Whitney Jane E, Feng Rui, Koterba Natalka, Chen Fang, Bush Jenny, Graham Kathryn, Lacey Simon F, Melenhorst Jan Joseph, Parikh Samir M, Weiss Scott L, Yehya Nadir
Division of Medical Critical Care, Department of Pediatrics, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology & Informatics, Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA.
Crit Care Explor. 2020 Dec 4;2(12):e0295. doi: 10.1097/CCE.0000000000000295. eCollection 2020 Dec.
Acute respiratory distress syndrome occurring in the setting of direct versus indirect lung injury may reflect different pathobiologies amenable to different treatment strategies. We sought to test whether a panel of plasma biomarkers differed between children with sepsis-associated direct versus indirect acute respiratory distress syndrome. We hypothesized that a biomarker profile indicative of endothelial activation would be associated with indirect acute respiratory distress syndrome.
Observational cohort.
Academic PICU.
Patients less than 18 years old with sepsis-associated direct (pneumonia, = 52) or indirect (extrapulmonary sepsis, = 46) acute respiratory distress syndrome.
None.
Of 58 biomarkers examined, 33 differed by acute respiratory distress syndrome subtype. We used classification and regression tree methodology to examine associations between clinical and biochemical markers and acute respiratory distress syndrome subtype. The classification and regression tree model using only clinical variables (age, sex, race, oncologic comorbidity, and Pediatric Risk of Mortality-III score) performed worse than the classification and regression tree model using five clinical variables and 58 biomarkers. The best classification and regression tree model used only four endothelial biomarkers, including elevated angiopoietin-2/angiopoietin-1 ratio, vascular cell-adhesion molecule, and von Willebrand factor, to identify indirect acute respiratory distress syndrome. Test characteristics were 89% (80-97%) sensitivity, 80% (69-92%) specificity, positive predictive value 84% (74-93%), and negative predictive value 86% (76-96%).
Indirect lung injury in children with acute respiratory distress syndrome is characterized by a biomarker profile indicative of endothelial activation, excess inflammation, and worse outcomes. A model using four biomarkers has the potential to be useful for more precisely identifying patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome whose pathobiology may respond to endothelial-targeted therapies in future trials.
在直接肺损伤与间接肺损伤背景下发生的急性呼吸窘迫综合征可能反映出不同的病理生物学特征,从而适合不同的治疗策略。我们试图检验脓毒症相关直接急性呼吸窘迫综合征与间接急性呼吸窘迫综合征患儿的一组血浆生物标志物是否存在差异。我们假设,指示内皮细胞活化的生物标志物谱将与间接急性呼吸窘迫综合征相关。
观察性队列研究。
学术性儿科重症监护病房。
年龄小于18岁的脓毒症相关直接(肺炎,n = 52)或间接(肺外脓毒症,n = 46)急性呼吸窘迫综合征患者。
无。
在检测的58种生物标志物中,33种因急性呼吸窘迫综合征亚型不同而存在差异。我们使用分类与回归树方法来研究临床和生化标志物与急性呼吸窘迫综合征亚型之间的关联。仅使用临床变量(年龄、性别、种族、肿瘤合并症和小儿死亡风险-III评分)的分类与回归树模型,其表现不如使用5个临床变量和58种生物标志物的分类与回归树模型。最佳分类与回归树模型仅使用4种内皮生物标志物,包括血管生成素-2/血管生成素-1比值升高、血管细胞黏附分子和血管性血友病因子,来识别间接急性呼吸窘迫综合征。检验特征为灵敏度89%(80 - 97%)、特异度80%(69 - 92%)、阳性预测值84%(74 - 93%)和阴性预测值86%(76 - 96%)。
急性呼吸窘迫综合征患儿的间接肺损伤特征为指示内皮细胞活化、炎症过度及预后较差的生物标志物谱。使用4种生物标志物的模型有可能用于更精确地识别急性呼吸窘迫综合征患者,其病理生物学特征可能在未来试验中对内皮靶向治疗产生反应。