• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

SCAI休克分期在脓毒症和脓毒性休克重症医学重症监护病房患者中的验证

Validation of SCAI Shock Staging in Critically Ill Medical Intensive Care Unit Patients With Sepsis and Septic Shock.

作者信息

Mukhtar Osama, Lal Amos, Jentzer Jacob, Kashani Kianoush

机构信息

Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.

Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.

出版信息

J Community Hosp Intern Med Perspect. 2025 Jan 6;15(1):13-21. doi: 10.55729/2000-9666.1436. eCollection 2025.

DOI:10.55729/2000-9666.1436
PMID:39867142
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11759074/
Abstract

PURPOSE

This study evaluated the predictive value of SCAI shock staging for mortality in patients with sepsis and septic shock admitted to the medical ICU.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a single-center historical cohort study. We analyzed data for adults (≥18-year-old) admitted to the medical ICU at Mayo Clinic St. Mary's campus with sepsis between June 1, 2018, and December 31, 2021. Sepsis was identified using the Sepsis-III criteria. Patients were stratified based on SCAI shock staging. Our primary outcome was all-cause 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

We identified 3079 eligible adult patients with sepsis or septic shock. The distribution of SCAI shock stages A through E was 9%, 12%, 25%, 49%, and 5%, respectively. The overall 30-day mortality was 24%. There was progression in all outcomes including ICU, hospital and 30-day mortality across SCAI shock stages. However, only SCAI shock stages D and E, had statistically significant adjusted HRs of 1.6 and 3, respectively. When compared to SOFA score, SCAI shock staging performed similarly in predicting ICU mortality with no statistically significant difference in AUCs, -value of 0.07.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results support the use of SCAI shock staging in critically ill medical patients with sepsis and septic shock for risk stratification. We propose that the SCAI shock staging may be used as a universal system for grading the severity of shock in critically ill patients regardless of etiology.

摘要

目的

本研究评估了SCAI休克分期对入住内科重症监护病房(ICU)的脓毒症和脓毒性休克患者死亡率的预测价值。

材料与方法

这是一项单中心回顾性队列研究。我们分析了2018年6月1日至2021年12月31日期间在梅奥诊所圣玛丽院区入住内科ICU的成年(≥18岁)脓毒症患者的数据。脓毒症采用Sepsis-III标准进行诊断。患者根据SCAI休克分期进行分层。我们的主要结局是全因30天死亡率。

结果

我们确定了3079例符合条件的成年脓毒症或脓毒性休克患者。SCAI休克分期A至E的分布分别为9%、12%、25%、49%和5%。总体30天死亡率为24%。包括ICU、医院和30天死亡率在内的所有结局在SCAI休克分期中均有进展。然而,只有SCAI休克分期D和E的校正风险比分别具有统计学意义,为1.6和3。与序贯器官衰竭评估(SOFA)评分相比,SCAI休克分期在预测ICU死亡率方面表现相似,曲线下面积(AUC)无统计学显著差异,P值为0.07。

结论

我们的结果支持将SCAI休克分期用于脓毒症和脓毒性休克危重症患者的风险分层。我们建议,SCAI休克分期可作为一种通用系统,用于对危重症患者休克的严重程度进行分级,而不考虑病因。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b1f2/11759074/f2a975f1aa75/jchim-15-01-013f4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b1f2/11759074/9053001471e6/jchim-15-01-013f1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b1f2/11759074/07cd3a133c0e/jchim-15-01-013f2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b1f2/11759074/0289dc13e732/jchim-15-01-013f3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b1f2/11759074/f2a975f1aa75/jchim-15-01-013f4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b1f2/11759074/9053001471e6/jchim-15-01-013f1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b1f2/11759074/07cd3a133c0e/jchim-15-01-013f2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b1f2/11759074/0289dc13e732/jchim-15-01-013f3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b1f2/11759074/f2a975f1aa75/jchim-15-01-013f4.jpg

相似文献

1
Validation of SCAI Shock Staging in Critically Ill Medical Intensive Care Unit Patients With Sepsis and Septic Shock.SCAI休克分期在脓毒症和脓毒性休克重症医学重症监护病房患者中的验证
J Community Hosp Intern Med Perspect. 2025 Jan 6;15(1):13-21. doi: 10.55729/2000-9666.1436. eCollection 2025.
2
Shock Severity Assessment in Cardiac Intensive Care Unit Patients With Sepsis and Mixed Septic-Cardiogenic Shock.心脏重症监护病房中患有脓毒症及脓毒性-心源性混合性休克患者的休克严重程度评估
Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes. 2021 Dec 23;6(1):37-44. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2021.11.008. eCollection 2022 Feb.
3
[Study on the value of prothrombin time for predicting the severity and prognosis of septic patients].[凝血酶原时间对脓毒症患者病情严重程度及预后预测价值的研究]
Zhonghua Wei Zhong Bing Ji Jiu Yi Xue. 2022 Jul;34(7):682-688. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn121430-20210614-00876.
4
Impact of Ursodeoxycholic Acid in Critically Ill Patients With Sepsis: A Retrospective Study.熊去氧胆酸对脓毒症危重症患者的影响:一项回顾性研究。
J Pharm Pract. 2023 Jun;36(3):566-571. doi: 10.1177/08971900211038363. Epub 2022 Jan 4.
5
Application of Cardiogenic Shock Working Group-defined Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (CSWG-SCAI) Staging of Cardiogenic Shock to the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV (MIMIC-IV) database.将心源性休克工作组定义的心血管造影和介入学会(CSWG-SCAI)心源性休克分期应用于重症监护医学信息集市IV(MIMIC-IV)数据库。
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2023 Dec;57:82-90. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2023.06.019. Epub 2023 Jun 23.
6
[Combined prognostic value of serum lactic acid, procalcitonin and severity score for short-term prognosis of septic shock patients].[血清乳酸、降钙素原及严重程度评分对脓毒症休克患者短期预后的联合预测价值]
Zhonghua Wei Zhong Bing Ji Jiu Yi Xue. 2021 Mar;33(3):281-285. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn121430-20201113-00715.
7
Clinical values of cerebral oxygen saturation monitoring in patients with septic shock.脑氧饱和度监测在感染性休克患者中的临床价值。
Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2021 Nov 28;46(11):1212-1219. doi: 10.11817/j.issn.1672-7347.2021.200905.
8
Septic shock definitions and associated outcomes in blood culture positive critically ill patients.血培养阳性的重症患者中脓毒症休克的定义及相关结局
Ann Transl Med. 2023 Mar 15;11(5):192. doi: 10.21037/atm-22-5147. Epub 2023 Feb 24.
9
Clinician and Algorithmic Application of the 2019 and 2022 Society of Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention Shock Stages in the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network Registry.临床医生和算法在心血管造影和介入学会 2019 年和 2022 年休克分期在重症心脏病学临床试验网络登记中的应用。
Circ Heart Fail. 2023 Jan;16(1):e009714. doi: 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.122.009714. Epub 2022 Dec 2.
10
Shock Severity Classification and Mortality in Adults With Cardiac, Medical, Surgical, and Neurological Critical Illness.成人心脏、内科、外科和神经重症疾病患者的休克严重程度分类和死亡率。
Mayo Clin Proc. 2024 May;99(5):727-739. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2023.08.007. Epub 2023 Oct 8.

本文引用的文献

1
Concomitant Sepsis Diagnoses in Acute Myocardial Infarction-Cardiogenic Shock: 15-Year National Temporal Trends, Management, and Outcomes.急性心肌梗死合并心源性休克时的脓毒症合并诊断:15年全国时间趋势、管理及预后
Crit Care Explor. 2022 Feb 4;4(2):e0637. doi: 10.1097/CCE.0000000000000637. eCollection 2022 Feb.
2
SCAI SHOCK Stage Classification Expert Consensus Update: A Review and Incorporation of Validation Studies: This statement was endorsed by the American College of Cardiology (ACC), American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP), American Heart Association (AHA), European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Association for Acute Cardiovascular Care (ACVC), International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT), Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM), and Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) in December 2021.SCAI休克分期分类专家共识更新:验证研究的回顾与纳入:本声明于2021年12月获得美国心脏病学会(ACC)、美国急诊医师学会(ACEP)、美国心脏协会(AHA)、欧洲心脏病学会(ESC)急性心血管护理协会(ACVC)、国际心肺移植学会(ISHLT)、危重病医学会(SCCM)和胸外科医师学会(STS)的认可。
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022 Mar 8;79(9):933-946. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2022.01.018. Epub 2022 Jan 31.
3
Incidence and Outcomes of Nontraumatic Shock in Adults Using Emergency Medical Services in Victoria, Australia.澳大利亚维多利亚州使用紧急医疗服务的成年人非创伤性休克的发生率和结局。
JAMA Netw Open. 2022 Jan 4;5(1):e2145179. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.45179.
4
Shock Severity Assessment in Cardiac Intensive Care Unit Patients With Sepsis and Mixed Septic-Cardiogenic Shock.心脏重症监护病房中患有脓毒症及脓毒性-心源性混合性休克患者的休克严重程度评估
Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes. 2021 Dec 23;6(1):37-44. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2021.11.008. eCollection 2022 Feb.
5
Lingua Franca of Cardiogenic Shock: Speaking the Same Language.心源性休克的通用语言:使用同一种语言交流
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2021 Sep 22;8:691232. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2021.691232. eCollection 2021.
6
Enhancing Aging and Ending Ageism: JAMA Network Open Call for Papers.《增强衰老与终结年龄歧视:美国医学会杂志网络公开征稿》
JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Jun 1;4(6):e2117621. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.17621.
7
Current use of inotropes in circulatory shock.血管活性药物在循环性休克中的当前应用。
Ann Intensive Care. 2021 Jan 29;11(1):21. doi: 10.1186/s13613-021-00806-8.
8
Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome Is Associated With Increased Mortality Across the Spectrum of Shock Severity in Cardiac Intensive Care Patients.全身炎症反应综合征与心脏重症监护患者休克严重程度范围内死亡率增加相关。
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2020 Dec;13(12):e006956. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.120.006956. Epub 2020 Dec 7.
9
Shock in the cardiac intensive care unit: Changes in epidemiology and prognosis over time.心脏重症监护病房中的休克:随时间变化的流行病学和预后变化。
Am Heart J. 2021 Feb;232:94-104. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2020.10.054. Epub 2020 Oct 24.
10
Prospective validation of the SCAI shock classification: Single center analysis.前瞻性验证 SCAI 休克分类:单中心分析。
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2020 Dec;96(7):1339-1347. doi: 10.1002/ccd.29319. Epub 2020 Oct 7.