Ho Kwok M, Harahsheh Yusrah
1Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Royal Perth Hospital, 4th Floor, North Block, Wellington Street, Perth, Western Australia 6000 Australia.
2School of Population and Global Health, University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia Australia.
J Intensive Care. 2018 Jan 19;6:3. doi: 10.1186/s40560-018-0274-z. eCollection 2018.
It is uncertain whether we can predict contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) after CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA). This study compared the ability of a validated CIN prediction score with the Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI) in predicting CIN after CTPA.
This cohort study involved critically ill adult patients who required a CTPA to exclude acute pulmonary embolism (PE). Patients with end-stage renal failure requiring dialysis were excluded. CIN was defined as an elevation in plasma creatinine concentrations > 44.2μmol/l (or 0.5 mg/dl) within 48 h after CTPA.
Of the 137 patients included, 77 (51%) were hypotensive, 54 (39%) required inotropic support, and 68 (50%) were mechanically ventilated prior to the CTPA. Acute PE was confirmed in 21 patients (15%) with 14 (10%) being bilateral. CIN occurred in 56 patients (41%) with 35 (26%) required dialysis subsequent to CTPA. The CIN prediction score had a good ability to discriminate between patients with and without developing CIN (Area under the receiver-operating-characteristic (AUROC) curve 0.864, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.795-0.916) and requiring subsequent dialysis (AUROC 0.897, 95% CI 0.833-0.942) and was better than the PESI in predicting both outcomes (AUROC 0.731, 95% CI 0.649-0.804 and 0.775, 95% CI 0.696-0.842, respectively). A CIN risk score > 10 and 12 had an 82.1 and 85.7% sensitivity and 81.5 and 78.4% specificity to predict subsequent CIN and dialysis, respectively. The CIN prediction model tended to underestimate the observed risks of dialysis, but this was improved after recalibrating the slope and intercept of the original prediction equation.
The CIN prediction score had a good ability to discriminate between critically ill patients with and without developing CIN after CTPA. Used together for critically ill patients with suspected acute PE, the CIN prediction score and PESI may be useful to inform clinicians when the benefits of a CTPA scan will outweigh its potential harms.
在CT肺动脉造影(CTPA)后我们是否能够预测对比剂肾病(CIN)尚不确定。本研究比较了经过验证的CIN预测评分与肺栓塞严重程度指数(PESI)预测CTPA后发生CIN的能力。
这项队列研究纳入了需要进行CTPA以排除急性肺栓塞(PE)的危重症成年患者。排除了需要透析的终末期肾衰竭患者。CIN定义为CTPA后48小时内血浆肌酐浓度升高>44.2μmol/l(或0.5mg/dl)。
在纳入的137例患者中,77例(51%)有低血压,54例(39%)需要使用血管活性药物支持,68例(50%)在CTPA前接受机械通气。21例患者(15%)确诊为急性PE,其中14例(10%)为双侧病变。56例患者(41%)发生CIN,其中35例(26%)在CTPA后需要透析。CIN预测评分在区分发生和未发生CIN的患者方面具有良好能力(受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUROC)为0.864,95%置信区间[CI]为0.795 - 0.916)以及区分需要后续透析的患者方面(AUROC为0.897,95%CI为0.833 - 0.942),并且在预测这两种结局方面均优于PESI(AUROC分别为0.731,95%CI为0.649 - 0.804和0.775,95%CI为0.696 - 0.842)。CIN风险评分>10和12时,预测后续CIN和透析的敏感性分别为82.1%和85.7%,特异性分别为81.5%和78.4%。CIN预测模型往往低估了观察到的透析风险,但在重新校准原始预测方程的斜率和截距后这种情况得到了改善。
CIN预测评分在区分CTPA后发生和未发生CIN的危重症患者方面具有良好能力。对于疑似急性PE的危重症患者,联合使用CIN预测评分和PESI可能有助于告知临床医生CTPA扫描的获益何时会超过其潜在危害。