Suppr超能文献

社区获得性和医院获得性脓毒症患者的特征及预后

Characteristics and outcomes of patients with community-acquired and hospital-acquired sepsis.

作者信息

Westphal Glauco Adrieno, Pereira Aline Braz, Fachin Silvia Maria, Barreto Ana Carolina Caldara, Bornschein Ana Carolina Gern Junqueira, Caldeira Filho Milton, Koenig Álvaro

机构信息

Centro Hospitalar Unimed Joinville - Joinville (SC), Brasil.

Universidade da Região de Joinville - Joinville (SC), Brasil.

出版信息

Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2019 Jan-Mar;31(1):71-78. doi: 10.5935/0103-507X.20190013.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with community-acquired and hospital-acquired sepsis.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study that included all patients with a diagnosis of sepsis detected between January 2010 and December 2015 at a private hospital in southern Brazil. Outcomes (mortality, intensive care unit and hospital lengths of stay) were measured by analyzing electronic records.

RESULTS

There were 543 hospitalized patients with a diagnosis of sepsis, with a frequency of 90.5 (85 to 105) cases/year. Of these, 319 (58%) cases were classified as hospital-acquired sepsis. This group exhibited more severe disease and had a larger number of organ dysfunctions, with higher hospital [8 (8 - 10) versus 23 (20 - 27) days; p < 0.001] and intensive care unit [5 (4 - 7) versus 8.5 (7 - 10); p < 0.001] lengths of stay and higher in-hospital mortality (30.7% versus 15.6%; p < 0.001) than those with community-acquired sepsis. After adjusting for age, APACHE II scores, and hemodynamic and respiratory dysfunction, hospital-acquired sepsis remained associated with increased mortality (OR 1.96; 95%CI 1.15 - 3.32, p = 0.013).

CONCLUSION

The present results contribute to the definition of the epidemiological profile of sepsis in the sample studied, in which hospital-acquired sepsis was more severe and was associated with higher mortality.

摘要

目的

比较社区获得性脓毒症和医院获得性脓毒症患者的临床特征及预后。

方法

这是一项回顾性队列研究,纳入了2010年1月至2015年12月间在巴西南部一家私立医院确诊为脓毒症的所有患者。通过分析电子记录来衡量预后(死亡率、重症监护病房住院时间和医院住院时间)。

结果

共有543例住院患者被诊断为脓毒症,年发病频率为90.5(85至105)例。其中,319例(58%)被归类为医院获得性脓毒症。该组疾病更为严重,器官功能障碍数量更多,医院住院时间[8(8 - 10)天对23(20 - 27)天;p < 0.001]和重症监护病房住院时间[5(4 - 7)天对8.5(7 - 10)天;p < 0.001]更长,院内死亡率更高(30.7%对15.6%;p < 0.001),高于社区获得性脓毒症患者。在调整年龄、急性生理与慢性健康状况评分系统II(APACHE II)评分以及血流动力学和呼吸功能障碍后,医院获得性脓毒症仍与死亡率增加相关(比值比1.96;95%置信区间1.15 - 3.32,p = 0.013)。

结论

本研究结果有助于明确所研究样本中脓毒症的流行病学特征,其中医院获得性脓毒症更为严重,且与更高的死亡率相关。

相似文献

1
Characteristics and outcomes of patients with community-acquired and hospital-acquired sepsis.
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2019 Jan-Mar;31(1):71-78. doi: 10.5935/0103-507X.20190013.
3
Brazilian Sepsis Epidemiological Study (BASES study).
Crit Care. 2004 Aug;8(4):R251-60. doi: 10.1186/cc2892. Epub 2004 Jun 15.
8
Comparative analysis of survival between elderly and non-elderly severe sepsis and septic shock resuscitated patients.
Einstein (Sao Paulo). 2015 Jul-Sep;13(3):357-63. doi: 10.1590/S1679-45082015AO3313. Epub 2015 Aug 21.
9
The Epidemiology of Sepsis in Chinese ICUs: A National Cross-Sectional Survey.
Crit Care Med. 2020 Mar;48(3):e209-e218. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000004155.

引用本文的文献

2
Comparison of outcomes of community-acquired sepsis and hospital-acquired sepsis in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2024 Dec 16;87(3):1569-1575. doi: 10.1097/MS9.0000000000002773. eCollection 2025 Mar.
4
Sepsis survivors readmitted within 30 days: outcomes of a single-center retrospective study.
Crit Care Sci. 2024 Dec 16;36:e20240116en. doi: 10.62675/2965-2774.20240116-en. eCollection 2024.
5
Antimicrobial Resistance Profile of Zoonotic Clinically Relevant WHO Priority Pathogens.
Pathogens. 2024 Nov 15;13(11):1006. doi: 10.3390/pathogens13111006.
7
From immune dysregulation to organ dysfunction: understanding the enigma of Sepsis.
Front Microbiol. 2024 Aug 26;15:1415274. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2024.1415274. eCollection 2024.
8
Hospital Acquired Sepsis, Disease Prevalence, and Recent Advances in Sepsis Mitigation.
Pathogens. 2024 May 30;13(6):461. doi: 10.3390/pathogens13060461.

本文引用的文献

1
The epidemiology of sepsis in Brazilian intensive care units (the Sepsis PREvalence Assessment Database, SPREAD): an observational study.
Lancet Infect Dis. 2017 Nov;17(11):1180-1189. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(17)30322-5. Epub 2017 Aug 17.
2
Time to Treatment and Mortality during Mandated Emergency Care for Sepsis.
N Engl J Med. 2017 Jun 8;376(23):2235-2244. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1703058. Epub 2017 May 21.
3
Early Liberal Fluids for Sepsis Patients Are Harmful.
Crit Care Med. 2016 Dec;44(12):2258-2262. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000001829.
4
The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3).
JAMA. 2016 Feb 23;315(8):801-10. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.0287.
5
Community-onset sepsis and its public health burden: protocol of a systematic review.
Syst Rev. 2015 Sep 23;4:119. doi: 10.1186/s13643-015-0103-6.
6
Systematic screening is essential for early diagnosis of severe sepsis and septic shock.
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2015 Apr-Jun;27(2):96-101. doi: 10.5935/0103-507X.20150018.
8
A positive fluid balance is an independent prognostic factor in patients with sepsis.
Crit Care. 2015 Jun 15;19(1):251. doi: 10.1186/s13054-015-0970-1.
9
Trial of early, goal-directed resuscitation for septic shock.
N Engl J Med. 2015 Apr 2;372(14):1301-11. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1500896. Epub 2015 Mar 17.

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