳性坏死性肌病患者临床特点分析[J]. 诊断学理论与实践, 2023, 22(03): 247-254. |
[14] | 周晓蝶, 陈巍魏, 余波, 王璇, 王建军, 石群立, 饶秋, 鲍炜. 尿路上皮癌的临床病理学特征[J]. 诊断学理论与实践, 2023, 22(03): 292-299. |
[15] | 乔敏捷, 周巍, 陈怡. 血清高速泳动族蛋白B1在评估脓毒症患者预后中的作用[J]. 内科理论与实践, 2023, 18(02): 70-75. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||