Suppr超能文献

序贯器官衰竭评估(SOFA)评分预测越南重症监护病房脓毒症患者死亡率:一项多中心、横断面研究。

Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) Score for predicting mortality in patients with sepsis in Vietnamese intensive care units: a multicentre, cross-sectional study.

机构信息

Center for Critical Care Medicine, Bach Mai Hospital, Hanoi, Viet Nam.

Department of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi, Viet Nam.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2023 Mar 14;13(3):e064870. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-064870.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To compare the accuracy of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) Scores in predicting mortality among intensive care unit (ICU) patients with sepsis in a low-income and middle-income country.

DESIGN

A multicentre, cross-sectional study.

SETTING

A total of 15 adult ICUs throughout Vietnam.

PARTICIPANTS

We included all patients aged ≥18 years who were admitted to ICUs for sepsis and who were still in ICUs from 00:00 to 23:59 of the specified study days (ie, 9 January, 3 April, 3 July and 9 October of the year 2019).

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was hospital all-cause mortality (hospital mortality). We also defined the secondary outcome as all-cause deaths in the ICU (ICU mortality).

RESULTS

Of 252 patients, 40.1% died in hospitals, and 33.3% died in ICUs. SOFA Score (areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC): 0.688 (95% CI 0.618 to 0.758); cut-off value≥7.5; P<0.001) and APACHE II Score (AUROC: 0.689 (95% CI 0.622 to 0.756); cut-off value ≥20.5; P<0.001) both had a poor discriminatory ability for predicting hospital mortality. However, the discriminatory ability for predicting ICU mortality of SOFA (AUROC: 0.713 (95% CI 0.643 to 0.783); cut-off value≥9.5; P<0.001) was fair and was better than that of APACHE II Score (AUROC: 0.672 (95% CI 0.603 to 0.742); cut-off value≥18.5; P<0.001). A SOFA Score≥8 (adjusted OR (AOR): 2.717; 95% CI 1.371 to 5.382) and an APACHE II Score≥21 (AOR: 2.668; 95% CI 1.338 to 5.321) were independently associated with an increased risk of hospital mortality. Additionally, a SOFA Score≥10 (AOR: 2.194; 95% CI 1.017 to 4.735) was an independent predictor of ICU mortality, in contrast to an APACHE II Score≥19, for which this role did not.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, SOFA and APACHE II Scores were worthwhile in predicting mortality among ICU patients with sepsis. However, due to better discrimination for predicting ICU mortality, the SOFA Score was preferable to the APACHE II Score in predicting mortality.Clinical trials registry - India: CTRI/2019/01/016898.

摘要

目的

比较序贯器官衰竭评估(SOFA)和急性生理学与慢性健康状况评估 II 评分(APACHE II 评分)在预测低收入和中等收入国家重症监护病房(ICU)脓毒症患者死亡率方面的准确性。

设计

多中心、横断面研究。

地点

越南共 15 个成人 ICU。

参与者

我们纳入了所有年龄≥18 岁、因脓毒症入住 ICU 且在指定研究日(即 2019 年 1 月 9 日、4 月 3 日、7 月 3 日和 10 月 9 日)00:00 至 23:59 仍在 ICU 的患者。

主要和次要结局指标

主要结局为医院全因死亡率(医院死亡率)。我们还将次要结局定义为 ICU 全因死亡率(ICU 死亡率)。

结果

在 252 名患者中,40.1%的患者在医院死亡,33.3%的患者在 ICU 死亡。SOFA 评分(受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUROC):0.688(95%CI 0.618 至 0.758);截断值≥7.5;P<0.001)和 APACHE II 评分(AUROC:0.689(95%CI 0.622 至 0.756);截断值≥20.5;P<0.001)在预测医院死亡率方面均具有较差的区分能力。然而,SOFA(AUROC:0.713(95%CI 0.643 至 0.783);截断值≥9.5;P<0.001)预测 ICU 死亡率的区分能力为中等,优于 APACHE II 评分(AUROC:0.672(95%CI 0.603 至 0.742);截断值≥18.5;P<0.001)。SOFA 评分≥8(调整比值比(AOR):2.717;95%CI 1.371 至 5.382)和 APACHE II 评分≥21(AOR:2.668;95%CI 1.338 至 5.321)与医院死亡率增加独立相关。此外,与 APACHE II 评分≥19 相比,SOFA 评分≥10(AOR:2.194;95%CI 1.017 至 4.735)是 ICU 死亡率的独立预测因素。

结论

在这项研究中,SOFA 和 APACHE II 评分在预测 ICU 脓毒症患者死亡率方面具有一定价值。然而,由于 SOFA 评分在预测 ICU 死亡率方面具有更好的区分能力,因此在预测死亡率方面优于 APACHE II 评分。

临床试验注册印度

CTRI/2019/01/016898。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/90aa/10016261/34c1220c2573/bmjopen-2022-064870f01.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