创伤后伴急性胃肠功能损伤的研究现状及诊治进展
Research Status and Progress of Diagnosis and Treatment of Post-Traumatic Injury with Acute Gastrointestinal Injury
DOI: 10.12677/ACM.2024.142613, PDF, HTML, XML, 下载: 37  浏览: 75 
作者: 程伟杰, 胡 毅*:新疆医科大学第五附属医院,新疆 乌鲁木齐
关键词: 创伤急性胃肠道损伤血清标志物评分系统Trauma Acute Gastrointestinal Injury Serum Markers Scoring System
摘要: 创伤仍然是全世界主要的死亡原因之一,随着社会及人类生活环境的发展变化,在我国,创伤已成为继心、脑血管疾病、肿瘤后的重要死因之一。2012年欧洲危重症学会对重症病人的胃肠功能进行了定义和分级,分为4级。在急诊科有许多入院初期评分系统以及血清标志物,对创伤后伴急性胃肠功能损伤(AGI)预后有较好预测价值为创伤后伴急性胃肠功能损伤的早期评估提供参考,进一步减少创伤后伴急性胃肠功能损伤的死亡率。本文就创伤后损伤伴急性胃肠损伤的研究现状及诊治进展做一综述。
Abstract: Trauma is still one of the main causes of death in the world. With the development and change of society and human living environment, trauma has become one of the important causes of death after heart disease, cerebrovascular disease and tumor in our country. In 2012, the European Soci-ety of Critical Care Medicine defined and graded the gastrointestinal function of critically ill pa-tients, which was divided into 4 grades. There are many early admission scoring systems and serum markers in the emergency department, which have good predictive value for the prognosis of acute gastrointestinal injury (AGI) after trauma, provide reference for early assessment of AGI after trauma, and further reduce the mortality of post-traumatic injury with acute gastrointestinal inju-ry. This article reviews the research status, diagnosis and treatment progress of post-traumatic in-jury with acute gastrointestinal injury.
文章引用:程伟杰, 胡毅. 创伤后伴急性胃肠功能损伤的研究现状及诊治进展[J]. 临床医学进展, 2024, 14(2): 4422-4427. https://doi.org/10.12677/ACM.2024.142613

1. 前言

世界卫生组织将创伤定义为由暴力、事故或自杀造成的身体或心理伤害 [1] 。创伤是死亡和残疾的主要原因,特别是男性,其发生率和原因如交通事故、自杀和暴力犯罪 [2] 。严重的创伤可涉及多个身体系统,导致器官功能障碍、感染和MODS,包括SIRS和ARDS [3] 。

AGI是创伤患者常见的并发症,预示着预后不良,在研究多器官功能障碍中起着至关重要的作用,一项研究指出,胃肠道对辐射敏感,导致肠道屏障完整性下降并引发炎症反应,这可能导致远隔器官受损,显示了AGI在多器官功能障碍研究中的重要性 [4] 。肠道微生物群通过有益的相互作用来维持肠道内稳态 [5] 。危重症的AGI由于肠道屏障、动力学和胃排空受损而导致营养吸收不良 [6] 。

肠道微生物群与宿主的健康有关,但破坏会导致有害的菌群增殖和生态失调。免疫激活可引发炎症,破坏肠道微生物–宿主联盟,甚至是MODS和死亡 [7] 。危重症监护患者需要胃肠道保护,因为AGI可加重全身炎症反应 [8] 。靠症状采取的传统方法是不够的。2012年ESICM胃肠功能标准化分级提高了对危重症患者AGI的评价 [9] 。

2. 急性胃肠道损伤分类

AGI是危重症患者胃肠道功能损伤和多因导致的胃肠道功能损伤损害的结合,严重影响患者的预后和生存 [10] 。

AGI grade I:部分胃肠道功能损害,表现为与已知原因相关的胃肠道症状。

AGI grade II:胃肠道不能充分消化和吸收,以满足身体的营养和液体需求,但尚未影响全身状况。

AGI grade III:胃肠道功能丧失,尽管进行了干预,但胃肠道功能仍未恢复,全身状态也未得到改善。

AGI grade IV:AGI已发展为立即危及生命的情况,MODS和休克恶化。

3. 创伤后伴急性胃肠功能损伤的现状

张东的研究表明,AGI危重患者有较高的死亡风险,尤其是重度AGI患者 [11] 。在胡邦川对550例ICU患者的研究中,470例被诊断为AGI。AGI分级与28天和60天的发病率和死亡率呈正相关:I级24.5%,II级49.4%,III级20.6%,IIV级5.5% [12] 。

创伤后AGI背后的复杂和多因素机制包括应激性炎症、机械通气、长期禁食或肠外营养,以及阿片类镇痛药的使用。这些因素可导致黏膜损伤、肠道屏障功能受损、细菌转移、感染、肠道微生物群和上皮细胞的改变,最终导致创伤患者AGI的发生 [13] 。

4. 急性胃肠损伤的标志物

胃肠道功能标志物的检测对AGI患者至关重要,因为临床评估很困难。肠黏膜屏障指标和血浆代谢物等新的标志物具有较高的敏感性和特异性。常见的标记物包括瓜氨酸、肠道脂肪酸结合蛋白和d-乳酸等。

4.1. 瓜氨酸

瓜氨酸是一种非蛋白氨基酸,是“尿素–鸟氨酸循环”的中间代谢物,以谷氨酰胺作为前体物质合成 [14] 。瓜氨酸作为一种生物标志物的作用已在短肠综合征、慢性小肠病变、肠移植物抗宿主病和急性肠衰竭患者中进行了研究,显示出了良好的结果 [15] 。

研究表明,在短肠综合征患者中,血浆鸟嘌呤浓度与残余小肠长度相关 [16] 。瓜氨酸与正常小肠长度患者和绒毛萎缩伴小肠疾病患者绒毛萎缩的严重程度和程度相关 [17] 。研究证实,在因SIRS和低血容量而导致小肠功能障碍风险的患者中,临床肠功能障碍与肠上皮细胞坏死的生物学证据相关 [18] 。

低血浆瓜氨酸与SIRS患者的小肠缺血、肠屏障功能丧失和急性肾功能衰竭有关 [19] 。一项研究表明,血清瓜氨酸与危重患者胃肠衰竭的严重程度相关,瓜氨酸的使用提高了对危重患者胃肠衰竭的诊断效果 [20] 。血浆瓜氨酸反映了肠上皮细胞的质量、长度和吸收能力。由于它在急性情况下对功能的质量,是一种很有前途的评估小肠功能的标志物 [21] 。

4.2. 肠道脂肪酸结合蛋白,I-FABP

I-FABP是一种低分子量蛋白,在肠缺血后由肠细胞释放到循环系统中,已被证明是肠上皮损伤的敏感标志物 [22] 。据报道,I-FABP的水平反映了肠上皮细胞的生理周转率,其升高表明肠上皮受损 [23] 。

一项研究表明,在576例(AGI)ICU患者中,患者的血清IFABP水平明显高于健康对照组,IFABP水平随着AGI分类的增加而逐渐升高,这表明AGI的严重程度和I-FABP水平之间有很强的关系 [24] 。Gael Piton等人表明,I-FABP可能有助于重症监护医生识别有肠道损伤、有细菌易位和全身炎症反应综合征风险的患者,以及肠上皮细胞功能降低和有吸收不良风险的患者 [25] 。

I-FABP一直具有极大的兴趣,并被广泛用作缺血的标志物 [26] 。研究表明,I-FABP水平在各种肠道功能受损的情况下都会升高。这些情况包括进行重大但非腹部手术后的创伤伴或不伴腹部病变、心脏骤停、心脏骤停、脓毒症、急性肠系膜闭塞和非闭塞缺血表型等 [27] 。

5. 急性胃肠损伤急诊评分

5.1. GIDS (胃肠道功能损伤评分)

GIDS是一种新的评估危重症患者AGI严重程度的评分系统。由Blaser等人于2021年开发,它包括瓜氨酸、I-FABP浓度和腹部体征等变量。当添加到SOFA总评分中时,GIDS提高了该评分的预测能力,并与28天和90天的死亡率独立相关 [28] 。

该研究涉及来自两家医院的276名ICU患者,他们在入院前7天接受了胃肠道和腹部症状的监测。连续7天进行AGI评分和DIGS评分,随访28天。GIDS可有效量化危重症患者的胃肠道功能障碍,并与疾病的严重程度、预后和28天死亡率密切相关 [29] 。

GIDS是AGI患者的主要评分趋势 [30] ,但目前的研究样本较小,需要更多的大样本的多中心前瞻性研究来证明这一点。

5.2. SOFA (序贯器官衰竭评估)

SOFA是一种通过评估多个系统中的器官功能来评估患者病情严重程度的工具。研究将SOFA和其他评分,如GIDS,来全面评估AGI。孙家贵的一项研究发现,SOFA是AGIII级或以上的危险因素 [31] 。另一项研究报道,随着AGI分类的增加,顺序器官衰竭评分(SOFA)逐渐增加 [24] 。

Jin Teng的一项研究通过相关性分析报道,胃肠道损伤患者的SOFA评分与血清瓜氨酸、d-乳酸和LPS水平相关。这说明SOFA评分在一定程度上可以与这些指标结合使用,以反映AGI患者的病情程度,从而有助于患者的治疗 [20] 。张东勇的研究报道,二级组患者年龄较大,SOFA评分高于原发性AGI患者,且SOFA评分可独立预测AGI患者28天死亡率的概率 [32] 。

6. 问题和前景

欧洲危重病协会腹部问题工作组在2012年提出了一套急性胃肠道损伤(AGI)的分级方法,旨在实现早期发现和干预。但是,要想有效地评估器官功能,它必须具备与预测结果和单向变化相关的属性,并且要客观可靠。现在,AGI的诊断和分级还主要靠临床表现,只有腹内压的升高才是量化的指标。然而,这样的定义只涵盖了胃肠道的消化和吸收功能,而忽略了其他功能,如屏障、内分泌和免疫功能。目前,还没有能够全面反映胃肠道各项功能的工具或标志物。虽然瓜氨酸等实验室检测能够显示消化、吸收和屏障功能,但它们的灵敏度和特异度还有待提高。需要更多的实验室研究,以寻找更敏感和特异的标志物,以及更精确的评分系统,为AGI的诊断和分级提供更客观和准确的依据。同时,还需要更多的研究,以揭示AGI的发病机制和危险因素,以增强诊断和分级的精确性。

NOTES

*通讯作者。

参考文献

[1] Harrison, J.E., Weber, S., Jakob, R. and Chute, C.G. (2021) ICD-11: An International Classification of Diseases for the Twen-Ty-First Century. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 21, Article No. 206.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-021-01534-6
[2] GBD 2019 Diseases and Injuries Collaborators (2020) Global Burden of 369 Diseases and Injuries in 204 Countries and Territories, 1990-2019: A Systematic Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet, 396, 1204- 1222.
[3] Pfeifer, R. and Pape, H.C. (2016) [Diagnostics and Treatment Strategies for Multiple Trauma Patients]. Der Chirurg, 87, 165-175.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00104-015-0139-0
[4] Hofman, M., Andruszkow, H., Kobbe, P., Poeze, M. and Hilde-brand, F. (2020) Incidence of Post-Traumatic Pneumonia in Poly-Traumatized Patients: Identifying the Role of Traumatic Brain Injury and Chest Trauma. European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery, 46, 11-19.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-019-01179-1
[5] Kaiko, G.E. and Stappenbeck, T.S. (2014) Host-Microbe Inter-actions Shaping the Gastrointestinal Environment. Trends in Immunology, 35, 538-548.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.it.2014.08.002
[6] Viteri, F.E. and Schneider, R.E. (1974) Gastrointestinal Alterations in Protein-Calorie Malnutrition. Medical Clinics of North America, 58, 1487-1505.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-7125(16)32085-5
[7] Haak, B.W. and Wiersinga, W.J. (2017) The Role of the Gut Microbiota in Sepsis. The Lancet Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 2, 135-143.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-1253(16)30119-4
[8] Chen, H., Zhang, H., Li, W., Wu, S. and Wang, W. (2015) Acute Gastrointestinal Injury in the Intensive Care Unit: A Retrospective Study. Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Man-agement, 11, 1523-1529.
https://doi.org/10.2147/TCRM.S92829
[9] Reintam Blaser, A., et al. (2012) Gastrointestinal Function in Intensive Care Patients: Terminology, Definitions and Management. Recommendations of the ESICM Working Group on Ab-dominal Problems. Intensive Care Medicine, 38, 384-394.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-011-2459-y
[10] Zhang, D., et al. (2014) Evaluation of Clinical Application of ESICM Acute Gastrointestinal Injury Grading System: A Sin-gle-Center Observational Study. Chinese Medical Journal, 127, 1833-1836.
https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0366-6999.20140269
[11] Zhang, D., et al. (2018) Prevalence and Outcome of Acute Gastrointestinal Injury in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Medicine, 97, e12970.
https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000012970
[12] Hu, B., et al. (2017) Severity of Acute Gastrointestinal Injury Grade Is A Predictor of All-Cause Mortality in Critically Ill Patients: A Multicenter, Prospective, Observational Study. Critical Care, 21, Article No. 188.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-017-1780-4
[13] Chelakkot, C., Ghim, J. and Ryu, S.H. (2018) Mechanisms Reg-ulating Intestinal Barrier Integrity and Its Pathological Implications. Experimental & Molecular Medicine, 50, 1-9.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s12276-018-0126-x
[14] Palencia, J.Y.P., et al. (2018) Effectiveness of Citrulline and N-Carbamoyl Glutamate as Arginine Precursors on Reproductive Performance in Mammals: A Systematic Review. PLOS ONE, 13, e0209569.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0209569
[15] Derikx, J.P., et al. (2011) A New Model to Study Intestinal Is-chemia-Reperfusion Damage in Man. Journal of Surgical Research, 166, 222-226.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2009.09.046
[16] Crenn, P., Coudray-Lucas, C., Thuillier, F., Cynober, L. and Mess-ing, B. (2000) Postabsorptive Plasma Citrulline Concentration Is A Marker of Absorptive Enterocyte Mass and Intestinal Failure in Humans. Gastroenterology, 119, 1496-1505.
https://doi.org/10.1053/gast.2000.20227
[17] Crenn, P., et al. (2003) Plasma Citrulline: A Marker of Enterocyte Mass in Villous Atrophy-Associated Small Bowel Disease. Gas-troenterology, 124, 1210-1219.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-5085(03)00170-7
[18] Pan, L., Wang, X., Li, W., Li, N. and Li, J. (2010) The Intestinal Fatty Acid Binding Protein Diagnosing Gut Dysfunction in Acute Pancreatitis: A Pilot Study. Pancreas, 39, 633-638.
https://doi.org/10.1097/MPA.0b013e3181c79654
[19] Van Noord, D., et al. (2011) Serum Markers and Intestinal Mucosal Injury in Chronic Gastrointestinal Ischemia. Digestive Diseases and Sciences, 56, 506-512.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-010-1303-5
[20] Teng, J., et al. (2021) The Serum Citrulline and D-Lactate Are Associated with Gastrointestinal Dysfunction and Failure in Critically Ill Patients. International Journal of General Medicine, 14, 4125-4134.
https://doi.org/10.2147/IJGM.S305209
[21] Piton, G., Manzon, C., Cypriani, B., Carbonnel, F. and Capellier, G. (2011) Acute Intestinal Failure in Critically Ill Patients: Is Plasma Citrulline the Right Marker? Intensive Care Medicine, 37, 911-917.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-011-2172-x
[22] Kocsis, D., et al. (2016) [Intestinal Fatty Acid Binding Protein: Marker of Enterocyte Damage in Acute and Chronic Gastroenterological Diseases]. Orvosi Hetilap, 157, 59-64.
https://doi.org/10.1556/650.2016.30336
[23] Relja, B., et al. (2010) Intestinal-FABP and Liver-FABP: Novel Markers for Severe Abdominal Injury. Academic Emergency Medicine, 17, 729-735.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1553-2712.2010.00792.x
[24] Wang, J., et al. (2017) [Diagnostic Value of Citrulline and Intestinal Fatty Acid Binding Protein on Acute Gastrointestinal Injury in Critical Patients: A Prospective Study of 530 Patients]. Chinese Critical Care Medicine, 29, 999-1003.
[25] Piton, G. and Capellier, G. (2016) Biomarkers of Gut Barrier Failure in the ICU. Current Opinion in Critical Care, 22, 152-160.
https://doi.org/10.1097/MCC.0000000000000283
[26] Vollrath, J.T., et al. (2022) I-FABP as A Potential Marker for Intestinal Barrier Loss in Porcine Polytrauma. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 11, Article 4599.
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11154599
[27] Zou, L., et al. (2018) Intestinal Fatty Acid-Binding Protein as a Predictor of Prognosis in Postoperative Cardiac Surgery Patients. Medicine, 97, e11782.
https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000011782
[28] Reintam Blaser, A., et al. (2021) Development of the Gas-trointestinal Dysfunction Score (GIDS) for Critically Ill Patients—A Prospective Multicenter Observational Study (ISOFA Study). Clinical Nutrition, 40, 4932-4940.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2021.07.015
[29] Liu, X., et al. (2023) Association between Gastrointestinal Dys-function Score (GIDS) and Disease Severity and Prognosis in Critically Ill Patients: A Prospective, Observational Study. Clinical Nutrition, 42, 700-705.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2023.03.004
[30] Berger, M.M. and Hurni, C.A. (2022) Management of Gastrointes-tinal Failure in the Adult Critical Care Setting. Current Opinion in Critical Care, 28, 190-197.
https://doi.org/10.1097/MCC.0000000000000924
[31] Sun, J.K., et al. (2020) Acute Gastrointestinal Injury in Critically Ill Patients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China. World Journal of Gastroenterology, 26, 6087-6097.
https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v26.i39.6087
[32] Zhang, D., et al. (2017) Comparison of the Clinical Characteristics and Prognosis of Primary versus Secondary Acute Gastrointestinal Injury in Critically Ill Patients. Journal of Intensive Care, 5, Article No. 26.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40560-017-0221-4