Candemir Ergene Gülcan, Doğan Nurettin Özgür, Ergül Tuğçe, Özturan İbrahim Ulaş, Pekdemir Murat, Yaka Elif, Yilmaz Serkan
M.D., Kocaeli University, Faculty of Medicine, Dept. of Emergency Medicine, Kocaeli, Turkey.
M.D., Professor, Kocaeli University, Faculty of Medicine, Dept. of Emergency Medicine, Kocaeli, Turkey.
Am J Emerg Med. 2025 Apr;90:23-30. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2025.01.012. Epub 2025 Jan 6.
Acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) frequently result in emergency department (ED) visits, necessitating accurate risk stratification. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the prognostic utility of the DECAF score and serum procalcitonin levels in predicting clinical outcomes in patients with AECOPD.
This retrospective cohort study encompassed AECOPD patients presenting to the ED over a three-year period who had serum procalcitonin levels measured. The primary outcome was one-month mortality, with secondary outcomes including ED re-admission, hospitalization, and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was employed to assess the prognostic performance of DECAF score and procalcitonin, and differences between areas under the curve (AUC) were compared.
A total of 130 patients were analyzed, comprising 105 survivors and 25 non-survivors. The median DECAF score was significantly higher in non-survivors [4 (IQR: 3-4)] compared to survivors [3 (IQR: 2-4)] (p < 0.001). Similarly, median procalcitonin levels were elevated in non-survivors [0.26 ng/mL (IQR: 0.11-2.77)] relative to survivors [0.08 ng/mL (IQR: 0.04-0.21)] (p < 0.001). The AUC for the DECAF score was 0.758 (95 % CI: 0.673-0.842), while that for procalcitonin was 0.764 (95 % CI: 0.668-0.860). The difference between AUCs was 0.006 (95 % CI: -0.140 to 0.127), (p = 0.927). The negative predictive value (NPV) was 90.6 % for the 4-point DECAF score and 96.2 % for a 0.075 ng/mL procalcitonin cut-off. Notably, when used in combination, the NPV reached 100 % (95 % CI: 89.1-100).
The DECAF score and serum procalcitonin levels both exhibit robust prognostic capabilities in excluding adverse outcomes in AECOPD patients, with their predictive accuracy enhanced when used in tandem.
慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重(AECOPD)常导致患者前往急诊科就诊,因此需要进行准确的风险分层。本研究旨在评估和比较DECAF评分与血清降钙素原水平在预测AECOPD患者临床结局方面的预后价值。
这项回顾性队列研究纳入了在三年期间因AECOPD前往急诊科就诊且检测了血清降钙素原水平的患者。主要结局为1个月死亡率,次要结局包括急诊科再入院、住院和重症监护病房(ICU)入院。采用受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线分析来评估DECAF评分和降钙素原的预后性能,并比较曲线下面积(AUC)之间的差异。
共分析了130例患者,其中105例存活,25例死亡。非存活者的DECAF评分中位数[4(四分位间距:3 - 4)]显著高于存活者[3(四分位间距:2 - 4)](p < 0.001)。同样,非存活者的血清降钙素原水平中位数[0.26 ng/mL(四分位间距:0.11 - 2.77)]高于存活者[0.08 ng/mL(四分位间距:0.04 - 0.21)](p < 0.001)。DECAF评分的AUC为0.758(95%可信区间:0.673 - 0.842),而降钙素原的AUC为0.764(95%可信区间:0.668 - 0.860)。AUC之间的差异为0.006(95%可信区间:-0.140至0.127),(p = 0.927)。4分的DECAF评分的阴性预测值(NPV)为90.6%,降钙素原临界值为0.075 ng/mL时的NPV为96.2%。值得注意的是,联合使用时,NPV达到100%(95%可信区间:89.1 - 100)。
DECAF评分和血清降钙素原水平在排除AECOPD患者不良结局方面均具有较强的预后能力,联合使用时预测准确性更高。