Suppr超能文献

两种急性肾衰竭严重程度评分与危重症通用评分系统的比较。

Comparison of 2 acute renal failure severity scores to general scoring systems in the critically ill.

作者信息

Ahlström Annika, Kuitunen Anne, Peltonen Seija, Hynninen Marja, Tallgren Minna, Aaltonen Janne, Pettilä Ville

机构信息

Intensive Care Unit, Department of Surgery, Division of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.

出版信息

Am J Kidney Dis. 2006 Aug;48(2):262-8. doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2006.04.086.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Several proposed definitions for acute renal failure (ARF) exist, but little is known of their significance in clinical practice. We evaluated the ability to predict hospital mortality in 2 ARF-specific severity-of-illness scoring methods, the Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss, End-Stage Renal Disease (RIFLE) score and the score presented by Bellomo et al in 2001.

METHODS

The study included 668 consecutive patients with 694 treatment episodes treated in 2 intensive care units (ICUs) in a university hospital within 11 months. ARF prevalence was classified according to the RIFLE and Bellomo scores. As references, we evaluated 2 general severity-of-illness scoring systems, the admission Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores.

RESULTS

Admission SOFA scores and maximum RIFLE scores for the first 3 days in the ICU were independent predictors of hospital mortality by means of forward conditional logistic regression. In receiver operating characteristic analysis, SOFA and APACHE II scores performed better than ARF-specific scores, and discriminative powers for hospital mortality were only moderate for the RIFLE and Bellomo scores: areas under the curve were 0.653 (95% confidence interval, 0.588 to 0.719) and 0.587 (95% confidence interval, 0.514 to 0.660), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Neither of the ARF-specific scoring methods presented good discriminative power regarding hospital mortality. However, maximum RIFLE score for the first 3 days in the ICU was found to be an independent predictor of hospital mortality, along with admission SOFA score.

摘要

背景

目前存在几种关于急性肾衰竭(ARF)的定义,但对于它们在临床实践中的意义知之甚少。我们评估了两种ARF特异性疾病严重程度评分方法预测医院死亡率的能力,即风险、损伤、衰竭、丧失、终末期肾病(RIFLE)评分以及贝洛莫等人在2001年提出的评分。

方法

该研究纳入了一所大学医院的两个重症监护病房(ICU)在11个月内连续收治的668例患者的694次治疗事件。根据RIFLE和贝洛莫评分对ARF患病率进行分类。作为对照,我们评估了两种一般疾病严重程度评分系统,即入院时的急性生理与慢性健康状况评估II(APACHE II)和序贯器官衰竭评估(SOFA)评分。

结果

通过向前条件逻辑回归分析,ICU前3天的入院SOFA评分和最高RIFLE评分是医院死亡率的独立预测因素。在受试者工作特征分析中,SOFA和APACHE II评分的表现优于ARF特异性评分,RIFLE和贝洛莫评分对医院死亡率的判别能力仅为中等:曲线下面积分别为0.653(95%置信区间,0.588至0.719)和0.587(95%置信区间,0.514至0.660)。

结论

两种ARF特异性评分方法在预测医院死亡率方面均未表现出良好的判别能力。然而,发现ICU前3天的最高RIFLE评分与入院SOFA评分一样,是医院死亡率的独立预测因素。

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