早期液体复苏入量及相关临床指标对老年脓毒性休克患者预后评估分析
Analysis of Prognostic Evaluation of Early Fluid Resuscitation Intake and Related Clinical Indicators in Elderly Patients with Septic Shock
DOI: 10.12677/acm.2024.143967, PDF,   
作者: 王雅欣:青岛大学附属青岛市市立医院,山东 青岛;毕俏杰*:青岛市市立医院东院急诊科,山东 青岛
关键词: 老年脓毒性休克早期液体复苏乳酸清除率下腔静脉变异度血尿素氮Senile Septic Shock Early Liquid Resuscitation Lactate Clearance Rate Inferior Vena Cava Variability Blood Urea Nitrogen
摘要: 目的:研究早期液体复苏入量及相关临床指标包括血尿素氮(BUN)、乳酸清除率(LCR)、下腔静脉变异度(IVCV)及急性生理与慢性健康(APACHE II)评分、序贯器官衰竭估计(SOFA)评分对老年脓毒性休克患者预后评估价值。方法:研究纳入2020年10月至2023年10月青岛市市立医院东院区收治的70例老年脓毒性休克患者,根据患者28天预后结果分为存活组(34例,48.6%)和死亡组(36例,51.4%),比较两组患者入院时的一般资料及入院6 h时的液体复苏入量、LCR、IVCV及入院24小时内APACHE II评分、SOFA评分,应用二元Logistic回归分析法分析影响老年脓毒性休克患者28天预后的独立危险因素,并绘制受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线,评估各指标对老年脓毒性休克患者28天预后的评估价值。结果:死亡组的BUN、APACHE II评分、SOFA评分高于存活组,6 h LCR低于存活组,且死亡组入院6 h无下腔静脉变异度(完全机械通气患者IVCV < 18%或自主呼吸患者IVCV < 50%)的患者明显多于存活组(P < 0.05)。死亡组患者在入院6小时内接受了更多的液体入量(P < 0.05)。应用二元Logistic回归分析校正了年龄、性别、BMI、白蛋白、CRP、PCT、基础疾病等混杂因素后,结果显示BUN (OR = 1.087, P < 0.05)、6 h LCR (OR = 0.983, P < 0.05)、6 h IVCV (OR = 15.557, P < 0.01)、APACHE II评分(OR = 1.175, P < 0.01)、SOFA评分(OR = 1.586, P < 0.01)、及入院6 h液体复苏入量(OR = 1.001, P < 0.05)均是影响老年脓毒性休克患者死亡的独立危险因素。绘制ROC曲线分析显示BUN、6 h LCR、APACHE II评分、SOFA评分、6 h液体复苏入量对老年脓毒性休克患者28天预后均有一定预测价值(P < 0.05)。其中APACHE II评分(AUC = 0.737, Cut-off = 26.50, P < 0.01)、SOFA评分(AUC = 0.735, Cut-off = 9.50, P < 0.01)预测老年脓毒性休克患者28天预后的AUC高于其他指标,低于四者联合指标(AUC = 0.785, P < 0.01)。上述六个指标联合对老年脓毒性休克患者28天预后的预测价值最好(AUC = 0.824, P < 0.01)。结论:入院6 h液体复苏入量、BUN、6 h LCR、6 h IVCV及APACHE II评分、SOFA评分均是影响老年脓毒性休克患者28天死亡的独立危险因素。在老年脓毒性休克患者液体复苏治疗时,不宜短时间内摄入过多液体(最佳截断值为1042.50 mL,灵敏度为72.2%,特异度为55.9%)。入院6 h液体复苏入量、BUN、6 h LCR、6 h IVCV及APACHE II评分、SOFA评分六项指标联合对老年脓毒性休克患者28天预后预测价值最高。
Abstract: Objective: Research on early fluid resuscitation volume and associated clinical indicators involves blood urea nitrogen (BUN), lactate clearance rate (LCR), inferior vena cava variability (IVCV), acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACHE II) score, sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score for prognostic assessment in elderly patients with septic shock. Methods: The study included 70 elderly septic shock patients admitted in the East Hospital District of Qingdao Municipal Hospital from October 2020 to October 2023. According to the 28-day prognosis of patients, they were divided into survival group (34 cases, 48.6%) and death group (36 cases, 51.4%), Compare the general information of two groups of patients upon admission, as well as the fluid resuscitation volume, LCR, IVCV at 6 hours of admission, and APACHE II and SOFA scores within 24 hours of admission, the application of binary logistic regression analysis to analyze the independent risk factors affecting the 28-day prognosis of elderly patients with septic shock, and plot the working characteristics of the subjects (ROC) curve to evaluate the evaluation value of each indicator for the 28-day prognosis of elderly patients with septic shock. Results: The BUN, APACHE II and SOFA scores in the death group were higher than those in the survival group, 6 h LCR was lower than in the survival group, and the patients who were admitted to the death group for 6 hours without inferior vena cava variation (IVCV < 18% in patients with complete mechanical ventilation or IVCV < 50% in patients with autonomous breathing) were obvious, more than the surviving group (P < 0.05). The patients in the dead group received more fluid intake (P < 0.05) within 6 hours of admission. After applying binary logistic regression analysis to correct age, gender, BMI, albumin, CRP, PCT, basic diseases and other mixed factors, the results showed BUN (OR = 1.087, P < 0.05), 6 h LCR (OR = 0.983, P < 0.05), 6 h IVCV (OR = 15.557, P < 0.01), APACHE II score (OR = 1.175, P < 0.01), SOFA score (OR = 1.586, P < 0.01), and admission 6 h liquid resuscitation input (OR = 1.001, P < 0.05) are independent risk factors affecting the death of elderly patients with septic shock. The ROC curve analysis shows that BUN, 6 h LCR, APACHE II score, SOFA score, and 6 h fluid resuscitation input have a certain predictive value for the 28-day prognosis of elderly patients with septic shock (P < 0.05). Among them, The APACHE II score (AUC = 0.737, Cut off = 26.50, P < 0.01) and SOFA score (AUC = 0.735, Cut off = 9.50, P < 0.01) predict a higher AUC than other indicators for the 28-day prognosis of elderly patients with septic shock, and lower the four combined indicators (AUC = 0.785, P < 0.01). The combination of six indicators has the best predictable value for the 28-day prognosis of elderly patients with septic shock (AUC = 0.824, P < 0.01). Conclusion: 6 h liquid resuscitation intake, BUN, 6 h LCR, 6 h IVCV and APACHE II scores, and SOFA scores are all independent risk factors affecting the 28-day death of elderly patients with septic shock. In the treatment of fluid resuscitation in elderly patients with septic shock, it is not appropriate to ingest too much fluid in a short period of time (the optimal truncation value is 1042.50 mL, the sensitivity is 72.2%, and the specificity is 55.9%). Six indicators of admission 6 h liquid resuscitation input, BUN, 6 h LCR, 6 h IVCV and APACHE II score, and SOFA score have the highest prognostic value for 28 days of elderly patients with septic shock.
文章引用:王雅欣, 毕俏杰. 早期液体复苏入量及相关临床指标对老年脓毒性休克患者预后评估分析[J]. 临床医学进展, 2024, 14(3): 2230-2239. https://doi.org/10.12677/acm.2024.143967

参考文献

[1] Evans, L., Rhodes, A., Alhazzani, W., et al. (2021) Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2021. Critical Care Medicine, 49, e1063-e1143.
[2] Singer, M., Deutschman, C.S., Seymour, C., et al. (2016) The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA, 315, 801-810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[3] Angus, D.C. and Van der Poll, T. (2013) Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock. The New England Journal of Medicine, 369, 840-851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[4] Kingren, M.S., Starr, M.E. and Saito, H. (2021) Divergent Sepsis Pathophysiology in Older Adults. Antioxidants & Redox Signaling, 35, 1358-1375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[5] Rowe, T.A. and McKoy, J.M. (2017) Sepsis in Older Adults. Infectious Disease Clinics of North America, 31, 731-742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[6] Lee, S.H., Hsu, T.C., Lee, M.G., et al. (2018) Nationwide Trend of Sepsis: A Comparison among Octogenarians, Elderly, and Young Adults. Critical Care Medicine, 46, 926-934. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[7] Ibarz, M., Haas, L.E.M., Ceccato, A., et al. (2024) The Critically Ill Older Patient with Sepsis: A Narrative Review. Annals of Intensive Care, 14, Article No. 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[8] 张锦鑫, 沈括, 胡大海, 等. 脓毒症早期诊断和治疗进展[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2022, 17(1): 76-80.
[9] Gavelli, F., Castello, L.M. and Avanzi, G.C. (2021) Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock in the Emergency Department. Internal and Emergency Medicine, 16, 1649-1661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[10] Kuttab, H.I., Lykins, J.D., Hughes, M.D., et al. (2019) Evaluation and Predictors of Fluid Resuscitation in Patients with Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock. Critical Care Medicine, 47, 1582-1590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[11] Esme, M., Topeli, A., Yavuz, B.B., et al. (2019) Infections in the Elderly Critically-Ill Patients. Frontiers in Medicine, 6, Article 118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[12] Airapetian, N., Maizel, J., Alyamani, O., et al. (2015) Does Inferior Vena Cava Respiratory Variability Predict Fluid Responsiveness in Spontaneously Breathing Patients? Critical Care (London, England), 19, Article No. 400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[13] Ryoo, S.M., Lee, J., Lee, Y.-S., et al. (2018) Lactate Level versus Lactate Clearance for Predicting Mortality in Patients with Septic Shock Defined by Sepsis-3. Critical Care Medicine, 46, e489-e495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[14] Minasyan, H. (2017) Sepsis and Septic Shock: Pathogenesis and Treatment Perspectives. Journal of Critical Care, 40, 229-242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[15] Liu, Y.C., Yao, Y., Yu, M.M., et al. (2022) Frequency and Mortality of Sepsis and Septic Shock in China: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. BMC Infectious Diseases, 22, Article No. 564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[16] Font, M.D., Thyagarajan, B. and Khanna, A.K. (2020) Sepsis and Septic Shock—Basics of Diagnosis, Pathophysiology and Clinical Decision Making. The Medical Clinics of North America, 104, 573-585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[17] De Backer, D., Ricottilli, F. and Ospina-Tascón, G.A. (2021) Septic Shock: A Microcirculation Disease. Current Opinion in Anaesthesiology, 34, 85-91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[18] Arina, P. and Singer, M. (2021) Pathophysiology of Sepsis. Current Opinion in Anaesthesiology, 34, 77-84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[19] Rivers, E., Nguyen, B., Havstad, S., et al. (2001) Early Goal-Directed Therapy in the Treatment of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock. The New England Journal of Medicine, 345, 1368-1377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[20] Opal, S.M., Girard, T.D. and Ely, E.W. (2005) The Immunopathogenesis of Sepsis in Elderly Patients. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 41, S504-S512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[21] Poulose, N. and Raju, R. (2014) Aging and Injury: Alterations in Cellular Energetics and Organ Function. Aging and Disease, 5, 101-108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[22] Glassock, R.J. and Rule, A.D. (2016) Aging and the Kidneys: Anatomy, Physiology and Consequences for Defining Chronic Kidney Disease. Nephron, 134, 25-29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[23] 王柏磊, 周石连, 叶雨. 老年患者脓毒性休克液体复苏速度与预后的关系[J]. 蛇志, 2012, 24(2): 124-126.
[24] Marik, P.E., Byrne, L. and Van Haren, F. (2020) Fluid Resuscitation in Sepsis: The Great 30 mL per kg Hoax. Journal of Thoracic Disease, 12, S37-S47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[25] Han, D., Zhang, L., Zheng, S., et al. (2021) Prognostic Value of Blood Urea Nitrogen/Creatinine Ratio for Septic Shock: An Analysis of the MIMIC-III Clinical Database. BioMed Research International, 2021, Article ID: 5595042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[26] Peerapornratana, S., Manrique-Caballero, C.L., Gómez, H., et al. (2019) Acute Kidney Injury from Sepsis: Current Concepts, Epidemiology, Pathophysiology, Prevention and Treatment. Kidney International, 96, 1083-1099. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[27] Li, X., Zheng, R., Zhang, T., et al. (2021) Association between Blood Urea Nitrogen and 30-Day Mortality in Patients with Sepsis: A Retrospective Analysis. Annals of Palliative Medicine, 10, 11653-11663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[28] 张秋妍, 沈骁, 章淬, 等. 乳酸清除率对危重患者预后影响的研究进展[J] 中国医师杂志, 2023, 25(8): 1255-1259.
[29] Vincent, J.L. and Bakker, J. (2021) Blood Lactate Levels in Sepsis: In 8 Questions. Current Opinion in Critical Care, 27, 298-302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[30] Baysan, M., Baroni, G.D., Van Boekel, A.M., et al. (2020) The Added Value of Lactate and Lactate Clearance in Prediction of In-Hospital Mortality in Critically Ill Patients with Sepsis. Critical Care Explorations, 2, e0087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[31] Lee, S.G., Song, J., Park, D.W., et al. (2021) Prognostic Value of Lactate Levels and Lactate Clearance in Sepsis and Septic Shock with Initial Hyperlactatemia: A Retrospective Cohort Study According to the Sepsis-3 Definitions. Medicine, 100, e24835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[32] De Valk, S., Olgers, T.J., Holman, M., et al. (2014) The Caval Index: An Adequate Non-Invasive Ultrasound Parameter to Predict Fluid Responsiveness in the Emergency Department? BMC Anesthesiology, 14, Article No. 114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[33] Orso, D., Paoli, I., Piani, T., et al. (2020) Accuracy of Ultrasonographic Measurements of Inferior Vena Cava to Determine Fluid Responsiveness: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Intensive Care Medicine, 35, 354-363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]