van Bommel E F, Bouvy N D, Hop W C, Bruining H A, Weimar W
Department of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Dijkzigt, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Ren Fail. 1995 Nov;17(6):731-42. doi: 10.3109/08860229509037641.
The study objective was to determine the applicability of the acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) II score in surgical patients with acute renal failure (ARF) requiring dialytic support, and to assess its utility in evaluating data from this specific disease group. This was a retrospective, partly prospective follow-up study of patients who developed ARF during their course of stay on the surgical intensive care unit (ICU) of a Dutch university hospital from January 1, 1986, to January 31, 1994. A total of 111 patients were identified, of whom 104 patients were considered eligible for this study. Data for the individual APACHE II scores were calculated from the most deranged values during the initial 24 h of ICU admission (APACHE II1) and on the day dialytic support was instituted (APACHE II2). The ratio between the two APACHE II scores was also calculated for each patient (AP2/AP1 ratio). Receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC) were constructed. Other variables evaluated included age, sex, serum creatinine, diagnostic category, time from ICU admission to start of dialytic support, and the type of dialytic support. Of these 104 patients (median age 64; range 23-85 years), 51 (50%) survived to leave the ICU, of whom 47 (46%) survived to leave hospital. The APACHE II2 score (27.0 +/- 4.4 vs. 22.4 +/- 3.5; p < 0.001) and AP2/AP1 ratio (1.12 +/- 0.09 vs. 0.97 +/- 0.06; p < 0.001) were significantly higher for nonsurvivors as compared to survivors. The ROC curve was most discriminative for the AP2/AP1 ratio (area under the curve 0.92) and to a lesser extent for the APACHE II2 score (area under the curve 0.78). Estimated risk of death with the APACHE II equation did not improve predictive power. Multivariate analysis of various variables revealed the AP2/AP1 ratio as the single most important factor predicting death (odds ratio 13.8, p < 0.001). Adjusting for the AP2/AP1 ratio, no impact on outcome was observed for age, diagnostic category, time from ICU admission to start of dialytic support, and the type of dialytic support. Above a value of 1.0 of the AP2/AP1 ratio, logistic regression revealed a sharp increase in death probability with increasing AP2/AP1 ratio. APACHE II, when used at the time of initiation of dialytic support, proved to be a valid way in our surgical ICU to stratify ARF patients by the severity of their illness. Moreover, use of the AP2/AP1 ratio further improved the usefulness of this severity index and may help to identify patients who have little chance of survival. Predicting death with the APACHE II equation did not improve predictive power.
本研究的目的是确定急性生理与慢性健康状况评估(APACHE)II评分在需要透析支持的急性肾衰竭(ARF)外科患者中的适用性,并评估其在评估该特定疾病组数据方面的效用。这是一项对1986年1月1日至1994年1月31日期间在荷兰一家大学医院外科重症监护病房(ICU)住院期间发生ARF的患者进行的回顾性、部分前瞻性随访研究。共确定了111例患者,其中104例患者被认为符合本研究条件。个体APACHE II评分的数据根据ICU入院最初24小时内(APACHE II1)以及开始透析支持当天(APACHE II2)的最异常值计算得出。还计算了每位患者的两个APACHE II评分之间的比值(AP2/AP1比值)。构建了受试者工作特征曲线(ROC)。评估的其他变量包括年龄、性别、血清肌酐、诊断类别、从ICU入院到开始透析支持的时间以及透析支持的类型。在这104例患者(中位年龄64岁;范围23 - 85岁)中,51例(50%)存活至离开ICU,其中47例(46%)存活至出院。与幸存者相比,非幸存者的APACHE II2评分(27.0±4.4 vs. 22.4±3.5;p<0.001)和AP2/AP1比值(1.12±0.09 vs. 0.97±0.06;p<0.00)显著更高。ROC曲线对AP2/AP1比值的区分能力最强(曲线下面积0.92),对APACHE II2评分的区分能力稍弱(曲线下面积0.78)。使用APACHE II方程估计的死亡风险并未提高预测能力。对各种变量进行多因素分析显示,AP2/AP1比值是预测死亡的唯一最重要因素(比值比13.8,p<0.001)。调整AP2/AP1比值后,未观察到年龄、诊断类别、从ICU入院到开始透析支持的时间以及透析支持类型对结局有影响。当AP2/AP1比值高于1.0时,逻辑回归显示随着AP2/AP1比值增加,死亡概率急剧上升。在我们的外科ICU中,在开始透析支持时使用APACHE II被证明是根据ARF患者病情严重程度进行分层的有效方法。此外,使用AP2/AP1比值进一步提高了该严重程度指数的效用,并可能有助于识别生存机会渺茫的患者。使用APACHE II方程预测死亡并未提高预测能力。