Zhang Zheng-Yun, Chen Rui, Zhou Zun-Qiang, Peng Cheng-Hong, Zhou Guang-Wen
From the Department of Surgery, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai, China.
Exp Clin Transplant. 2015 Feb;13(1):41-5. doi: 10.6002/ect.2013.0289. Epub 2014 Apr 28.
We hypothesized that the combination of APACHE II and Model for End-Stage Liver Disease systems would work satisfactorily in patients admitted to intensive care unit after living-donor liver transplant.
Data were retrospectively collected from the database of our surgical team. The study included 38 patients (hepatitis B virus cirrhosis, 47.4%; hepatocellular carcinoma, 28.9%; other diseases, 23.7%). Laboratory values were obtained. Vital signs, Glasgow Coma scale scores, and urine output were abstracted. Variables included age, sex, acute physiology score, APACHE II score, APACHE II-predicted intensive care unit and hospital mortality, predicted length of intensive care unit, and hospital stay. Patients' actual length of intensive care unit and hospital stays, intensive care unit and hospital discharge status, and discharge location were recorded. Standardized mortality ratios were calculated. Discrimination and calibration of APACHE II were assessed. All patients were divided into 3 groups: Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score: >25, 18 to 25, and <18. Predicted hospital mortality was calculated and compared.
Mean APACHE II scores of survivors and non-survivors were 13.03 and 23.67. Mean risk of death was 7.05% and 25.07%. APACHE II scores and risk of death between survivors and non-survivors was significantly different (P <.001). The cutoff value of APACHE II score and Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score in the receiving operating characteristic curve was 20 and 25. Patients with APACHE II scores greater than 20 or Model for End-Stage Liver Disease scores greater than 25 had higher predicted hospital mortality after living-donor liver transplant.
The modified APACHE II model provides an accurate prognosis of patients receiving a living-donor liver transplant. The combined application of Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score and APACHE II score can improve the predictive accuracy.
我们假设急性生理与慢性健康状况评分系统(APACHE II)和终末期肝病模型(Model for End-Stage Liver Disease)相结合,在活体肝移植后入住重症监护病房的患者中能发挥令人满意的作用。
数据从我们手术团队的数据库中回顾性收集。该研究纳入了38例患者(乙型肝炎病毒肝硬化患者占47.4%;肝细胞癌患者占28.9%;其他疾病患者占23.7%)。获取了实验室检查值。提取了生命体征、格拉斯哥昏迷量表评分和尿量。变量包括年龄、性别、急性生理评分、APACHE II评分、APACHE II预测的重症监护病房及医院死亡率、预测的重症监护病房住院时长及住院时间。记录患者实际的重症监护病房及住院时间、重症监护病房及医院出院状态以及出院地点。计算标准化死亡率。评估APACHE II的辨别力和校准度。所有患者被分为3组:终末期肝病模型评分:>25、18至25和<18。计算并比较预测的医院死亡率。
存活者和非存活者的平均APACHE II评分分别为13.03和23.67。平均死亡风险分别为7.05%和25.07%。存活者和非存活者之间的APACHE II评分及死亡风险有显著差异(P<.001)。在受试者工作特征曲线中,APACHE II评分和终末期肝病模型评分的截断值分别为20和25。APACHE II评分大于20或终末期肝病模型评分大于25的患者,活体肝移植后预测的医院死亡率更高。
改良的APACHE II模型能准确预测接受活体肝移植患者的预后。终末期肝病模型评分与APACHE II评分联合应用可提高预测准确性。