Suppr超能文献

老年住院患者急性肾损伤的预后

Prognosis of ARF in hospitalized elderly patients.

作者信息

Sesso Ricardo, Roque Alexandre, Vicioso Belinda, Stella Sergio

机构信息

Federal University of São Paulo, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Division of Nephrology, São Paulo, Brazil.

出版信息

Am J Kidney Dis. 2004 Sep;44(3):410-9.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Differentiation between hospital-acquired acute renal failure (ARF) and community-acquired ARF may have epidemiological implications that lead to different prognoses in hospitalized patients. Such a comparison has not yet been made among elderly individuals.

METHODS

We performed a 3-year prospective study in a tertiary referral hospital of 325 patients aged 60 years or older who presented with ARF. Patients were divided into 2 groups; those with hospital-acquired ARF (n = 154) and community-acquired ARF (n = 171), and were followed up in relation to mortality. Multiple logistic regression was used in the analysis.

RESULTS

The overall mortality rate in this elderly population was 54%; 59% for the group with hospital-acquired ARF and 41% for the group with community-acquired ARF (P < 0.001). Groups differed (P < 0.01) in relation to cause of ARF, preexisting diseases, organ failure, sepsis, and performance of dialysis, among other factors. The adjusted mortality risk for the group with hospital-acquired ARF was 2.23 times greater than for the group with community-acquired ARF (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.21 to 4.08). In the group with hospital-acquired ARF, factors associated with mortality were neurological failure (odds ratio [OR], 2.97; 95% CI, 1.17 to 7.60), hematologic failure (OR, 4.30; 95% CI, 1.63 to 11.34), and oliguria (OR, 12.14; 95% CI, 4.62 to 31.87). In the group with community-acquired ARF, significant factors were neoplasia, cardiac disease, hepatic disease, cardiovascular failure, oliguria, and sepsis.

CONCLUSION

Differentiation between hospital-acquired ARF and community-acquired ARF is important in determining the prognosis of ARF in the elderly. Mortality risk factors are different in these 2 groups, and knowledge of their characteristics may allow better management of such patients.

摘要

背景

医院获得性急性肾衰竭(ARF)与社区获得性ARF的鉴别可能具有流行病学意义,这会导致住院患者出现不同的预后。在老年个体中尚未进行过此类比较。

方法

我们在一家三级转诊医院对325例60岁及以上出现ARF的患者进行了为期3年的前瞻性研究。患者被分为两组,即医院获得性ARF组(n = 154)和社区获得性ARF组(n = 171),并对其死亡率进行随访。分析采用多因素逻辑回归。

结果

该老年人群的总体死亡率为54%;医院获得性ARF组为59%,社区获得性ARF组为41%(P < 0.001)。两组在ARF病因、基础疾病、器官衰竭、败血症及透析情况等因素方面存在差异(P < 0.01)。医院获得性ARF组的校正死亡风险比社区获得性ARF组高2.23倍(95%置信区间[CI],1.21至4.08)。在医院获得性ARF组中,与死亡率相关的因素有神经功能衰竭(比值比[OR],2.97;95%CI,1.17至7.60)、血液系统功能衰竭(OR,4.30;95%CI,1.63至11.34)和少尿(OR,12.14;95%CI,4.62至31.87)。在社区获得性ARF组中,显著因素有肿瘤、心脏病、肝病、心血管功能衰竭、少尿和败血症。

结论

区分医院获得性ARF和社区获得性ARF对于确定老年患者ARF的预后很重要。这两组的死亡风险因素不同,了解其特征可能有助于更好地管理此类患者。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验