重症急性胰腺炎患者器官功能衰竭的患病率及其危险因素分析

目的 调查重症急性胰腺炎(SAP)患者器官功能衰竭的患病率,分析其发病的危险因素.方法 回顾性分析2000年3月至2009年10月于山西省晋中市第一人民医院ICU住院的186例SAP患者.SAP诊断依据2006年中华医学会外科学会制订的重症急性胰腺炎诊断标准.收集年龄、性别、病因、并存病、APACHE Ⅱ评分、CECT胰腺坏死程度、CT严重性指数(CTSI)、腹腔间隔窒综合征(ACS)、器官功能衰竭数目与死亡人数等资料.计算器官功能衰竭的患病率和病死率.采用非条件多因素Logistic回归分析方法确定器官功能衰竭的危险因素.结果 186例SAP患者中,96例患器官功能衰竭.96例SAP器官功能衰竭患者中,47例死亡.SAP患者器官功能衰竭患病率与年龄、并存病数目、APACHEⅡ评分、CECT胰腺坏死程度、CTSI和ACS显著相关.器官功能衰竭数目随着年龄、并存病数目、APACHEⅡ评分,CECT胰腺坏死程度增加显著增加.进入非条件多因素Logistic回归方程的因素有年龄、并存病数目、APACHEⅡ评分、CECT胰腺坏死程度、CTSI和ACS.结论 SAP患者器官功能衰竭的患病率为51.6%,与之相关的病死率为49.0%,年龄、并存病数目、APACHEⅡ评分、CECT胰腺坏死程度、CTSI和ACS是SAP患者器官功能衰竭的独立危险因素.

Abstract：

Objective To determine the prevalence of organ failure and its risk factors in patients with severe acute pancreatitis(SAP). Method A retrospective analysis was conducted in 186 patients, who were hospitalized in the intensive care unit of Jinzhong First People's Hospital with SAP between March 2000and October 2009. SAP patients met the diagnostic criteria of SAP set by Surgery Society of Chinese Medical Association in 2006. The variables included age, gender, etiology of SAP, the number of comorbidit, APACHE Ⅱ score, CECT pancreatic necrosis, CT Severity Index ( CTSI ), abdomen compartment syndrome (ACS) ,the number of organ failure and the number of death. The prevalence and mortality of organ failure were calculated. The above-mentioned variables were analyzed by unconditional multivariate logistic regression analysis to determine the independent risk factors for organ failure in SAP. Results Of 186 patients, 96had organ failure. In 96 patients with organ failure, 47 died. There was a significant association between the prevalence of organ failure and age, the number of comorbidit, APACHE Ⅱ score, CECT pancreatic necrosis, CTSI, ACS. An increase in age, the number of comorbidit, APACHE Ⅱ score, CECT pancreatic necrosis correlated with an increase in the number of organ failure. Age, the number of comorbidit, APACHE Ⅱ score,CECT pancreatic necrosis, CTSI and ACS went into the unconditional multivariate logistic regression equation. Conclusions Organ failure occurred in 51.6% of 186 patients with SAP. The mortality of SAP with organ failure is 49.0%. Age, the number of comorbidit, APACHE Ⅱ score, CECT pancreatic necrosis,CTSI and ACS are independent risk factors of organ failure.     

测定血清肌红蛋白水平对西宁地区脓毒症患者病情及预后判断的应用价值

目的 探讨血清肌红蛋白(MYO)对西宁地区脓毒症患者病情及预后判断的应用价值.方法 选择青海大学附属医院急诊重症监护病房(EICU)30例脓毒症患者,24 h内测定血清MYO水平并进行急性生理学与慢性健康状况评分系统Ⅱ(APACHEⅡ)评分.采用集束化治疗策略,判定28 d患者预后.比较存活组与死亡组血中MYO和APACHEⅡ评分,并对MYO和APACHEⅡ评分进行相关性分析;按MYO将患者分为＜500(10例)、500～1 000(14例)、＞1 000 μg/L(6例)3组,比较各组APACHEⅡ评分和死亡例数.结果 30例患者中存活16例,死亡14例.存活组血清MYO和APACHEⅡ评分明显低于死亡组[MYO(μg/L):607.85±499.40比976.21±370.10;APACHEⅡ评分(分):15.50±4.43比18.93±3.63,t1=2.28,t2=2.29,均P<0.05].随着MYO升高,患者死亡例数明显增加(MYO＜500、500～1 000、＞1 000 μg/L组分别为2、7、5例,χ2=5.94,P<0.05),但APACHEⅡ评分差异无统计学意义.相关分析显示,血清MYO与APACHEⅡ评分呈明显正相关(r＝0.407,P<0.05).结论 测定MYO可反映西宁地区脓毒症患者的病情及预后.

Abstract：

Objective To investigate the value of determination of serum myoglobin (MYO) in estimation of the degree of illness and prognosis of patients with sepsis in Xining area. Methods Serum MYO was measured and acute physiological and chronic health estimationⅡ (APACHEⅡ) score was evaluated in 30 cases with sepsis within 24 hours of admission to emergency intensive care unit (EICU), and their correlation was analyzed. The patients were divided into two groups, survival group and death group according to the result within 28 days. The MYO and APACHEⅡ score were analyzed in both groups. All cases were divided into three groups: namely <500 (n=10), 5001 000 (n=14), >1 000 μg/L (n=6) groups, according to serum MYO value, and APACHEⅡ score and dead case were compared among three groups. Results Sixteen patients survived, and 14 patients died. The level of serum MYO and APACHEⅡ score were significantly lower in survival group than death group [MYO (μg/L): 607.85±499.40 vs. 976.21±370.10, APACHEⅡ score: 15.50±4.43 vs. 18.93±3.63, t1=2.28, t2=2.29, both P<0.05]. With the elevation of serum MYO, the dead case was increased in sepsis patients (the dead case in MYO<500, 5001 000, >1 000 μg/L groups was 2, 7 , 5 cases, respectively, χ2=5.94, P<0.05), but there was no difference in APACHEⅡ score among three groups. There was significal positive correlation between serum MYO and APACHEⅡ score (r＝0.407, P<0.05). Conclusion Determination of serum MYO can reflect degree of illness and prognosis of sepsis patients in Xining area.     

血清LGT蛋白质组和急性生理学与慢性健康状况评分系统Ⅱ对危重病患者预后评估的临床意义

目的 探讨危重病患者血清LGT蛋白质组的变化规律,分析其对疾病预后评估的临床意义.方法 采用蛋白芯片技术检测96例危重病患者和30例健康对照者的血清蛋白质组变化.测量LGT蛋白质组的丰度值,结合急性生理学与慢性健康状况评分系统Ⅱ(APACHE Ⅱ)分值,分析LGT蛋白质组对危重病患者预后评估的临床意义.结果 危重病患者血清指纹图谱存在LGT蛋白质组表达谱,APACHE Ⅱ评分≥15分组(35例)LGT蛋白质组丰度[(9.26±7.51)%]明显高于APACHE Ⅱ评分＜15分组(61例)的丰度[(4.19±4.07)%],且两组丰度明显高于健康对照组[(1.52±0.47)%],差异有统计学意义(均P＜0.01);患者LGT蛋白质组丰度与APACHE Ⅱ评分呈明显正相关(r=0.317,P=0.002).死亡组(23例)LGT蛋白质组丰度[(10.14±9.23)%]明显高于存活组(73例)的丰度[(5.83±3.57)%,P＜0.01];且LGT蛋白质组丰度≥5%组的病死率[68.0%(17/25)]明显高于丰度＜5%组[8.5%(6/71),P＜0.01].用LGT蛋白质组预测预后的阳性预测率为68.0%,阴性预测率为91.5%;假阳性率为32.0%,假阴性率为8.5%.结论 LGT蛋白质组与病情的严重程度及预后密切相关,可能成为危重病患者预后评估的重要指标;结合APACHE Ⅱ评分系统可为临床早期评估危重病患者预后提供更可靠的依据.

Abstract：

Objective To investigate the expression of serum lost goodwill target(LGT)proteome,and to analyze its clinical significance in evaluating prognosis of patient with critical illness on the basis of acute physiology and chronic health evaluation Ⅱ(APACHE Ⅱ)score. Methods The serum samples were collected from 96 patients with critical illness and 30 healthy volunteers as healthy control. The expression of serum LGT proteome was detected by surface-enhanced laser desorption/ionization-time of flight-mass spectrometry(SELDI-TOF-MS)protein-chip technology. The abundance value of LGT proteome in patients at admission was measured, and at the same time APACHE Ⅱ score was estimated, in order to analyze its clinical significance in patients with critical illness. Results The amount of LGT proteome in APACHE Ⅱ≥15 group[n= 35,(9.26 ± 7. 51)%]was significantly higher than that of APACHE Ⅱ＜ 15 group[n= 61,(4. 19 ± 4.07)%], and the LGT proteome amount in both groups was significantly higher than that of the healthy control group[(1.52± 0.47)%, both P＜0.01]. Spearman correlation analysis showed that there was significant positive correlation between the abundance of LGT proteome and the APACHE Ⅱ score (r=0. 317, P=0. 002). The abundance of LGT proteome in death group[n=23,(10. 14±9. 23)%]was significantly higher than that in survival group[n=73,(5. 83±3.57)%, P＜0. 01]. The fatality rate of the LGT proteome group with average abundance exceeding 5%[68.0%(17/25)]was significantly higher than that of the LGT proteome group with average abundance lower than 5%[8.5%(6/71), P＜0.01].According to the LGT proteome abundance to evaluate the prognosis of the patients, the positive predict rate was 68.0 %, the negative predict rate was 91.5 %, the false positive rate was 32. 0%, the false negative rate was 8.5%. Conclusion The LGT proteome was intimately correlated with the severity degree of disease condition and prognosis in patients with critical illness. The determination of LGT proteome combined with APACHE Ⅱ score evaluation can probably be an important indicator in evaluating the prognosis of patient with critical illness. Further research on LGT proteome is warranted to facilitate the prognostication and clinical decision-making.     

血清硫化氢浓度与APACHE Ⅲ评分在危重病患者预后中的应用价值

Objective To explore the prognosis value of serum hydrogen sulfide (H2S) concentration and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation HI (APACHE Ⅲ) scores in critically ill patients. Methods The serum H2S levels were measured in 72 cases and 12 controls by spectrophotometry. The APACHE Ⅲ scores of the patients were assessed. The relationship between serum H2S concentration and APACHE H scores and prognosis were analyzed. Results The average serum H2S concentration of the 72 cases was (45. 6 ±17.2) μmol/L The concentration in the survival group was(41. 1 ± 14. 7) μmol/L,and which was significantly lower than in the dead group(62. 8 ±15. 5)μmol/L,(P<0. 01). The average APACHE I score was(43. 6 ±26. 0)of the 72 cases. The APACHE Ⅲ score was(37. 7 ±22. 2) in the survival group,and which was significantly lower than in the dead group (65. 0 ±29. 6) (P <0. 01). The higher of the serum H2S concentration or APACHE Ⅲ scores,the higher mortality of the patients(P <0. 01). Conclusions Serum H2S levels and APACHE Ⅲ scores of critically ill patients have a role in judging the condition and prognosis of the patients.     

血清硫化氢浓度与APACHE Ⅲ评分在危重病患者预后中的应用价值

Objective To explore the prognosis value of serum hydrogen sulfide (H2S) concentration and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation HI (APACHE Ⅲ) scores in critically ill patients. Methods The serum H2S levels were measured in 72 cases and 12 controls by spectrophotometry. The APACHE Ⅲ scores of the patients were assessed. The relationship between serum H2S concentration and APACHE H scores and prognosis were analyzed. Results The average serum H2S concentration of the 72 cases was (45. 6 ±17.2) μmol/L The concentration in the survival group was(41. 1 ± 14. 7) μmol/L,and which was significantly lower than in the dead group(62. 8 ±15. 5)μmol/L,(P<0. 01). The average APACHE I score was(43. 6 ±26. 0)of the 72 cases. The APACHE Ⅲ score was(37. 7 ±22. 2) in the survival group,and which was significantly lower than in the dead group (65. 0 ±29. 6) (P <0. 01). The higher of the serum H2S concentration or APACHE Ⅲ scores,the higher mortality of the patients(P <0. 01). Conclusions Serum H2S levels and APACHE Ⅲ scores of critically ill patients have a role in judging the condition and prognosis of the patients.     

Value of strong ion gap for predicting the severity of acute pancreatitis北大核心CSCD

Objective: To investigate the value of strong ion gap (SIG) in predicting the severity of acute pancreatitis (AP) based on the revised Atlanta classification. Methods: A total of 133 patients with AP admitted from January, 2015 to December, 2016 were enrolled. Of them, there were 55 with mild AP (MAP), 52 with moderately severe AP (MSAP) and 26 with severe AP (SAP). All patients with AP conformed to the diagnostic criteria of Guidelines or Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute Pancreatitis set in 2014 in China. Patients with other underlying diseases that might influence the clinical outcome were excluded, including those with diabetic ketoacidosis, chronic renal failure and other disorders. The changes in blood SIG levels in each group were observed. The correlations between SIG and acute physiology, chronic health evaluation (APACHE) II score, Ranson score and length of hospital stay were analyzed. The receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC) were plotted to determine the efficiency of SIG, Scr, APACHE II score, and Ranson score for predicting the severity of acute pancreatitis. Results: The level of SIG in the SAP group was the highest, followed by the MSAP group and the lowest in the MAP group. There were significant differences in pairwise comparisons (P<0.01). The correlations between SIG and APACHE II score (r=0.567, P<0.01), Ranson score (r=0.502, P<0.01), and length of hospital stay were positive (r=0.589, P<0.01). There was no statistical difference in the area under curve (AUC) between SIG and APACHE II score (0.874±0.029 w.0.895±0.025, P>0.05) and as well as Ranson score (0.874±0.029 vs. 0.890±0.027, P>0.05) for predicting moderately-severe acute pancreatitis, but SIG was superior to Scr (0.874±0.029 vs. 0.735±0.043, P<0.01). There was a significant difference in AUC between SIG and Scr (0.910±0.030 vs. 0.755±0.054, P<0.01), but no statistical differences between SIG and APACHE II score (0.910±0.030 vs. 0.867±0.034, P>0.05) and Ranson score (0.910±0.030 vs. 0.871±0.032, P>0.05) for predicting severe acute pancreatitis. Conclusion: SIG has important clinical significance for predicting the severity of acute pancreatitis. © 2018 Chinese Medical Association. All rights reserved.     

Artificial intelligence computed tomography helps evaluate the severity of COVID-19 patients:A retrospective study

BACKGROUND:Computed tomography(CT)is a noninvasive imaging approach to assist the early diagnosis of pneumonia.However,coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19)shares similar imaging features with other types of pneumonia,which makes differential diagnosis problematic.Artificial intelligence(AI)has been proven successful in the medical imaging field,which has helped disease identification.However,whether AI can be used to identify the severity of COVID-19 is still underdetermined.METHODS:Data were extracted from 140 patients with confirmed COVID-19.The severity of COVID-19 patients(severe vs.non-severe)was defined at admission,according to American Thoracic Society(ATS)guidelines for community-acquired pneumonia(CAP).The AI-CT rating system constructed by Hangzhou YITU Healthcare Technology Co.,Ltd.was used as the analysis tool to analyze chest CT images.RESULTS:A total of 117 diagnosed cases were enrolled,with 40 severe cases and 77 non-severe cases.Severe patients had more dyspnea symptoms on admission(12 vs.3),higher acute physiology and chronic health evaluation(APACHE)II(9 vs.4)and sequential organ failure assessment(SOFA)(3 vs.1)scores,as well as higher CT semiquantitative rating scores(4 vs.1)and AI-CT rating scores than non-severe patients(P<0.001).The AI-CT score was more predictive of the severity of COVID-19(AUC=0.929),and ground-glass opacity(GGO)was more predictive of further intubation and mechanical ventilation(AUC=0.836).Furthermore,the CT semiquantitative score was linearly associated with the AI-CT rating system(Adj R2=75.5%,P<0.001).CONCLUSIONS:AI technology could be used to evaluate disease severity in COVID-19 patients.Although it could not be considered an independent factor,there was no doubt that GGOs displayed more predictive value for further mechanical ventilation.     

危重病严重脓毒症/脓毒性休克患者早期规范化液体复苏治疗——多中心、前瞻性、随机、对照研究

Objective To investigate the effect of early goal-directed therapy (EGDT) on treatment of critical patients with severe sepsis/septic shock.Methods A multi-center, prospective, randomized,controlled study was deployed.Totally 314 critical patients, from eight comprehensive hospitals in Zhejiang Province admitted during January, 2005 to January, 2008, suffering from severe sepsis/septic shock were randomized into conventional treatment group (n=151) and EGDT group (n = 163), the patients of the former underwent fluid resuscitation guided by central venous pressure (CVP), systolic blood pressure (SBP) or mean artery pressure (MAP) and urinary output (UO), and the latter guided by CVP, SBP orMAP and UO plus central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO2).The patients were treated with fluid, blood transfusions and cardiac stimulants in a period of 6 hours after enrollment to reach the goal.The difference of 28-day survival rate and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (primary end points), the length of ICU stay,the duration of mechanical ventilation, duration of antibiotics treatment, incidence of newly occurredinfection, and severity scores (secondary end points) were compared between two groups.Results Finally,a total of 303 patients were eligible to enter this study, with 157 patients in EGDT group and 146 patients in conventional treatment group.In comparison with conventional treatment group, the 28-day survival rate of EGDT group was increased by 17.7% (75.2% vs.57.5%, P=0.001) and the ICU mortality of EGDT group was decreased by 15.7% (35.0% vs.50.7%, P=0.035), the acute physiology and chronic health evaluation Ⅱ(APACHE Ⅱ) score (14.4±8.5 vs.18.0±7.1, P=0.043), multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) score (5.8±3.1 vs.8.9±3.7, P=0.014) and sepsis-related organ failure assessment (SOFA) score (5.6 ± 2.9 vs.10.4 ± 3.7, P = 0.001) were significantly decreased in EGDT group.Meanwhile, a significant shortening of duration of using antibiotics was also found [(13.4±10.0) days vs.(19.7 ± 13.5) days, P = 0.004], with a lowering of incidence of occurrence of new infection (37.6% vs.53.4%, P=0.014).There were no differences in other parameters for secondary end points.Conclusion EGDT improves 28-day survival rate and clinical scores, and it shows beneficial effects on outcome of critical patients with severe sepsis/septic shock.     

危重病严重脓毒症/脓毒性休克患者早期规范化液体复苏治疗——多中心、前瞻性、随机、对照研究

Objective To investigate the effect of early goal-directed therapy (EGDT) on treatment of critical patients with severe sepsis/septic shock.Methods A multi-center, prospective, randomized,controlled study was deployed.Totally 314 critical patients, from eight comprehensive hospitals in Zhejiang Province admitted during January, 2005 to January, 2008, suffering from severe sepsis/septic shock were randomized into conventional treatment group (n=151) and EGDT group (n = 163), the patients of the former underwent fluid resuscitation guided by central venous pressure (CVP), systolic blood pressure (SBP) or mean artery pressure (MAP) and urinary output (UO), and the latter guided by CVP, SBP orMAP and UO plus central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO2).The patients were treated with fluid, blood transfusions and cardiac stimulants in a period of 6 hours after enrollment to reach the goal.The difference of 28-day survival rate and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (primary end points), the length of ICU stay,the duration of mechanical ventilation, duration of antibiotics treatment, incidence of newly occurredinfection, and severity scores (secondary end points) were compared between two groups.Results Finally,a total of 303 patients were eligible to enter this study, with 157 patients in EGDT group and 146 patients in conventional treatment group.In comparison with conventional treatment group, the 28-day survival rate of EGDT group was increased by 17.7% (75.2% vs.57.5%, P=0.001) and the ICU mortality of EGDT group was decreased by 15.7% (35.0% vs.50.7%, P=0.035), the acute physiology and chronic health evaluation Ⅱ(APACHE Ⅱ) score (14.4±8.5 vs.18.0±7.1, P=0.043), multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) score (5.8±3.1 vs.8.9±3.7, P=0.014) and sepsis-related organ failure assessment (SOFA) score (5.6 ± 2.9 vs.10.4 ± 3.7, P = 0.001) were significantly decreased in EGDT group.Meanwhile, a significant shortening of duration of using antibiotics was also found [(13.4±10.0) days vs.(19.7 ± 13.5) days, P = 0.004], with a lowering of incidence of occurrence of new infection (37.6% vs.53.4%, P=0.014).There were no differences in other parameters for secondary end points.Conclusion EGDT improves 28-day survival rate and clinical scores, and it shows beneficial effects on outcome of critical patients with severe sepsis/septic shock.     

腹腔压力与重症急性胰腺炎严重程度的关系

Objective Previous investigations suggest that severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) is one of the main causes of intra-ahdominal pressure (lAP) increase. The aims of this study were, to evaluate the increased IAP in patients with SAP and the correlation between LAP and severity or prognosis. Method Data of 75 SAP patients admitted to Xuan-Wu Hospital of Capital Medical University intensive care unit with SAP from January 2000 to Jan-uary 2008 were collected. All the patients had at least one organ dysfunction, and they were diagnozed with en-hanced CT, lAP were monitored in the 56 patients. The 56 patients were divided into three groups according to IAP, group A (7- 15 mmHg), group B (16-25 mmHg) and group C (26-31 mmHg). Maximal APECHE Ⅱscore, maximal Ranson score, maximal C-response protein (CRP), maximal arterial lactate, maximal creatinine, organ dysfunction, length of stay and mortality were compared. Results The 56 patients (24 male and 32 female)with average age of (52±14.1) years (ranging 21 - 72 years) and average body mass index (BMI) of 28±12.5(ranging 21 - 35) were monitored with IAP. The etiologic causes of SAP were biliary in 27 patients, alcohol in 14cases, hyperlipidemia in 11 cases and idiopathic in 4 cases. The rate of intra-abdominal hypertension was 89% (50/56), and 32% (18/56) patients complicated with abdominal compartment syndrome. There were 22, 26 and 8 patients in the A, B and C groups respectively. With the increasing of IAP, the maximal APACHE Ⅱ, maximal Ranson score, maximal CRP, maximal creatinine, organ dysfunction and mortality were also increased significant-ly. The mortality of the three groups was 13.6% (3/22), 23.1% (6/26) and 62.5% (5/8) respectively (χ2 =7.56, p = 0.023), and the total mortality of the 56 patients was 25%. The hospital stay of the three groups had no significant differenee(F = 2.23,P = 0.117). Conclusions IAP may be one of the markers used to evaluate the severity of SAP, and the monitoring of IAP is useful to assess the prognosis in patients with SAP.     

3种评分方法对急诊室全身炎症反应综合征患者28 d死亡预测能力的比较

目的 比较急性生理学与慢性健康状况评分系统Ⅱ(APACHEⅡ)、简化急性生理学评分Ⅱ(SAPSⅡ)、急诊脓毒症死亡风险评分(MEDS)对急诊抢救室全身炎症反应综合征(SIRS)患者28 d死亡的预测能力.方法 选取2006年12月-2007年9月在首都医科大学附属北京朝阳医院急诊抢救室救治的621例SIRS患者,分别进行APACHEⅡ、SAPSⅡ和MEDS评分,记录28 d转归情况.通过logistic回归分析评价各评分系统分值与预后的关系,确定SIRS患者28 d死亡的独立预测因素,通过受试者工作特征曲线(ROC曲线)对各独立预测因素的预后能力进行比较.结果 621例患者28 d死亡222例.死亡组患者年龄及3种评分系统的分值均显著高于存活组(年龄:73岁比70岁,APACHEⅡ评分:18分比14分,SAPSⅡ评分:36分比24分,MEDS评分:14分比7分,P<0.05或P<0.01).28 d死亡的独立预测因素有APACHEⅡ、SAPSⅡ、MEDS评分,ROC曲线下面积(AUC)分别为0.715、0.774、0.965.与APACHEⅡ评分比较,MEDS评分的预后能力更佳(Z=35.435,P<0.01).结论 对于急诊抢救室SIRS患者,MEDS具有较好的预后价值.     

慢性阻塞性肺疾病和支气管哮喘生理评分对慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重期伴呼吸衰竭患者病情评估的价值研究

目的 探讨慢性阻塞性肺疾病和支气管哮喘生理评分(CAPS)在慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重期(AECOPD)伴呼吸衰竭患者病情评估中的应用价值.方法 采用回顾性分析方法,选择2005年1月至2009年3月收治的82例AECOPD伴呼吸衰竭患者临床资料,分别用CAPS、急性生理学与慢性健康状况评分系统(APACHE Ⅱ和APACHE Ⅲ)对存活和死亡患者进行评分,然后进行统计学处理与分析.结果 死亡组19例患者CAPS、APACHE Ⅱ、APACHE Ⅲ评分、有创通气时间、住ICU时间分别为(34.21±9.89)分、(22.53±7.49)分、(75.11±18.07)分、(25.06±24.64)d、(32.42±25.49)d;存活组63例患者分别为(27.41±8.15)分、(18.65±5.34)分、(64.11±15.92)分、(5.23±5.50)d、(12.51±20.70)d,两组间比较差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05或P<0.01).CAPS、APACHE Ⅱ和APACHE Ⅲ评分的受试者工作特征曲线(ROC曲线)下面积分别是0.712(P=0.005)、0.654(P=0.043)和0.655(P=0.042);CAPS评分为30.5分时约登指数最大,为0.435.CAPS评分与病死率呈正相关,且超过30分时病死率明显增加.结论 CAPS对AECOPD伴呼吸衰竭患者的病情评估与预后判断具有良好的效果,简单、依从性好,且优于APACHE Ⅱ和APACHE Ⅲ评分.     

简化急性生理评分Ⅱ与牛津急性疾病严重程度评分对重症监护病房患者短期预后的预测价值比较

目的比较简化急性生理评分（SAPS）Ⅱ与牛津急性疾病严重程度评分（OASIS）对重症监护病房（ICU）患者短期预后预测价值的差异,以期为实际临床工作中疾病严重程度评分系统的选择提供一定的研究证据。 方法从美国重症监护数据库（MIMIC-Ⅲ）（2001年至2012年）提取成年（年龄≥18岁）ICU患者的基本信息、生命体征以及相关实验室检验指标等,按各评分系统的要求分别计算SAPS Ⅱ与OASIS评分,以ICU内病死为首要结局指标,绘制接受者操作特征（ROC）曲线,计算并比较曲线下面积（AUC）的差异。 结果共有38 468例ICU成年患者被纳入最终分析,其中男性患者占56.61%,年龄中位数为65.72岁,ICU病死率为8.28%（3185/38 468）。与存活患者相比,ICU死亡患者具有更高的SAPS Ⅱ（存活者 vs死亡者：32分 vs 51分,H=3473.792,P<0.001）与OASIS评分（存活者 vs死亡者：30分vs 41分,H=3422.382,P<0.001）以及更高的机械通气比例（存活者 vs死亡者：22.76% vs 73.59%,χ²=3831.865,P<0.001）。ROC曲线分析显示,SAPS Ⅱ评分与OASIS评分的AUC分别为0.8147（95%CI：0.8068~0.8226）和0.8123（95%CI：0.8042~0.8204）,Hanley-McNeil检验显示二者AUC差异无统计学意义（Z=0.686,P=0.4928）。 结论SAPS Ⅱ评分与OASIS评分对成年ICU患者短期预后的预测价值并无显著差异,更加简便的OASIS评分有望成为ICU疾病严重程度评分的另一选择。     

急诊脓毒症病死率评分在急诊脓毒症患者中的应用

目的 验证急诊脓毒症病死率评分(mortality in emergency department sepsis score,MEDS)对于急诊脓毒症患者病情评估的应用价值,并将其对患者28 d病死率的预测效果进行比较。方法 对2009年9月至2010年9月首都医科大学附属北京朝阳医院急诊抢救室救治的613例脓毒症患者进行前瞻性研究。记录患者的证急诊脓毒症病死率评分(MEDS)、急性生理学与慢性健康情况评价系统Ⅱ（acute physiology and chronic health evaluation,APACHEⅡ）、简化急性生理学评分Ⅱ（simplified acute physiology score,SAPSⅡ）和改良早期预警评分(modified early warning score,MEWS)。随访28 d转归。根据患者MEDS评分分值将死亡风险分级：极低危险组(0 ～4分)、低度危险组（5～7分）、中度危险组（8～12分）、高度危险组（13 ～ 15分）、极高危险组（大于15分）,各组间实际病死率采用X2检验比较。再对生存组和死亡组进行比较,通过logistic 回归分析确定预测死亡的独立因素,应用受试者工作特征曲线（ROC曲线）比较MEDS与APACHEⅡ,SAPSⅡ和MEWS评分对预后的预测能力。结果 失访10例,完整记录603例。MEDS评分患者各组实际病死率分别为0％,7.7％,18.5％,46.7％,63％,各组间实际病死率有显著区别。生存组（440例）与死亡组（163例）之间年龄和四种评分差异均具有统计学意义(P＜0.01)。MEDS,APACHEⅡ,SAPSⅡ、MEWS评分均是预测死亡的独立因素,ROC曲线下的面积(AUC)分别为0.767,0.743,0.741和0.636。结论 MEDS评分可以对脓毒症患者死亡风险进行分级,在患者28 d病死率方面有较好的预测能力,适用于急诊脓毒症患者。     

MODS病情严重度评分及预后王宝恩名医工作室学术园地评估系统对MODS患者预后预测价值的

目的 验证多器官功能障碍综合征病情严重度评分及预后评估系统（MODS评分系统）对MODS患者病情严重程度的辨别力及预后预测的准确性;同时与APACHEⅡ评分系统、Marshall评分系统相比较,判断三者在预测多器官功能障碍综合征患者预后方面的关联性及准确性.方法 前瞻性的收集MODS患者183例,利用MODS评分系统判断每例患者器官功能障碍种类及数目并计算出每例患者MODS评分及死亡概率;利用APACHEⅡ评分系统计算每例患者的APACHEⅡ评分和死亡危险性;利用Marshall评分系统计算每例患者的Marshall评分;比较死亡组患者与存活组患者MODS评分有无差异;应用接受者操作特征曲线下面积（AURCC）,判断该评分系统在预测患者转归方面的准确性,同时与APACHEⅡ评分系统、Marshall评分系统相比较,判断三者的关系.结果 ①183例患者病死率为58.4%.存活组MODS评分均值为6.05,标准差为2.87;死亡组MODS评分为10.12,标准差为3.60.两组比较差异有显著性（P〈0.05）.②在预测病死率方面：MODS评分系统死亡概率与APACHEⅡ评分系统死亡危险性的ROC曲线下面积分别为0.831±0.031、0.820±0.031;MODS评分、APACHEⅡ评分以及Marshall评分的ROC曲线下面积分别为0.805±0.032、0.809±0.032、0.649±0.041.结论 ①死亡组与存活组MODS评分差异有统计学意义,且随着MODS评分的增加,病死率增加,MODS评分系统能较好地反映患者病情严重程度.②MODS评分系统中死亡概率计算方程及APACHEⅡ评分系统中死亡危险性计算公式对MODS患者病死率的预测准确性较高,MODS评分系统预测病死率的准确性优于APACHEⅡ评分系统;MODS评分系统、APACHEⅡ评分系统、Marshall评分系统三者所计算出来的评分区分存活与死亡的辨别力较好,但前两者准确性更高.     

两种评分系统对慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重期患者病情严重程度及预后评估的研究

目的探讨慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重期(acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease,AECOPD)患者急性生理学与慢性健康状况评分Ⅱ(acute physiology and chronic health evaluationⅡ,APACHEⅡ)及慢性阻塞性肺疾病和支气管哮喘生理评分(COPD and asthma physiology score,CAPS)与病情严重程度及预后的关系及评估价值。方法回顾性分析2013年1月至2018年11月于北京积水潭医院呼吸与危重症医学科住院治疗的AECOPD患者239例。根据住院期间有无机械通气分为无机械通气组和机械通气组;根据预后分为存活组和死亡组。住院后计算APACHEⅡ评分及CAPS评分。进行两种评分系统的不同组间比较;进行两种评分系统与住院期间需要行机械通气的可能性及疾病转归的相关性分析;评估入院时两种评分系统对住院期间需要行机械通气的可能性及死亡发生风险的预测价值。结果①AECOPD无机械通气组患者两种评分均明显低于机械通气组[APACHEⅡ分别为(12.09±3.48)分、(18.74±4.06)分,CAPS分别为(18.70±5.70)分、(26.35±7.87)分,P<0.05];②AECOPD存活组患者两种评分均明显低于死亡组[APACHEⅡ分别为(13.88±4.06)分、(20.86±4.43)分,CAPS分别为(19.66±5.37)分、(32.84±6.74)分,P<0.05];③Spearman相关分析显示,AECOPD患者APACHEⅡ评分、CAPS评分与住院期间需要行机械通气的可能性均呈显著相关(r值分别为0.694、0.525,P<0.05);④Spearman相关分析显示,AECOPD患者APACHEⅡ评分、CAPS评分与死亡发生风险均呈显著相关(r值分别为0.554、0.612,P<0.05)。结论AECOPD患者入院时APACHEⅡ评分及CAPS评分与病情严重程度及预后密切相关;对于评估患者病情严重程度、住院期间需要行机械通气的可能性,APACHEⅡ评分优于CAPS评分;两者对于AECOPD患者预后的预测价值基本相当,均具有较高的预测价值。     

心源性休克患者院内死亡危险因素分析

目的:探讨影响重症监护室心源性休克（cardiogenic shock, CS）患者死亡的危险因素。方法:采用回顾性队列研究，收集eICU合作研究数据库v2.0（The eICU Collaborative Research Database V2.0, eICU-CRD v2.0）截止2018年5月发布的来自美国多家医院组成的重症患者临床数据。选择诊断为CS的患者，根据院内死亡情况分为生存组与死亡组，收集入选患者年龄、性别、体质量质量指数（body mass index, BMI），急性生理学与慢性健康状况评分Ⅳ（acute physiology and chronic health status score Ⅳ, APACH-Ⅳ）、首次简化急性生理学评分Ⅱ（simplified acute physiology score Ⅱ, SAPS-Ⅱ）、种族、重症监护室（intensive care unit, ICU）类型、临床合并症、入院诊断、血流动力学参数、重要治疗、临床结局等。对两组年龄、性别、BMI，APACH-Ⅳ、SAPS-Ⅱ进行倾向性匹配，对匹配结果采用多因素Logistic回归分析死亡的危险因素。受试者特征工作（receiver operator characteristic, ROC）曲线评估其临床效用。结果:最终纳入33 998例患者，其中院内生存组27 596例，死亡6 402例（占18,83%），倾向性匹配6 301对；匹配后两组在急性肾衰竭发生率(29.33% vs. 31.82%)、机械通气时间[(6.05±5.77) d vs. (4.97±5.11) d]、ICU时间[(101.35±154.59) h vs. (110.15±175.58) h]、总住院时间[(12.73±10.53) d vs. (9.53±10.35) d]上差异具有统计学意义（ P<0.01）；多变量Logistic回归分析显示：年龄、BMI、APACH-Ⅳ、SAPS-Ⅱ、部分合并症（除外起搏器植入术后）、入院诊断（心搏骤停、急性心梗、心力衰竭、呼吸系统疾病及消化道出血）及部分治疗措施[无创机械通气、血液净化、冠状动脉旁路移植（coronary artery bypass grafting，CABG）手术、血管活性药物应用]是CS患者院内死亡的危险因素（ P<0.05）；心脏辅助装置（ventricular assist device, VAD）植入是CS患者院内死亡的保护性治疗措施（ HR[95% CI]: 0.49[0.24~0.98], P=0.045）；多变量ROC曲线分析结果显示：模型可较好的预测ICU病死率[AUC=0.80(95% CI: 0.784~0.816), P<0.01]及在院病死率[AUC=0.779(95% CI: 0.765-0.793), P<0.01]。 结论:在ICU的CS患者中，年龄、BMI、APACH-Ⅳ、SAPS-Ⅱ、部分合并症（除外起搏器植入术后）、入院诊断（心搏骤停、急性心梗、心力衰竭、呼吸系统疾病及消化道出血）及部分治疗措施（无创机械通气、血液净化、CABG手术、血管活性药物应用）是CS患者院内死亡的独立危险因素，VAD植入可能改善CS患者院内病死率。相关因素的ROC曲线显示模式可以较好的预测临床结局。     

改良APACHEⅢ预测泌尿外科急诊手术并发症的应用价值

目的评估改良APACHEⅢ预测泌尿外科急诊手术并发症的应用价值。方法将我院泌尿外科急诊住院手术患者39例分为并发症组（n=7）,无并发症组（n=32）,分别用APACHEⅢ、改良A-PACHEⅡ、改良APACHEⅢ进行评分,评分与泌尿外科急诊手术患者术后并发症的相关性进行比较,并分别用24h内的APACHEⅡ、APACHEⅢ、改良APACHEⅢ受试者工作特征曲线（ROC）,计算ROC曲线下面积,衡量各种评分系统对患者预后预测判别的能力。并通过ROC曲线加以证实。结果三者评分差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）,随着分值的升高,并发症率亦呈现上升趋势。各评分法ROC曲线下面积均大于0．7,从大到小依次为：改良APACHEⅢ（0．878）改良APACHEⅡ（0．805）与APACHEⅢ（0．809）。结论改良APACHEⅢ评分对泌尿外科急诊手术患者的预后评估是可行的,较其他两种评分方法更能反应并发症的发生几率。     

APACHEⅡ评分和SAPSⅡ评分预测危重症患者病死率的应用价值分析

目的 探讨APACHEⅡ评分、SAPSⅡ评分在预测危重症患者病死率的准确性及意义.方法 回顾性分析近18个月收住重症监护病房（ICU）治疗的患者192例,搜集入住ICU后第一个24h内的生命体征、血常规、肝肾功能、电解质及血气分析检查资料,作为计算APACHEⅡ评分和SAPSⅡ评分的指标,并根据公式计算出预测病死率.结果 192例危重症患者中有38例死亡,病死率19.8%.APACHEⅡ评分、SAPSⅡ评分的预测病死率分别为37.1 %±26.9%、34.7%±28.3%均大于患者的实际病死率（P 〈0.05）.两者的敏感性均大于90%.APACHEⅡ评分0～10、11～20;SAPSⅡ评分0～20三个评分段,均没有病人实际死亡,特异性为0;两者特异性随着评分的增高而增高.结论 APACHEⅡ评分、SAPSⅡ评分对低评分阶段和总的预测病死率偏高,对高评分阶段患者的预后存在一定价值.     

MEWS、REMS、APAC H EⅡ、SAPSⅡ4种评分系统在老年危重患者中的相关性研究及对预后的评估

目的：探讨改良早期预警（modified early warning score,MEWS）评分、快速急诊内科（rapid emergency medicine score,REMS）评分、急性生理学及慢性健康状况Ⅱ（acute physiology and chronic health evaluations Ⅱ, APACHEⅡ）评分、简化急性生理Ⅱ（simplified acute physiology socre Ⅱ,SAPSⅡ）评分在老年危重患者中的相关性及对预后评估的准确性。方法分析入选的150例老年危重患者4种评分情况,统计患者治疗后28天病死率,比较死亡组和生存组间各评分之间是否存在差异。并分析4种评分间的相关性及利用受试者工作特征（ROC）曲线探究4种评分对患者预后的评估能力。结果4种评分在死亡组与存活组间差异具有统计学意义。4种评分间均互呈正相关关系。通过 ROC曲线分析显示：4种评分对患者预后均具有一定评估能力。APACHEⅡ评分的评估准确性优于SAPSⅡ、REMS评分、MEWS评分。SAPSⅡ评分评估准确性同样优于 REMS评分和 MEWS评分。REMS评分和MEWS评分评估准确性相当。结论 4种评分系统对急诊老年患者预后均具有评估意义。急诊早期 MEWS评分、REMS评分与 ICU病房 APACHEⅡ评分、SAPSⅡ评分间对患者预后评估具有一致性。急诊早期可行 MEWS评分、REMS评分评估患者病情,对可能预后不良患者早期 ICU病房进行分诊,进一步根据不同情况行 APACHEⅡ评分和SAPSⅡ评分动态观察、综合评估,同时各评分系统间相互结合与补充,适时采取临床相关干预措施,调整诊疗方案,挽救患者生命。