时间加权平均静脉血糖水平对重症急性肾损伤患者短期预后的影响

目的 探讨时间加权平均静脉血糖(time-weighted average glucose,TWAG)对重症急性肾损伤(acute renal injury,AKI)患者短期预后的影响。方法 本研究资料来源于medical information mart for intensive care (MIMIC)-Ⅲ数据库,首次入重症监护室(intensive care unit,ICU)并诊断为重症AKI的患者为研究对象。采用Postgre SQL11提取感兴趣数据。入ICU期间TWAG值用于评估患者血糖水平,以7.8 mmol/L为分界线分为TWAG≥7.8 mmol/L组和TWAG <7.8 mmol/L组,以院内死亡、30 d死亡为本研究的主要研究终点。并予以倾向性评分匹配、逆概率加权和Logistic回归模型分析TWAG与重症AKI短期预后的关系。结果 本研究共纳入5848例重症AKI患者,院内病死率为24.0%,30 d病死率为25.6%。经单因素、多因素回归分析,发现在倾向性评分匹配调整前、倾向性评分匹配后以及协变量调整倾向性评分后,TWAG≥7.8 mmol/L组短期...     

喂养不耐受风险评估表在神经内科ICU老年脑卒中病人中应用的有效性

目的:探讨采用喂养不耐受风险评估量表评估神经内科重症监护室(ICU)老年脑卒中病人肠内营养不耐受(FI)风险的有效性。方法:回顾性分析2018年6月—2020年12月入住医院神经内科ICU的345例老年脑卒中病人的资料,按照是否发生FI分为观察组(n=119例)和对照组(n=226),采用单因素、多因素Logistic回归分析喂养不耐受风险评估量表中各因素与FI的相关性,比较两组的量表风险评分和风险分级。结果:单因素分析显示,两组在长期卧床、长期禁食或全肠外营养、急性生理学及慢性健康状况评分系统Ⅱ(APACHEⅡ)、格拉斯哥昏迷评分(GCS)、白蛋白、血糖、重症病人急性胃肠损伤分级(AGI)和使用机械通气上差异有统计学意义;多因素Logistic回归分析显示,长期卧床(≥3 d)、APACHEⅡ评分≥20分、GCS评分3~5分、白蛋白≤25 g/L、血糖≥23 mmol/L、AGIⅢ级、使用机械通气是FI发生的独立危险因素。与对照组相比,观察组喂养不耐受风险评分、高风险等级比例显著较高,低风险比例显著较低(P<0.05)。结论:喂养不耐受风险评估量表对神经内科ICU老年脑卒中病人喂养不耐受发生风险的评估具有临床意义。     

肺结核合并呼吸衰竭患者的预后影响因素分析

目的探讨影响肺结核合并呼吸衰竭患者预后的相关因素。方法收集2017年4月至2019年6月该院收治的肺结核并发呼吸衰竭患者共98例,按照患者转归情况分为死亡组和生存组,采用logistic回归模型分析与肺结核合并呼吸衰竭患者预后密切相关的影响因素。结果 98例患者按照转归情况分为生存组73例,死亡组25例,病死率25.51%;单因素分析结果显示,吸烟史、有多器官功能障碍综合征(MODS)、Ⅱ类呼吸衰竭、急性生理及慢性健康评分表(APACHEⅡ)评分≥25分是影响肺结核合并呼吸衰竭患者预后的相关因素(P0.05);logistic多因素分析模型显示,APACHEⅡ评分≥25分、Ⅱ型呼吸衰竭、MODS为肺结核合并呼吸衰竭患者预后独立危险因素(P0.05),其中APACHEⅡ评分≥25分且未入住ICU治疗患者的病死率为入ICU治疗的3.500倍(95%CI:1.826～4.966),差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论 APACHEⅡ评分≥25分、Ⅱ型呼吸衰竭、发生MODS是肺结核合并呼吸衰竭患者死亡的独立危险因素,且对于APACHEⅡ评分≥25分的患者早期转入重症医学科进行积极干预,可改善患者预后。     

查尔森合并症指数评分系统评价基础疾病对危重患者预后的影响

目的 探讨查尔森合并症指数(WIC)评分系统评价基础疾病对于重症监护病房(ICU)危重患者28 d死亡风险的影响.方法 单中心、回顾性分析上海长征医院2009年1月至2011年10月ICU 406例危重病患者的临床信息,按照28 d治疗转归分为死亡组(104例)和存活组(302例);记录一般临床资料;计算入院时WIC评分和入院24h急性生理学与慢性健康状况评分系统Ⅱ(APACHEⅡ)评分.采用logistic回归分析影响患者预后的因素.结果 与存活组比较,死亡组患者年龄、WIC评分、APACHEⅡ评分、严重脓毒症的比例及主要致病因素如肺部感染的比例均较高,多发伤的比例较低.单因素分析显示,年龄、WIC评分、APACHEⅡ评分、肺部感染、多发伤、严重脓毒症与患者28 d预后相关.多因素logistic回归分析提示,WIC评分[优势比(OR)=1.538,95％可信区间(95％CI)为1.265 ～ 1.869,P=0.000]、APACHEⅡ评分(OR=1.193,95％CI为1.137～1.252,P=0.000)、肺部感染(OR=0.546,95％CI为0.304～0.982,P=0.043)、严重脓毒症(OR=0.178,95％CI为0.098 ～ 0.323,P=0.000)与患者28 d预后独立相关.WIC评分、APACHEⅡ评分及二者合并后预测预后的受试者工作特征曲线(ROC曲线)下面积[AUC(95％CI)]依次为0.657 (0.592～ 0.722)、0.790(0.739 ～ 0.841)、0.821(0.772 ～ 0.869).结论 WIC评分系统可以较好地评价ICU危重患者的28 d预后.     

慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重期患者急性胃肠损伤发生率及其预后研究

目的探讨慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重期（AECOPD）患者急性胃肠损伤（AGI）的发生率及其对预后的评价。 方法分析2009年1月至2015年12月在马鞍山十七冶医院重症医学科收治的146例AECOPD患者的临床资料,进行AGI诊断和分级,依据28 d内存活情况,将发生AGI的患者分为存活组（72例）和死亡组（17例）,比较两组患者年龄、性别、合并症以及急性病生理学和长期健康评价（APACHEⅡ）评分、临床肺部感染评分（CPIS）。依据APACHEⅡ评分分值将AECOPD患者分成四组,轻度组（39例）、重度组（53例）、危重度组（35例）和极危重度组（19例）;另依据CPIS评分分值分成三组,轻度组（71例）、中度组（53例）和重度组（22例）,比较各分组间AGI发生率和28 dAGI病死率。同时对不同AGI分级患者的28 d病死率也进行比较。 结果146例AECOPD患者中有89例发生AGI,发生率为60.96%,其中Ⅰ级53例（59.55%）、Ⅱ级19例（21.35%）、Ⅲ级11例（12.36%）、Ⅳ级6例（6.74%）。AECOPD合并AGI患者存活组和死亡组的年龄、性别、合并症等比较,差异均无统计学意义（P均> 0.05）;但存活组患者APACHEⅡ评分[（20 ± 5）分vs.（28 ± 5）分,t = 5.833,P< 0.001]、CPIS评分[（3.5 ± 1.5）分vs.（5.4 ± 1.6）分,t = 4.568,P< 0.001]均显著低于死亡组。APACHEⅡ评分分组中AGI发生率和28 dAGI病死率各组比较,差异均有统计学意义（χ² = 27.369、47.838,P均< 0.001）;而CPIS评分分组中AGI发生率和28 dAGI病死率各组比较,差异也均有统计学意义（χ² = 24.025、47.453,P均< 0.001）。不同AGI分级患者28 d病死率比较（1.89%、15.79%、63.64%和100.00%）,差异有统计学意义（χ² = 49.829,P < 0.05）。 结论AECOPD患者AGI发生率高,且AGI分级越高,预后越差,应当重视AECOPD患者AGI的诊治。     

鼻胃管减压联合鼻肠管营养支持对重症神经系统疾病患者预后的影响

目的评估胃管减压联合鼻肠管营养支持对重症神经系统疾病患者预后的影响。方法将90例患者分为鼻肠管组和鼻胃管组,每组各45例。收集两组患者入组时急性病生理学和长期健康评价(APACHE)Ⅱ评分及格拉斯哥昏迷评分(GCS);收集每例患者治疗后1、7、14 d白蛋白水平及肠内营养热卡;记录并比较各组患者并发症的发生情况及机械通气时间、ICU住院时间、总住院时间、病死率情况。结果鼻肠管组及鼻胃管组患者APACHEⅡ评分[(20.5±6.4)分vs.(20.3±6.9)分]、GCS评分[(6.1±1.3)分vs.(5.5±1.5)分]间比较,差异均无统计学意义(t=0.140、0.270,P=0.888、0.787)。鼻肠管组患者治疗后14 d的血白蛋白水平[(37.5±2.8)g/L vs.(34.2±5.6)g/L]及获得肠内营养热卡[(2 147±625)kcal vs.(1 791±768)kcal]较鼻胃管组显著升高(t=3.548、2.412,P=0.001、0.017)。同时,鼻肠管组患者吸入性肺炎(5/45 vs.20/45)、营养液潴留(3/45 vs.19/45)的发生率显著低于鼻胃管组患者(χ~2=12.462、15.401,P=0.001、0.001)。而两组患者在机械通气时间(t=1.149,P=0.253)、ICU住院时间(t=0.763,P=0.447)、总住院时间(t=1.251,P=0.214)及病死率(χ~2=0.403,P=0.525)的比较,差异均无统计学意义。结论对于重症神经系统患者早期进行胃管减压联合鼻空肠管营养更能有效改善其营养状况、减少并发症的发生,对改善患者预后有一定的临床价值。     

ICU患者红细胞输注后血清血红素水平对其预后的预测价值分析

目的探讨重症监护室(ICU)患者红细胞(RBC)输注后血清血红素水平对其预后的预测价值。方法选取2017年6月至2019年12月绵阳市第三人民医院ICU收治的138例需输血治疗的患者,根据30d预后结果分为生存组及死亡组。两组患者一般资料及血液学指标进行比较,采用多因素Logistic回归模型分析影响患者预后的相关因素,使用受试者工作特征曲线(ROC曲线)对其预测价值进行分析。结果 138例患者中共有35例患者在30d内发生死亡,ICU输血患者30d病死率为25.36%。死亡组患者天门冬氨酸氨基转移酶、丙氨酸氨基转移酶、总胆红素、空腹血糖、C反应蛋白、D-二聚体、血红素水平及急性生理学与慢性健康状况评分系统Ⅱ(APACHE-Ⅱ)评分高于生存组,血小板水平低于生存组,差异有统计学意义(均P0.05)。血红素和APACHE-Ⅱ评分是影响输血疗效的独立危险因素(P0.05)。结论血清血红素水平是RBC输注后的ICU患者预后的独立危险因素,并对其预后具有较高的预测价值,值得临床推广应用。     

血乳酸辅助APACHEⅡ判断ICU老年重症感染患者预后的临床意义

目的研究血乳酸(LAC)辅助急性生理与慢性健康评分Ⅱ(APACHEⅡ)判断重症监护病房(ICU)老年重症感染患者预后的临床意义。方法回顾性分析我院2017年7月-2018年7月ICU病房收治的100例老年重症感染患者,依据患者预后情况分为预后良好(存活,n=82)与预后不良组(死亡,n=18)。收集两组治疗前基础资料信息,包括性别、年龄、感染部位、饮酒史、吸烟史、APACHEⅡ评分及LAC水平,再经过多因素Logistic回归分析,明确影响ICU老年重症感染患者预后的危险因素。结果预后不良组年龄、APACHEⅡ评分及LAC水平显著高于预后良好组(P0.05)。经ROC分析证实,年龄、APACHEⅡ评分及LAC水平均能用于ICU老年重症感染患者预后的预测,曲线下面积分别为0.878、0.886、0.884(均P0.05)。经多因素Logistic回归分析证实,年龄≥73岁、APACHEⅡ评分≥13分、LAC≥9.145mmol/L为ICU老年重症感染患者预后不良的危险因素(均P0.05)。结论 ICU老年重症感染患者预后受到年龄、APACHEⅡ评分、LAC的影响,临床医师应对其予以密切的关注,对患者的预后评估具有重要意义。     

重症监护病房患者发生多重耐药鲍曼不动杆菌血流感染影响预后的危险因素分析

目的分析重症监护病房(ICU)患者发生多重耐药鲍曼不动杆菌(MDR-AB)血流感染的临床特征、影响预后的相关危险因素。方法收集2012年1月-2017年12月四川省人民医院ICU中血培养为MDR-AB血流感染患者的临床资料。根据28d预后分为死亡组和生存组,采用logistic回归分析患者基础资料、住院情况等导致预后差异的危险因素。结果共收集ICU MDR-AB血流感染43例,男28例,女15例,多为继发于呼吸道感染病例。同时合并基础疾病≥3个、呼吸系统基础疾病、心血管基础疾病、气管插管、高急性生理与慢性健康评分(APACHEⅡ评分)是ICU患者发生MDR-AB血流感染预后不良的危险因素。合并基础疾病≥3个、气管插管、高APACHEⅡ评分是MDR-AB血流感染预后不良的独立危险因素。结论 ICU MDR-AB血流感染与基础疾病存在较大相关性,气管插管增加患者死亡风险。     

再入重症监护室患者的预后多因素分析研究

目的 明确重症患者再入ICU后的预后及与之相关的临床因素.方法 收集2009年1月14日至2011年12月29日,收入复旦大学附属中山医院ICU进行治疗的2 459例患者作为研究对象.所有患者按是否再入ICU分为未再入组(A组)和再入组(B).所有治疗都按照复旦大学附属中山医院重症医学科的诊疗常规及相关临床指南,在专职ICU主治医师的参与下进行.结果 再入ICU延长了患者的住院天数和住ICU时间,也是患者ICU病死率升高的独立预后因素(HR=2.246,95％CI 1.27-3.973,P=0.005).进一步以再入ICU患者为研究对象,发现与再入ICU患者ICU病死率升高密切相关的因素包括首次入ICU时的APACHEⅡ评分≥16以及非外科患者.结论 再入ICU是重症患者不良预后的相关因素.而造成再入ICU患者ICU病死率较高的主要原因是与患者首次入ICU的基础情况密切相关,包括疾病严重程度和是否手术患者.     

A comparison of early gastric and post-pyloric feeding in critically ill patients: a meta-analysis

Objective To investigate the potential beneficial and adverse effects of early post-pyloric feeding compared with gastric feeding in critically ill adult patients with no evidence of impaired gastric emptying.Design Randomised controlled studies comparing gastric and post-pyloric feeding in critically ill adult patients from Cochrane Controlled Trial Register (2005 issue 3), EMBASE and MEDLINE databases (1966 to 1 October 2005) without any language restriction were included. Two reviewers reviewed the quality of the studies and performed data extraction independently.Measurements and results Eleven randomised controlled studies with a total of 637 critically ill adult patients were considered. The mortality (relative risk [RR] 1.01, 95% CI 0.76–1.36, p = 0.93; I ² = 0%) and risk of aspiration or pneumonia (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.91–1.80, p = 0.15; I ² = 0%) were not significantly different between patients treated with gastric or post-pyloric feeding. The effect of post-pyloric feeding on the risk of pneumonia or aspiration was similar when studies were stratified intothose with and those without the use of concurrent gastric decompression (RR ratio 0.95, 95% CI 0.48–1.91, p = 0.89). The risk of diarrhoea and the length of intensive care unit stay (weighted mean difference in days –1.46, 95% CI –3.74 to 0.82,p = 0.21; I ² = 24.6%) were not statistically different. The gastric feeding group had a much lower risk of experiencing feeding tube placement difficulties or blockage (0 vs 9.6%, RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.04–0.44, p = 0.001; I ² = 0%).Conclusions Early use of post-pyloric feeding instead of gastric feeding in critically ill adult patients with no evidence of impaired gastric emptying was not associated with significant clinical benefits.This study was solely funded by the Department of Intensive Care, Royal Perth Hospital. No financial support was received for this study from pharmaceutical companies or other private companies in the form of grants and awards.     

ICU不同进食方式的患者误吸发生现状及特征比较

目的 了解不同进食方式的ICU患者显性误吸和微误吸的发生现状,并比较其特征,为针对性开展误吸预防提供依据。方法 该研究为前瞻性研究,采用便利抽样法,选取2020年1月—2021年4月入住苏州市某三级甲等医院ICU的患者作为调查对象,根据患者进食方式分为经口进食组、经胃管喂养组及经幽门后喂养组,观察并比较不同进食方式患者显性误吸及微误吸的发生情况及特征。 结果 共纳入721例患者。经口进食组、经胃管喂养组及经幽门后喂养组显性误吸发生率分别为8.10%、15.26%、11.26%;微误吸发生率分别为76.95%、77.11%、58.28%。3组显性误吸发生特征比较,经胃管喂养组首次误吸发生时间早于经幽门后喂养组;经口进食组显性误吸发生次数多于经胃管喂养组和经幽门后喂养组;经胃管喂养组和经幽门后喂养组意识障碍、胃潴留、腹内高压、吞咽障碍、机械通气患者的比例高于经口进食组,差异均具有统计学意义（Bonferroni法,均P<0.017）。3组微误吸发生特征比较,经口进食组呕吐患者的比例高于经幽门后喂养组;经幽门后喂养组急性生理与慢性健康状况评分高于经口进食组、入住ICU时间长于经口进食组;经胃管喂养组和经幽门后喂养组意识障碍、机械通气患者的比例高于经口进食组,差异均具有统计学意义（Bonferroni法,均P<0.017）。结论 经胃管喂养的ICU患者显性误吸、微误吸的发生率较高,不同进食方式的ICU患者误吸发生特征有明显差异。临床护士应根据患者的特征、进食方式,及早采取个性化的预防措施。     

Gastric versus post-pyloric feeding: a systematic review

Background  

Our objective was to evaluate the impact of gastric versus post-pyloric feeding on the incidence of pneumonia, caloric intake, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), and mortality in critically ill and injured ICU patients.     

A randomised controlled comparison of early post-pyloric versus early gastric feeding to meet nutritional targets in ventilated intensive care patients

Introduction  

To compare outcomes from early post-pyloric to gastric feeding in ventilated, critically ill patients in a medical intensive care unit (ICU).     

Upper digestive intolerance during enteral nutrition in critically ill patients: frequency, risk factors, and complications

OBJECTIVE: To study the frequency of and risk factors for increased gastric aspirate volume (GAV) and upper digestive intolerance and their complications during enteral nutrition (EN) in critically ill patients. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Intensive care unit (ICU) in a general hospital. PATIENTS: A total of 153 patients with nasogastric tube feeding. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Upper digestive intolerance was considered when GAV was between 150 and 500 mL at two consecutive measurements, when it was >500 mL, or when vomiting occurred. Forty-nine patients (32%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 25%-42%) presented increased GAV after a median EN duration of 2 days (range, 1-16 days), and 70 patients (46%; 95% CI, 38%-54%) presented upper digestive intolerance. Independent risk factors for high GAV were GAV >20 mL before the start of EN (odds ratio [OR], 2.16; 95% CI, 1.11-4.18; p =.02), GAV >100 mL during EN (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.01-2.19; p <.05), sedation during EN (OR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.17-2.71; p =.007), use of catecholamines during EN (OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.21-2.70; p =.004). Complications related to high GAV were a lower feed intake (15 +/- 7 vs. 19 +/- 8 kcal/kg/day; p =.0004) and vomiting (53% vs. 23%; p =.0002). Complications related to upper digestive intolerance were the development of pneumonia (43% vs. 24%; p =.01), a longer ICU stay (23 +/- 21 vs. 15 +/- 16 days; p =.007), and a higher ICU mortality (41% vs. 25%; p =.03), even after adjustment for Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.04-2.10; p =.028). CONCLUSION: In ICU patients receiving nasogastric tube feeding, high gastric aspirate volume was frequent, occurred early, and was more frequent in patients with sedation or catecholamines. High gastric aspirate volume was an early marker of upper digestive intolerance, which was associated with a higher incidence of nosocomial pneumonia, a longer ICU stay, and a higher ICU mortality.     

Feed the ICU patient 'gastric' first,and go post-pyloric only in case of failure

In a randomised trial comparing early enteral feeding by gastric and post-pyloric routes, White and colleagues have shown that gastric feeding is possible and efficient in the vast majority of critically ill patients. But the authors' conclusion that gastric is equivalent to post-pyloric is true in only the least severe patients. Given the extra workload and costs, post-pyloric is now clearly indicated in case of gastric feeding failure.     

Evaluation of a technique for blind placement of post-pyloric feeding tubes in intensive care: application in patients with gastric ileus

Objective To evaluate a blind ‘active’ technique for the bedside placement of post-pyloric enteral feeding tubes in a critically ill population with proven gastric ileus. Design and setting An open study to evaluate the success rate and duration of the technique in cardiothoracic and general intensive care units of a tertiary referral hospital. Patients 20 consecutive, ventilated patients requiring enteral nutrition, where feeding had failed via the gastric route. Interventions Previously described insertion technique—the Corpak 10-10-10 protocol—for post-pyloric enteral feeding tube placement, modified after 20 min if placement had not been achieved, by insufflation of air into the stomach to promote pyloric opening. Measurements and results A standard protocol and a set method to identify final tube position were used in each case. In 90% (18/20) of cases tubes were placed on the first attempt, with an additional tube being successfully placed on the second attempt. The median time for tube placement was 18 min (range 3–55 min). In 20% (4/20) insufflation of air was required to aid trans-pyloric passage. Conclusions The previously described technique, modified by insufflation of air into the stomach in prolonged attempts to achieve trans-pyloric passage, proved to be an effective and cost efficient method to place post-pyloric enteral feeding tubes. This technique, even in the presence of gastric ileus, could be incorporated by all critical care facilities, without the need for any additional equipment or costs. This approach avoids the costs of additional equipment, time-delays and necessity to transfer the patient from the ICU for the more traditional techniques of endoscopy and radiographic screening.     

Small bowel feeding and risk of pneumonia in adult critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

Introduction

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of small bowel feeding compared with gastric feeding on the frequency of pneumonia and other patient-important outcomes in critically ill patients.

Methods

We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, clinicaltrials.gov and personal files from 1980 to Dec 2012, and conferences and proceedings from 1993 to Dec 2012 for randomized trials of adult critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) comparing small bowel feeding to gastric feeding, and evaluating risk of pneumonia, mortality, length of ICU stay, achievement of caloric requirements, duration of mechanical ventilation, vomiting, and aspiration. Independently, in duplicate, we abstracted trial characteristics, outcomes and risk of bias.

Results

We included 19 trials with 1394 patients. Small bowel feeding compared to gastric feeding was associated with reduced risk of pneumonia (risk ratio [RR] 0.70; 95% CI, 0.55, 0.90; P = 0.004; I² = 0%) and ventilator-associated pneumonia (RR 0.68; 95% CI 0.53, 0.89; P = 0.005; I² = 0%), with no difference in mortality (RR 1.08; 95% CI 0.90, 1.29; P = 0.43; I² = 0%), length of ICU stay (WMD -0.57; 95%CI -1.79, 0.66; P = 0.37; I² = 0%), duration of mechanical ventilation (WMD -1.01; 95%CI -3.37, 1.35; P = 0.40; I² = 17%), gastrointestinal bleeding (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.56, 1.42; P = 0.64; I² = 0%), aspiration (RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.52, 1.65; P = 0.79; I² = 0%), and vomiting (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.53, 1.54; P = 0.72; I² = 57%). The overall quality of evidence was low for pneumonia outcome.

Conclusions

Small bowel feeding, in comparison with gastric feeding, reduces the risk of pneumonia in critically ill patients without affecting mortality, length of ICU stay or duration of mechanical ventilation. These observations are limited by variation in pneumonia definition, imprecision, risk of bias and small sample size of individual trials.