不同标准对脓毒症急性肾损伤患者预后评估的价值

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-1358.2016.04.011

目的

探究APACHE Ⅱ、SOFA及KDIGO共3种标准对脓毒症AKI患者的预后评估价值。

方法

搜集2013年1月至2015年1月于本院ICU接受治疗的250例脓毒症患者的临床资料，根据患者收入ICU病房的第一个24 h内的生理指标最差值，分别采用APACHE Ⅱ、SOFA评分标准对其进行评分，同时采用KDIGO标准对所有患者进行AKI诊断及分期，并用ROC曲线评估3种标准对患者预后评估的准确度，3种标准对患者预后的影响的差异则采用Logistic多元回归进行分析。

结果

250例脓毒症患者中，脓毒症肾损伤患者145例（占58%），脓毒症非肾损伤患者105例（占42%），总体院内病死率为28.6%，脓毒症肾损伤患者中Ⅰ期患者72例（占49.7%），病死率为24.3%；Ⅱ期患者44例（占30.3%），病死率为36.6%；Ⅲ期患者29例（占20.0），病死率为75.4%。与脓毒症非AKI患者相比，脓毒症肾损伤患者的APACHE Ⅱ及SOFA评分明显偏高，且差异具有统计学意义（t = 3.206，P < 0.05），Logistic多元回归分析表明，APACHEⅡ评分> 22分（OR = 4.50）及KDIGO分期中Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ期（OR = 2.42、7.53和43.00）是预测脓毒症肾损伤患者院内死亡的独立标准。

结论

APACHE Ⅱ、SOFA及KDIGO三种标准对脓毒症肾损伤患者预后均有较好的预测价值。

关键词: 脓毒症, 急性肾损伤, 急性生理与慢性健康状况评分, 序贯器官衰竭评估

Objective

To explore the difference of the prognostic evaluation value of patients with AKI caused by sepsis in three evaluation criteria of KDIGO, APACHE Ⅱ and SOFA.

Methods

Clinical data of 250 patients with septic in department of intensive care medicine in our hospital from January 2013 to January 2015 were collected. APACHE Ⅱand SOFA scores of all patients were evaluated according to the worst value of physiologic variables in the first 24 h after ICU admission and was classified by KDIGO criteria. Discrimination and calibration of these three models were assessed by ROC curve. Besides, their effects on prognostic were evaluated by multiple Logistic regression analysis.

Results

Among the 250 admissions, 145 patients developed into AKI with the incidence of 58%. There were 105 sepsis patients with non-AKI, accounting for 42%, and the overall mortality was 29.8%. There were of 72 cases (49.7%) in phase I with the mortality rate as 24.3%; phase Ⅱof 44 patients (30.3%) with the mortality rate as 36.6%; phase Ⅲ of 29 cases (20.0%) with the mortality rate as 75.4%. APACHE Ⅱ, SOFA score of sepsis patients with AKI were significantly higher than patients with non-AKI (t = 3.206, P < 0.05). In sepsis patients with AKI, Logistic multivariate regression analysis showed that APACHE Ⅱ higher than 22 points (OR = 4.50), the KDIGO stageⅠ, Ⅱ, Ⅲ (OR = 2.42, 7.53 and 43.00) were all predictors to in-hospital deaths.

Conclusion

All the three criterias of APACHE Ⅱ, SOFA and KDIGO present good discrimination and calibration in predicting the outcome.

Key words: Sepsis, Acute kidney injury, Acute physiology and chronic health evaluation, Sequential organ failure assessment

表1 两组患者的一般资料

指征	脓毒症非AKI组（105例）	脓毒症AKI组（145例）	统计量	P值
年龄（ ±s，岁）	55.0±8.7	59.0±10.5	t = 3.190	0.002
男性[例（%）]	59（57.1）	78（53.8）	χ² = 0.276	0.599
合并慢性病[例（%）]	22（21.3）	60（41.5）	χ² = 11.529	0.001
实际病死率[例（%）]	19（18.3）	63（43.5）	χ² = 17.760	0.000
APACHE Ⅱ评分（ ±s，分）	13.8±6.6	17.3±9.6	t = 3.224	0.001
SOFA评分（ ±s，分）	5.4±3.2	7.1±4.7	t = 3.206	0.002

表1 两组患者的一般资料

指征	脓毒症非AKI组（105例）	脓毒症AKI组（145例）	统计量	P值
年龄（ ±s，岁）	55.0±8.7	59.0±10.5	t = 3.190	0.002
男性[例（%）]	59（57.1）	78（53.8）	χ² = 0.276	0.599
合并慢性病[例（%）]	22（21.3）	60（41.5）	χ² = 11.529	0.001
实际病死率[例（%）]	19（18.3）	63（43.5）	χ² = 17.760	0.000
APACHE Ⅱ评分（ ±s，分）	13.8±6.6	17.3±9.6	t = 3.224	0.001
SOFA评分（ ±s，分）	5.4±3.2	7.1±4.7	t = 3.206	0.002

表2 脓毒症AKI Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ期患者肾功能、APACHE和SOFA评分以及院内死亡情况

项目	Ⅰ期	Ⅱ期	Ⅲ期
例数	72	44	29
基础肌酐值（ ±s，mmol/L）	68.3±36.4	71.2±25.7	95.6±58.7
最高肌酐值（ ±s，mmol/L）	131.7±52.3	233.9±97.8	413.7±186.6
实际病死率[例（%）]	11（15.9）	18（41.6）	20（68.8）
SOFA评分	4.7±3.5	8.1±6.4	9.3±3.8
APACHE Ⅱ评分	15.7±7.7	18.6±7.8	22.3±3.4

表2 脓毒症AKI Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ期患者肾功能、APACHE和SOFA评分以及院内死亡情况

项目	Ⅰ期	Ⅱ期	Ⅲ期
例数	72	44	29
基础肌酐值（ ±s，mmol/L）	68.3±36.4	71.2±25.7	95.6±58.7
最高肌酐值（ ±s，mmol/L）	131.7±52.3	233.9±97.8	413.7±186.6
实际病死率[例（%）]	11（15.9）	18（41.6）	20（68.8）
SOFA评分	4.7±3.5	8.1±6.4	9.3±3.8
APACHE Ⅱ评分	15.7±7.7	18.6±7.8	22.3±3.4

表3 APACHE Ⅱ、SOFA评分系统及KDIGO分期系统对脓毒症AKI患者院内病死率影响的Logistic多元回归分析

项目	Beta值	S.E.值	Wald值	OR值	95%CI值	P值
APACHE Ⅱ评分	1.447	0.461	9.852	4.250	1.722～10.491	0.002
SOFA评分	0.429	1.201	0.128	1.536	0.146～16.167	0.720
KDIGO Ⅰ期	0.775	0.263	8.683	2.171	1.296～3.635	0.003
KDIGO Ⅱ期	2.083	0.674	9.551	8.029	2.142～30.085	0.000
KDIGO Ⅲ期	3.723	1.095	11.560	41.388	4.839～353.966	0.001

表3 APACHE Ⅱ、SOFA评分系统及KDIGO分期系统对脓毒症AKI患者院内病死率影响的Logistic多元回归分析

项目	Beta值	S.E.值	Wald值	OR值	95%CI值	P值
APACHE Ⅱ评分	1.447	0.461	9.852	4.250	1.722～10.491	0.002
SOFA评分	0.429	1.201	0.128	1.536	0.146～16.167	0.720
KDIGO Ⅰ期	0.775	0.263	8.683	2.171	1.296～3.635	0.003
KDIGO Ⅱ期	2.083	0.674	9.551	8.029	2.142～30.085	0.000
KDIGO Ⅲ期	3.723	1.095	11.560	41.388	4.839～353.966	0.001

1	贾静，富小红，贾雪飞, 等. 高龄急性肾损伤患者的护理对策[J]. 中国临床保健志,2014,6(2):651-652.
2	Shih YC, Lee PY, Cheng H, et al. Adiposederived stem cells exhibit antioxidative and antiapoptotic properties to rescue ischemic acute kidney injury in rats. Plast Reconstr Surg,2013,132(33):940-942.
3	周景霞，尤丕聪，刘春涛, 等. 探讨急性肾损伤分期的KDIGO标准在选择连续性血液净化治疗介入时机中的指导意义[J]. 中华危重病急救医学,2013,25(7):420-423.
4	Okusa M, Davenport A. Reading between the (guide)lines--the KDIGO practice guideline on acute kidney injury in the individual patient[J]. Kidney Int,2014,85(1):39-48.
5	Cerro L, Valencia J, Calle P, et al. Validation of APACHE Ⅱ and SOFA scores in 2 cohorts of patients with suspected infection and sepsis, not admitted to critical care units[J]. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim,2014,9(3):125-132.
6	Wang HE, Shapiro NI, Safford MM, et al. High-sensitivity C-reactive protein and risk of sepsis[J]. PLoS One,2013,8(2):132-135.
7	董磊. 肾替代模式对脓毒症休克合并急性肾损伤的疗效影响[J]. 中国现代医学杂志,2013,23(19):56-60.
8	麦振华，佟琳，钟秀明, 等. 脓毒症患者肾损伤程度与血浆血管生成素-1, 2水平相关性的研究[J]. 四川医学,2014,23(7):757-760.
9	Lindlau AN, Widmann C, Putensen C, et al. Predictors of hippocampal atrophy in critically ill patients[J]. Eur J Neurol,2015,22(2):410-415.
10	李建秋，杨琴，党西强, 等. 新生儿急性肾损伤研究进展[J]. 中华实用儿科临床杂志,2014,29(17):1345-1348.
11	Aslaner A, Gunal O, Turgut HT, et al. Effect of melatonin on kidney cold ischemic preservation injury[J]. Int J Clin Exp Med,2013,6(2):794-798.
12	Facem M, Facem GA, Daniel M, et al. Comparison of PIRO, SOFA, and MEDS scores for predicting mortality in emergency department patients with severe sepsis and septic shock[J]. Acad Emerg Med,2014,21(11):1257-1263.
13	Craciun FL, Iskander KN, Chiswick EL, et al. Early murine polymicrobial sepsis predominantly causes renal injury[J]. Shock,2014,41(8):97-103.
14	Olguner CG, Koca U, Altekin E, et al. Ischemic preconditioning attenuates lipid peroxidation and apoptosis in the cecal ligation and puncture model of sepsis[J]. Exp Ther Med,2013,5(3):1581-1588.
15	Koca U, Olguner ÇG, Ergür BU, et al. The effects of dexmedetomidine on secondary acute lung and kidney injuries in the rat model of intra-abdominal sepsis[J]. Sci World J,2013:29(2)687-689.
16	Luo CJ, Zhang FJ, Zhang L, et al. Mesenchymal stem cells ameliorate sepsis-associated acute kidney injury in mice[J]. Shock,2014,41(8):123-129.
17	Chancharoenthana W, Tiranathanagul K, Srisawat N, et al. Enhanced vascular endothelial growth factor and inflammatory cytokine removal with online hemodiafiltration over high-flux hemodialysis in sepsis-related acute kidney injury patients[J]. Ther Apher Dial,2013,17(3):557-563.
18	Wang Z, Holthoff JH, Seely KA, et al. Development of oxidative stress in the peritubular capillary microenvironment mediates sepsis-induced renal microcirculatory failure and acute kidney injury[J]. Am J Pathol,2012,180(56):505-516.
19	Srinivasan V, Zakaria R, Othman Z, et al. Acuña-Castroviejo D. Agomelatine in depressive disorders: its novel mechanisms of action[J]. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci,2012,24(5):290-308.
20	Molteni R, Macchi F, Zecchillo C, et al. Modulation of the inflammatory response in rats chronically treated with the antidepressant agomelatine[J]. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol,2013,23(3):1645-1655.
21	Zeden JP, Fusch G, Holtfreter B, et al. Excessive tryptophan catabolism along the kynurenine pathway precedes ongoing sepsis in critically ill patients[J]. Anaesth Intensive Care,2010,38(12):307-316.
22	Shih YC, Lee PY, Cheng H, et al. Adiposederived stem cells exhibit antioxidative and antiapoptotic properties to rescue ischemic acute kidney injury in rats[J]. Plast Reconstr Surg,2013,132(18):940e-951e.
23	Holthoff JH, Wang Z, Patil NK, et al. Rolipram improves renal perfusion and function during sepsis in the mouse[J]. J Pharmacol Exp Ther,2013,347(56):357-364.

[1]	韩圣瑾, 周正武, 翁云龙, 黄鑫. 碳酸氢钠林格液联合连续性肾脏替代疗法对创伤合并急性肾损伤患者炎症水平及肾功能的影响[J]. 中华危重症医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 16(05): 376-381.
[2]	张秋彬, 张楠, 林清婷, 徐军, 朱华栋, 姜辉. 急性胰腺炎合并急性肾损伤患者的预后评估[J]. 中华危重症医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 16(05): 382-389.
[3]	孟建标, 张庚, 焦燕娜. 脓毒症合并心功能障碍患者早期肠道微生态改变的探讨[J]. 中华危重症医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 16(04): 279-285.
[4]	陈宇, 冯芳, 张露, 刘健. 基于生物信息学分析筛选脓毒症心肌病关键致病基因[J]. 中华危重症医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 16(04): 286-291.
[5]	张晓燕, 肖东琼, 高沪, 陈琳, 唐发娟, 李熙鸿. 转录因子12过表达对脓毒症相关性脑病大鼠大脑皮质的保护作用及其机制[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 540-549.
[6]	魏徐, 张鸽, 伍金林. 新生儿脓毒症相关性凝血病的监测和治疗[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(04): 379-386.
[7]	姚咏明. 如何精准评估烧伤脓毒症患者免疫状态[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2023, 18(06): 552-552.
[8]	窦上文, 邓欢, 刘邦锋, 岳高远志, 朱华财, 刘永达. 术前复查尿培养在预测微通道经皮肾镜取石术相关感染并发症中的作用[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 361-366.
[9]	李伟, 卓剑, 黄川, 黄有攀. Lac、HO-1、sRAGE、CRP/ALB表达及脓毒症并发ARDS危险因素分析[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2023, 16(04): 514-516.
[10]	李青霖, 宋仁杰, 周飞虎. 一种重型劳力性热射病相关急性肾损伤小鼠模型的建立与探讨[J]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2023, 12(05): 265-270.
[11]	任加发, 邬步云, 邢昌赢, 毛慧娟. 2022年急性肾损伤领域基础与临床研究进展[J]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2023, 12(05): 276-281.
[12]	李金璞, 饶向荣. 抗病毒药物和急性肾损伤[J]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2023, 12(05): 287-290.
[13]	易成, 韦伟, 赵宇亮. 急性肾脏病的概念沿革[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(08): 906-910.
[14]	谭睿, 王晶, 於江泉, 郑瑞强. 脓毒症中高密度脂蛋白、载脂蛋白A-I和血清淀粉样蛋白A的作用研究进展[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 749-753.
[15]	蔡荇, 郑瑞强. 肝素结合蛋白在脓毒症中的应用及研究进展[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 487-490.

阅读次数

全文

摘要

选择文件类型/文献管理软件名称

选择包含的内容

The value of different criteria in assessing the prognostic evaluation of patients with AKI caused by sepsis

模态框（Modal）标题

选择文件类型/文献管理软件名称

选择包含的内容

The value of different criteria in assessing the prognostic evaluation of patients with AKI caused by sepsis