Bossink A W, Groeneveld A B, Koffeman G I, Becker A
Medical Intensive Care Unit, Free University Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Crit Care Med. 2001 Jan;29(1):25-31. doi: 10.1097/00003246-200101000-00006.
Shock in the course of fever is likely caused by septic shock. Because septic shock carries a high mortality rate, early recognition could benefit the patient. We tried to predict the development of shock in medical patients with fever and a clinical infection, on the basis of clinical and microbiological information, and to evaluate the role therein of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria: abnormal body temperature, tachycardia, tachypnea, and abnormal white blood cell counts.
Prospective observational study.
Department of Internal Medicine at a university hospital.
Patients were 212 consecutive medical patients with newly onset fever (temperature, >38.0 degrees C axillary or >38.3 degrees C rectally) and a clinical source of infection.
Of the 212 patients enrolled, 14 developed shock (i.e., a decrease in systolic arterial blood pressure of >40 mm Hg) during a maximum follow-up period of 7 days after inclusion. In univariate analyses, advanced age, prior urogenital disease, an abdominal source, nosocomial infections, and bacteremia predisposed patients to shock (p < .05). For clinical variables, obtained daily for 2 days after inclusion, a low performance (p < .001), the peak respiratory rate (p < .05), the peak heart rate (p < .05), the nadir score on the Glasgow Coma Scale (p < .005), the peak and nadir white blood cell counts (p < .005), and the nadir albumin (p < .01) and peak creatinine concentrations in blood (p < .001) predicted shock development. In multivariate analysis, the presence of bacteremia, the peak respiratory rate, the nadir Glasgow Coma Scale score, and the peak white blood cell count positively and the peak erythrocyte sedimentation rate negatively contributed to prediction of shock development. In contrast, SIRS had less predictive value, mainly because of lack of predictive value of peak heart rate and temperature in multivariate models.
In febrile medical patients with a clinical infection, the development of shock involves an interaction between circulating microbial products and the host response, which can be recognized clinically by variables easily obtained at the bedside and partly different from the set used to define SIRS.
发热过程中的休克可能由脓毒性休克引起。由于脓毒性休克死亡率高,早期识别对患者有益。我们试图根据临床和微生物学信息,预测发热且有临床感染的内科患者休克的发生,并评估全身炎症反应综合征(SIRS)标准(体温异常、心动过速、呼吸急促和白细胞计数异常)在其中的作用。
前瞻性观察性研究。
一所大学医院的内科。
连续212例新发发热(腋温>38.0℃或直肠温度>38.3℃)且有临床感染源的内科患者。
纳入的212例患者中,14例在纳入后最长7天的随访期内发生休克(即收缩压下降>40mmHg)。单因素分析中,高龄、既往泌尿生殖系统疾病、腹部感染源、医院感染和菌血症使患者易发生休克(p<0.05)。对于纳入后2天每天获取的临床变量,低效能(p<0.001)、最高呼吸频率(p<0.05)、最高心率(p<0.05)、格拉斯哥昏迷量表最低评分(p<0.005)、最高和最低白细胞计数(p<0.005)以及最低白蛋白(p<0.01)和血肌酐最高浓度(p<0.001)可预测休克的发生。多因素分析中,菌血症的存在、最高呼吸频率、格拉斯哥昏迷量表最低评分和最高白细胞计数对休克发生的预测有正向作用,而最高红细胞沉降率对休克发生的预测有负向作用。相比之下,SIRS的预测价值较小,主要是因为多因素模型中最高心率和体温缺乏预测价值。
在有临床感染的发热内科患者中,休克的发生涉及循环微生物产物与宿主反应之间的相互作用,这可通过床边易于获取的变量在临床上识别,且部分不同于用于定义SIRS的指标。