切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"
高级检索
中华危重症医学杂志(电子版)

中华危重症医学杂志(电子版) ›› 2020, Vol. 13 ›› Issue (02) : 100 -105. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-6880.2020.02.005

所属专题： 文献；

论著

联合检测中性粒细胞与白蛋白比值和乳酸对脓毒性休克患者早期预后的评估价值
陈文秀1, 沈骁1, 宋晓春1, 孙加奎1, 章文豪1, 王翔1, 刘颖1, 刘汉1, 施乾坤1, 章淬1, 穆心苇1,†()   
  1. 1. 210006　南京，南京市第一医院重症医学科
  • 收稿日期:2020-01-13 出版日期:2020-04-01
  • 通信作者: 穆心苇

Prognostic value of combined detection of neutrophil to albumin ratio and lactic acid on patients with septic shock

Wenxiu Chen1, Xiao Shen1, Xiaochun Song1, Jiakui Sun1, Wenhao Zhang1, Xiang Wang1, Ying Liu1, Han Liu1, Qiankun Shi1, Cui Zhang1, Xinwei Mu1,†()   

  1. 1. Department of Intensive Care Unit, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing 210006, China
  • Received:2020-01-13 Published:2020-04-01
  • Corresponding author: Xinwei Mu
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Mu Xinwei, Email:
全文 ( ) 下载PDF ( ) 导出引用
引用本文：

陈文秀, 沈骁, 宋晓春, 孙加奎, 章文豪, 王翔, 刘颖, 刘汉, 施乾坤, 章淬, 穆心苇. 联合检测中性粒细胞与白蛋白比值和乳酸对脓毒性休克患者早期预后的评估价值[J/OL]. 中华危重症医学杂志(电子版), 2020, 13(02): 100-105.

Wenxiu Chen, Xiao Shen, Xiaochun Song, Jiakui Sun, Wenhao Zhang, Xiang Wang, Ying Liu, Han Liu, Qiankun Shi, Cui Zhang, Xinwei Mu. Prognostic value of combined detection of neutrophil to albumin ratio and lactic acid on patients with septic shock[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Critical Care Medicine(Electronic Edition), 2020, 13(02): 100-105.

目的

探讨中性粒细胞与白蛋白比值（NAR）和乳酸对脓毒性休克患者28 d死亡的预测价值。

方法

回顾性分析2017年10月至2019年10月南京市第一医院ICU收治的118例脓毒性休克患者的临床资料，记录所有患者的年龄、性别、体质量指数（BMI）、急性病生理学和长期健康评价（APACHE）Ⅱ评分、序贯器官衰竭估计（SOFA）评分、C反应蛋白质（CRP）、降钙素原、NAR、白细胞计数、红细胞分布宽度（RDW）、乳酸、住ICU时间、机械通气时间、行连续肾脏替代疗法（CRRT）、肺部感染、腹腔感染、泌尿系感染、血行感染和28 d死亡情况。将上述因素纳入单因素Logistic回归分析，初步筛选出相关的影响因素，再纳入多因素Logistic回归分析，得到影响脓毒性休克患者28 d死亡的独立危险因素；采用受试者工作特征（ROC）曲线分析NAR、乳酸及两者联合对脓毒性休克患者28 d死亡的预测价值，并用Z检验比较曲线下面积（AUC）。

结果

经单因素Logistic回归分析，初步筛选出影响脓毒性休克患者28 d死亡的9个因素，包括男性[比值比（OR）= 0.345，95%置信区间（CI）（0.603，3.357），P = 0.004]、SOFA评分[OR = 1.183，95%CI（1.036，1.350），P = 0.013]、NAR [OR = 2.849，95%CI（1.487，5.457），P = 0.002]、乳酸[OR = 1.275，95%CI（1.108，1.467），P = 0.001]、机械通气时间[OR = 0.254，95%CI（1.025，1.223），P < 0.001]、行CRRT [OR = 4.585，95%CI（1.737，12.100），P = 0.002]、存在肺部感染[OR = 0.282，95%CI（0.898，4.732），P < 0.001]、存在腹腔感染[OR = 0.460，95%CI（0.392，1.989），P = 0.002]、存在泌尿系感染[OR = 0.464，95%CI（0.201，2.195），P < 0.001]。将上述影响因素纳入多因素Logistic回归分析，结果显示，NAR [OR = 4.424，95%CI（1.427，13.717），P = 0.010]、乳酸[OR = 1.267，95%CI（1.008，1.594），P = 0.043]、机械通气时间[OR = 1.168，95%CI（1.007，1.356），P = 0.041]、行CRRT [OR = 5.148，95%CI（1.069，24.794），P = 0.041]是脓毒性休克患者28 d死亡的独立危险因素。ROC曲线分析结果显示，NAR [AUC = 0.676，95%CI（0.572，0.780），P = 0.001]、乳酸[AUC = 0.696，95%CI（0.592，0.800），P < 0.001]及NAR和乳酸联合[AUC = 0.759，95%CI（0.699，0.850），P < 0.001]均对脓毒性休克患者28 d死亡具有预测价值，且NAR和乳酸联合的AUC显著高于NAR（Z = 2.110，P = 0.035）及乳酸（Z = 1.991，P = 0.047）。

结论

NAR和乳酸对脓毒性休克患者28 d死亡有一定的预测价值，且两者联合能够提高预测价值。

关键词: 中性粒细胞与白蛋白比值, 乳酸, 脓毒性休克, 28 d死亡
Objective

To evaluate the prognostic value of neutrophil to albumin ratio (NAR) and lactic acid on 28-day mortality of patients with septic shock.

Methods

Clinical data of 118 patients with septic shock admitted to the ICU of Nanjing First Hospital from October 2017 to October 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. The age, sex, body mass index (BMI), acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE)Ⅱ score, sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score, C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin, NAR, leukocyte count, red blood cell distribution width (RDW), lactic acid, ICU stay, mechanical ventilation time, continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT), pulmonary infection, abdominal infection, urinary tract infection, blood transfusion infection, and 28-day death were recorded in all patients. Then they were included in the univariate Logistic regression analysis, and relative influencing factors were preliminarily screened and included in the multivariate Logistic regression analysis to obtain independent risk factors affecting 28-day mortality in patients with septic shock. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to analyze the predictive value of NAR, lactic acid and their combination on 28-day mortality, and the areas under the curves (AUCs) were compared with the Z-test.

Results

Univariate Logistic regression analysis showed that male [odds ratio (OR) = 0.345, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.603, 3.357), P = 0.004], SOFA score [OR = 1.183, 95%CI (1.036, 1.350), P = 0.013], NAR [OR = 2.849, 95%CI (1.487, 5.457), P = 0.002], lactic acid [OR = 1.275, 95%CI (1.108, 1.467), P = 0.001], mechanical ventilation time [OR = 0.254, 95%CI (1.025, 1.223), P < 0.001], CRRT [OR = 4.585, 95%CI (1.737, 12.100), P = 0.002], pulmonary infection [OR = 0.282, 95%CI (0.898, 4.732), P < 0.001], abdominal infection [OR = 0.460, 95%CI (0.392, 1.989), P = 0.002] and urinary tract infection [OR = 0.464, 95%CI (0.201, 2.195), P < 0.001] were associated with 28-day mortality of patients with septic shock. When these factors were taken into account in the multiple Logistic regression analysis, the results showed that NAR [OR = 4.424, 95%CI (1.427, 13.717), P = 0.010], lactic acid [OR = 1.267, 95%CI (1.008, 1.594), P = 0.043], mechanical ventilation time [OR = 1.168, 95%CI (1.007, 1.356), P = 0.041] and CRRT [OR = 5.148, 95%CI (1.069, 24.794), P = 0.041] were independent risk factors for 28-day death. ROC curve analysis showed that NAR [AUC = 0.676, 95%CI (0.572, 0.780), P = 0.001], lactic acid [AUC = 0.696, 95%CI (0.592, 0.800), P < 0.001] and their combination [AUC = 0.759, 95%CI (0.699, 0.850), P < 0.001] had predictive values for 28-day death of patients with septic shock. In addition, the AUC of NAR and lactic acid combination was significantly higher than that of NAR (Z = 2.110, P = 0.035) and lactic acid (Z = 1.991, P = 0.047).

Conclusion

NAR and lactic acid are predictive for 28-day mortality of patients with septic shock, and their combination can improve the predictive value.

Key words: Neutrophil to albumin ratio, Lactic acid, Shock, septic, 28-day mortality
表1 影响脓毒性休克患者患者28 d死亡的主要分类变量赋值方法
影响因素 赋值
性别 男 = 1，女 = 0
CRRT 是 = 1，否 = 0
肺部感染 是 = 1，否 = 0
腹腔感染 是 = 1，否 = 0
泌尿系感染 是 = 1，否 = 0
血行感染 是 = 1，否 = 0
表2 脓毒性休克患者28 d死亡的单因素Logistic回归分析
影响因素 回归系数 标准误 Wald值 P值 OR值 95%CI
年龄（岁） 1.821 0.941 3.744 0.053 0.162 0.989 ~ 1.041
男性 -1.065 0.367 8.429 0.004 0.345 0.603 ~ 3.357
BMI（kg/m2） -0.081 1.221 0.004 0.947 0.922 0.871 ~ 1.072
APACHEⅡ评分（分） 0.036 0.025 2.049 0.152 1.037 0.987 ~ 1.090
SOFA评分（分） 0.168 0.068 6.128 0.013 1.183 1.036 ~ 1.350
CRP（mg/L） 0.002 0.002 1.070 0.301 1.002 0.998 ~ 1.006
降钙素原（μg/L） -0.005 0.005 0.856 0.355 0.995 0.985 ~ 1.005
NAR（× 109/g） 1.047 0.332 9.959 0.002 2.849 1.487 ~ 5.457
白细胞计数（× 109/L） -0.464 0.356 1.701 0.192 0.629 0.930 ~ 1.019
RDW（%） 0.149 0.125 1.401 0.236 1.160 0.907 ~ 1.483
乳酸（mmol/L） 0.243 0.072 11.538 0.001 1.275 1.108 ~ 1.467
住ICU时间（d） -0.018 0.030 0.361 0.548 0.982 0.927 ~ 1.041
机械通气时间（d） -1.372 0.306 20.142 < 0.001 0.254 1.025 ~ 1.223
行CRRT 1.523 0.495 9.455 0.002 4.585 1.737 ~ 12.100
肺部感染 -1.266 0.341 13.744 < 0.001 0.282 0.898 ~ 4.732
腹腔感染 -0.777 0.252 9.499 0.002 0.460 0.392 ~ 1.989
泌尿系感染 -0.768 0.214 12.907 < 0.001 0.464 0.201 ~ 2.195
血行感染 -1.016 1.099 0.855 0.355 0.362 0.042 ~ 3.121
表3 脓毒性休克患者28 d死亡的多因素Logistic回归分析
影响因素 回归系数 标准误 Wald值 P值 OR值 95%CI
男性 0.710 0.874 0.673 0.412 2.049 0.369 ~ 11.364
SOFA评分（分） 0.091 0.091 0.706 0.401 0.401 0.885 ~ 1.356
NAR（× 109/g） 1.487 0.577 6.634 0.010 4.424 1.427 ~ 13.717
乳酸（mmol/L） 0.237 0.117 4.101 0.043 1.267 1.008 ~ 1.594
机械通气时间（d） 0.156 0.076 4.190 0.041 1.168 1.007 ~ 1.356
行CRRT 1.639 0.802 4.173 0.041 5.148 1.069 ~ 24.794
肺部感染 0.273 0.942 0.084 0.772 1.313 0.207 ~ 8.324
腹腔感染 -0.271 0.940 0.083 0.773 0.763 0.121 ~ 4.816
泌尿系感染 -1.203 1.808 0.443 0.506 0.300 0.009 ~ 10.394
图1 NAR、乳酸及两者联合预测脓毒性休克患者28 d死亡的ROC曲线分析
[1]
Rhodes A, Evans LE, Alhazzani W, et al. Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2016[J]. Intensive Care Med, 2017, 43 (3): 304-377.
[2]
Green JM. Essentials of sepsis management[J]. Surg Clin North Am, 2015, 95 (2): 355-365.
[3]
韦广莹，卢荣桓，李晶.血清超敏C反应蛋白、血清样淀粉酶A与降钙素原对脓毒症患者的预测价值[J/CD].中华危重症医学杂志（电子版），2015，8（4）：235-240.
[4]
García de Guadiana-Romualdo LM, Rebollo-Acebes S, Esteban-Torrella P, et al. Prognostic value of lipopolysaccharide binding protein and procalcitonin in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock admitted to intensive care[J]. Med Intensiva, 2015, 39 (4): 207-212.
[5]
Boran OF, Yazar FM, Boran M, et al. The preseptic period and inflammatory markers in the prediction of the course of sepsis[J]. Med Sci Monit, 2018 (24): 3531-3539.
[6]
Yin M, Si L, Qin W, et al. Predictive value of serum albumin level for the prognosis of severe sepsis without exogenous human albumin administration: a prospective cohort study[J]. J Intensive Care Med, 2018, 33 (12): 687-694.
[7]
赵天平，陈华刚.中性粒细胞和白蛋白的比值对小儿严重脓毒症预后的预测价值[J].浙江医学，2019，41（13）：1387-1390.
[8]
Fang YN, Tong MS, Sung PH, et al. Higher neutrophil counts and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio predict prognostic outcomes in patients after non-atrial fibrillation-caused ischemic stroke[J]. Biomed J, 2017, 40 (3): 154-162.
[9]
Vavrova L, Rychlikova J, Mrackova M, et al. Increased inflammatory markers with altered antioxidant status persist after clinical recovery from severe sepsis: a correlation with low HDL cholesterol and albumin[J]. Clin Exp Med, 2016, 16 (4): 557-569.
[10]
Huang Z, Fu Z, Huang W, et al. Prognostic value of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in sepsis: a meta-analysis[J]. Am J Emerg Med, 2019.
[11]
韩涛，邓秋明，万献尧. 脓毒症患者低白蛋白血症研究进展[J].中华医学杂志，2017，97（3）：228-231.
[12]
Arnau-Barrés I, Güerri-Fernández R, Luque S, et al. Serum albumin is a strong predictor of sepsis outcome in elderly patients[J]. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis,2019, 38 (4): 743-746.
[13]
Tawfik B, Mokdad AA, Patel PM, et al. The neutrophil to albumin ratio as a predictor of pathological complete response in rectal cancer patients following neoadjuvant chemoradiation[J]. Anticancer Drugs, 2016, 27 (9): 879-883.
[14]
Shen H, Dai Z, Wang M, et al. Preprocedural neutrophil to albumin ratio predicts in-stent restenosis following carotid angioplasty and stenting[J]. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis, 2019, 28 (9): 2442-2447.
[15]
Chen FC, Kung CT, Cheng HH, et al. Metformin affects serum lactate levels in predicting mortality of patients with sepsis and bacteremia[J]. J Clin Med, 2019, 8 (3).
[16]
Liu Y, Zheng J, Zhang D, et al. Neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio and plasma lactate predict 28-day mortality in patients with sepsis[J]. J Clin Lab Anal, 2019, 33 (7): 22942.
[17]
Zhang HB, Chen J, Lan QF, et al. Diagnostic values of red cell distribution width, platelet distribution width and neutrophil-lymphocyte count ratio for sepsis[J]. Exp Ther Med, 2016, 12 (4): 2215-2219.
[18]
杨爱华，赵丽娟.老年脓毒症休克患者血红细胞分布宽度和乳酸水平与预后的关系[J].中国老年学杂志，2019，39（2）：5038-5041.
[19]
Elliott TS, Casey AL, Karpanen TJ, et al. Addition of PLA2 to CRP enhances sepsis diagnosis[J]. J Infect, 2016, 73 (4): 386-388.
[20]
Yu Y, Li XX, Jiang LX, et al. Procalcitonin levels in patients with positive blood culture, positive body fluid culture, sepsis, and severe sepsis: a cross-sectional study[J]. Infect Dis, 2016, 48 (1): 63-69.
[1] 姚宁宁, 蒋丽, 张小霞, 陆玉成. 组蛋白乳酸化修饰及其在乳腺癌中的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(04): 231-234.
[2] 刘世佳, 陶新楠, 史晋宇, 吕文豪, 张亚芬. 乳酸脱氢酶A在乳腺癌中的作用[J/OL]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(03): 175-179.
[3] 张霞, 张瑞, 郑志波, 张勤. 紫草素调控乳酸化修饰和线粒体功能改善脓毒症心肌病小鼠的预后[J/OL]. 中华危重症医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(04): 275-284.
[4] 朱金伟, 陆件, 宁文娜, 陈亚欧. 基于肠道生物标志物探讨三种营养策略对重度胃肠损伤患者的价值[J/OL]. 中华危重症医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(02): 111-117.
[5] 吴卫照, 肖贞, 袁转苹, 吴丹, 李源斌. MTO1基因变异致联合氧化磷酸化缺陷症10型患儿的临床和遗传学分析[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(06): 719-727.
[6] 张延清, 冯少霞, 陈宇. 乳酸乳球菌对致龋菌生长及生物膜形成的作用[J/OL]. 中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(02): 96-102.
[7] 王淑贤, 张良灏, 王利君, 张慧, 郭源, 许传屾, 李志强, 蔡金贞, 解曼, 饶伟. 成人肝移植围手术期严重心血管事件危险因素分析及预测模型研究[J/OL]. 中华移植杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(04): 222-229.
[8] 钟文文, 李科, 刘碧好, 蔡炳, 脱颖, 叶雷, 马波, 瞿虎, 汪中扬, 王德娟, 邱剑光. 不同比例聚乳酸/丝素蛋白复合支架在兔尿道缺损修复中的疗效[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 516-522.
[9] 韩苏驰, 黄琰菁. 乳酸脱氢酶与小细胞肺癌脑转移风险临床分析[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(03): 402-406.
[10] 程玲燕, 卢嘉宾, 韦庆, 兰祖. 急性低氧性呼吸衰竭乳酸/白蛋白比值与病死率相关性分析[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2023, 16(05): 654-657.
[11] 孙文恺, 沈青, 杭丽, 张迎春. 纤维蛋白原与清蛋白比值、中性粒细胞与白蛋白比值、C反应蛋白与溃疡性结肠炎病情评估和预后的关系[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(05): 426-431.
[12] 高静, 夏婷婷. 血清乳酸脱氢酶、中性粒细胞/淋巴细胞比值、血浆纤维蛋白原/前白蛋白比值对晚期结直肠癌患者姑息化疗效果与不良反应的评价[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(03): 203-207.
[13] 王秀, 王义国. 益生菌联合恩替卡韦治疗乙型肝炎肝硬化临床疗效的meta分析[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(02): 164-171.
[14] 宫平, 刘倩, 王啸, 袁会敏, 王维展, 王璞. 早期PI联合Pv-aCO2/Ca-vO2预测老年脓毒性休克的死亡风险[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(03): 253-258.
[15] 李易飞, 李文冉, 刘欢. 乳酸脱氢酶A在乳腺癌诊疗中的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华诊断学电子杂志, 2024, 12(02): 128-132.
阅读次数
全文


摘要

版权所有 中华医学会 中华医学电子音像出版社有限责任公司  京ICP备14006079号-1  网络出版服务许可证：(署)网出证(京)字第075号