Suppr超能文献

评估固定比值和正常下限诊断 COPD 患者的合并症和预后:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Assessment of comorbidities and prognosis in patients with COPD diagnosed with the fixed ratio and the lower limit of normal: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

机构信息

The First Clinical Medical College of the First Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, 730000, China.

Department of Intensive Care Unit, The First Hospital of Lanzhou University, No.199 Donggang West Road, Chengguan District, Lanzhou City, 730000, Gansu Province, China.

出版信息

Respir Res. 2020 Jul 16;21(1):189. doi: 10.1186/s12931-020-01450-9.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Currently, the diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is not uniform, COPD guidelines recommend fixed ratio (FR), whereas ATS and ERS define airflow obstruction based on lower limit of normal (LLN). We aim to determine if there is difference between the two diagnostic criteria for morbidity, mortality, exacerbation.

METHODS

Four databases and all relevant studies from the references were searched from inception to June 25, 2019, to find studies that described the rate of comorbidity, the exacerbation rates, mortality in COPD patients. Data analysis was performed using STATA/SE 14.0 and followed the standard of Cochrane Collaboration. A sensitivity analysis was performed to find the source of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies and 154,447 participants were finally included in this meta-analysis. The 11 cohort studies and 2 cross-sectional studies were all high-quality. Patients with airflow limitation according to either FR or LLN had higher mortality (HR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.14-1.42; HR = 1.83, 95% CI = 1.17-2.86) than those who met neither criteria. When compared with the FR-/LLN- criteria, those who met the FR criteria were more likely to exacerbate (HR  = 1.64, 95% CI = 1.09-2.46; HR  = 1.58, 95% CI = 0.70-3.55). The meta-analysis for comorbidities showed no significant difference between patients who met neither criteria and those who met LLN or FR criteria.

CONCLUSION

The patients with airflow limitations according to FR were more likely to exacerbate than those with LLN only. Patients that met either FR or LLN were more likely to have higher mortality than FR-/LLN-. There was no difference between the FR+/LLN- and FR-/LLN+ groups for the occurrence of comorbidities.

摘要

背景

目前,慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)的诊断并不统一,COPD 指南建议采用固定比值(FR),而 ATS 和 ERS 则根据正常下限(LLN)定义气流受限。我们旨在确定这两种诊断标准在发病率、死亡率和加重率方面是否存在差异。

方法

从 2019 年 6 月 25 日起,我们在四个数据库和所有相关研究的参考文献中进行了搜索,以找到描述 COPD 患者合并症发生率、加重率和死亡率的研究。数据分析使用 STATA/SE 14.0,并遵循 Cochrane 协作组的标准。进行敏感性分析以找出异质性的来源。

结果

共有 13 项研究和 154447 名参与者最终纳入了这项荟萃分析。11 项队列研究和 2 项横断面研究均为高质量研究。根据 FR 或 LLN 有气流受限的患者死亡率高于既不符合 FR 也不符合 LLN 的患者(HR=1.27,95%CI=1.14-1.42;HR=1.83,95%CI=1.17-2.86)。与 FR-/LLN-标准相比,符合 FR 标准的患者更有可能加重(HR=1.64,95%CI=1.09-2.46;HR=1.58,95%CI=0.70-3.55)。对于合并症的荟萃分析显示,既不符合 FR 也不符合 LLN 的患者与符合 LLN 或 FR 标准的患者之间无显著差异。

结论

根据 FR 有气流受限的患者比只有 LLN 的患者更容易加重。符合 FR 或 LLN 的患者比 FR-/LLN-的患者死亡率更高。符合 FR+/LLN-和 FR-/LLN+的患者发生合并症的几率没有差异。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cc73/7364614/9b40c93cdf2c/12931_2020_1450_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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