切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华危重症医学杂志(电子版) ›› 2022, Vol. 15 ›› Issue (01) : 22 -27. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-6880.2022.01.005

论著

脓毒症合并胰腺损伤的危险因素及预后分析
冯娟1, 吴先正1, 王蒙蒙1, 张海霞1, 宋艳丽1,()   
  1. 1. 200065 上海,同济大学附属同济医院急诊医学科
  • 收稿日期:2021-07-21 出版日期:2022-02-28
  • 通信作者: 宋艳丽
  • 基金资助:
    上海市科学技术委员会产学研医合作项目(12DZl930503); 上海市科学技术委员会中医引导项目(19401930700)

Analysis of risk factors and prognosis in pancreatic injury patients with sepsis

Juan Feng1, Xianzheng Wu1, Mengmeng Wang1, Haixia Zhang1, Yanli Song1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Emergency, Tongji Hospital of Tongji University, Shanghai 200065, China
  • Received:2021-07-21 Published:2022-02-28
  • Corresponding author: Yanli Song
引用本文:

冯娟, 吴先正, 王蒙蒙, 张海霞, 宋艳丽. 脓毒症合并胰腺损伤的危险因素及预后分析[J/OL]. 中华危重症医学杂志(电子版), 2022, 15(01): 22-27.

Juan Feng, Xianzheng Wu, Mengmeng Wang, Haixia Zhang, Yanli Song. Analysis of risk factors and prognosis in pancreatic injury patients with sepsis[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Critical Care Medicine(Electronic Edition), 2022, 15(01): 22-27.

目的

探讨脓毒症合并胰腺损伤患者早期预警及预后的风险因素。

方法

回顾性分析同济大学附属同济医院2017年2月到2020年12月急诊重症监护病房收治的210例脓毒症患者。根据是否合并胰腺损伤将210例脓毒症患者分为胰腺损伤组(52例)和无胰腺损伤组(158例),根据胰腺损伤患者住院期间的生存情况将其分为存活组(34例)和死亡组(18例)。记录所有患者的一般情况、基础疾病、入院24 h内生命体征、实验室指标、急性病生理学和长期健康评价(APACHE)Ⅱ评分及序贯器官衰竭估计(SOFA)评分。分别采用多因素Logistic回归分析和多因素Cox回归分析影响脓毒症合并胰腺损伤早期预警及预后的危险因素。

结果

胰腺损伤组与无胰腺损伤组脓毒症患者APACHEⅡ评分、白细胞计数、降钙素原、超敏C反应蛋白(hs-CRP)、淀粉酶、脂肪酶、肌酐、血小板计数、丙氨酸转氨酶、天冬氨酸氨基转移酶及心肌肌钙蛋白I比较,差异均有统计学意义(P均< 0.05);而两组患者住院期间病死率比较,差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。胰腺损伤患者存活组和死亡组年龄、APACHEⅡ评分、SOFA评分、血乳酸及白细胞介素6水平比较,差异均有统计学意义(P均< 0.05)。多因素Logistic回归分析结果显示,降钙素原[比值比(OR)= 1.007,95%置信区间(CI)(0.970,1.005),P = 0.039]和hs-CRP[OR = 1.008,95%CI(0.990,1.027),P = 0.040]是脓毒症合并胰腺损伤的独立危险因素。多因素Cox回归分析结果显示,APACHEⅡ评分[相对危险度(RR)= 1.207,95%CI(1.054,1.384),P = 0.007]是脓毒症合并胰腺损伤患者预后的独立预测因素。

结论

入院24 h内降钙素原和hs-CRP是脓毒症合并胰腺损伤的早期预警风险因素,APACHEⅡ评分是脓毒症合并胰腺损伤患者预后的独立危险因素。

Objective

To investigate the risk factors for early warning and prognosis in pancreatic injury patients with sepsis.

Methods

A total of 210 patients with sepsis admitted to emergency intensive care unit (EICU) of Tongji Hospital, Tongji University from February 2017 to December 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. According to whether there was concomitant pancreatic injury, 210 patients were divided into a pancreatic injury group (n = 52) and a non-pancreatic injury group (n = 158). The patients with pancreatic injury were divided into a survival group (n = 34) and a death group (n = 18) according to their survival status during hospitalization. The general conditions, underlying diseases, vital signs, laboratory indicators, acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) Ⅱ score and sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score within 24 h of admission were recorded for all patients. Multivariate Logistic regression and multivariate Cox regression were used to analyze the risk factors for early warning and prognosis in pancreatic injury patients with sepsis.

Results

The APACHEⅡ score, leucocyte count, procalcitonin, hypersensitive C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), amylase, lipase, creatinine, platelet counts, alanine transaminase, aspartate aminotransferase and cardiac troponin I (cTnI) were significantly different between the pancreatic injury group and the non-pancreatic injury group (all P < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference in mortality between these two groups (P > 0.05). There were significant differences in the age, APACHEⅡ score, SOFA score, blood lactic acid and interleukin-6 between the survival group and the death group (all P < 0.05). Multivariate Logistic regression analysis showed that procalcitonin [odds ratio (OR) = 1.007, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.970, 1.005), P = 0.039] and hs-CRP [OR = 1.008, 95%CI (0.990,1.027), P = 0.040] were independent risk factors of pancreatic injury in patients with sepsis. Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that APACHEⅡ score [relative risk (RR) = 1.207, 95%CI (1.054, 1.384), P = 0.007] was an independent risk factor for the prognosis of sepsis complicated with pancreatic injury.

Conclusions

The procalcitonin and hs-CRP within 24 h of admission are early warning risk factors of pancreatic injury in patients with sepsis. The APACHE Ⅱ score is an independent risk factor for the prognosis of sepsis complicated with pancreatic injury.

表1 胰腺损伤组与无胰腺损伤组脓毒症患者一般资料比较( ± s
表2 胰腺损伤组与无胰腺损伤组脓毒症患者实验室指标比较( ± s
表3 存活组与死亡组脓毒症合并胰腺损伤患者一般资料比较( ± s
表4 存活组与死亡组脓毒症合并胰腺损伤患者实验室指标比较( ± s
表5 脓毒症合并胰腺损伤的多因素Logistic回归分析
表6 影响脓毒症合并胰腺损伤预后的多因素Cox回归分析
1
Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, et al. The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (sepsis-3)[J]. JAMA, 2016, 315 (8): 801-810.
2
Liu PP, Lu XL, Xiao ZH, et al. Relationship between beta cell dysfunction and severity of disease among critically ill children: a STROBE-compliant prospective observational study[J]. Medicine (Baltimore), 2016, 95 (19): e3104.
3
Chaari A, Abdel Hakim K, Bousselmi K, et al. Pancreatic injury in patients with septic shock: a literature review[J]. World J Gastrointest Oncol, 2016, 8 (7): 526-531.
4
袁军.危重患者继发性胰腺损伤的临床研究[J].中国医药指南201210(19):5-7.
5
刘妍,李倩.脓毒症致多脏器功能损伤机制的临床研究进展[J].锦州医科大学学报202041(4):108-112.
6
Domínguez-Munoz JE. Pancreatic exocrine insufficiency: diagnosis and treatment[J]. J Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2011 (26 Suppl 2): 12-16.
7
Mo YY, Zeng XT, Weng H, et al. Association between tumor necrosis factor-alpha-308A polymorphism and dental periimplant disease risk: a meta-analysis[J]. Medicine (Baltimore), 2016, 95 (35): e4425.
8
罗敏,焦志勇,刘易林,等.血乳酸及肌酐总体水平对早期急性重症胰腺炎患者的预后评估价值[J].岭南急诊医学杂志201419(1):26-27,36.
9
Aydin A, Varoglu AO. Methylenetetrahy drofolate reductase gene polymorphism and clinical importance in epilepsy patients using valproic acid, carbamazepine and levetiracetam[J]. Laboratoriums Medizin, 2017, 41 (3): 147-151.
10
Maiti R, Mishra BR, Sanyal S, et al. Effect of carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine on serum neuron-specific enolase in focal seizures: a randomized controlled trial[J]. Epilepsy Res, 2017 (138): 5-10.
11
胡限,祝益民,陈卫坚,等.脓毒症与非脓毒症死亡患儿胰腺功能的病理特征分析[J].中华急诊医学杂志201423(2):157-162.
12
王力军,刘艳存,寿松涛,等.脓毒症患者弥散性血管内凝血抗凝治疗新进展[J/CD].中华危重症医学杂志(电子版)201811(3):206-209.
13
孙建,吴伟东.脓毒症相关性血小板减少症的危险因素及预后分析[J/CD].中华危重症医学杂志(电子版)20147(3):177-181.
14
Staubli SM, Oertli D, Nebiker CA. Laboratory markers predicting severity of acute pancreatitis[J]. Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci, 2015, 52 (6): 273-283.
15
Yang CJ, Chen J, Phillips AR, et al. Predictors of severe and critical acute pancreatitis: a systematic review[J]. Dig Liver Dis, 2014, 46 (5): 446-451.
16
张凯凯,于学忠,梁显泉,等.乌司他丁对脓毒症伴多器官衰竭患者血清降钙素原超敏C反应蛋白及免疫功能的影响[J].中国急救医学201838(4):328-331.
17
Vassiliki M, Vassilios K, Dimitrios T, et al. Changes in adaptive and innate immunity in patients with acute pancreatitis and systemic inflammatory response syndrome[J]. Pancreatology, 2011, 11 (5): 475-481.
18
李小彦,王小波,刘秀峰,等.重症急性胰腺炎患者器官功能衰竭的患病率及其危险因素分析[J].中华急诊医学杂志201120(2):156-159.
19
Kolber W, Dumnicka P, Maraj M, et al. Does the automatic measurement of interleukin 6 allow for prediction of complications during the first 48 h of acute pancreatitis?[J]. Int J Mol Sci, 2018, 19 (6): 1820.
20
Liu Z, Meng Z, Li Y, et al. Prognostic accuracy of the serum lactate level, the SOFA score and the qSOFA score for mortality among adults with sepsis[J]. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med, 2019, 27 (1): 51.
21
梅婉雯,姚峰,浦秦华,等.炎症因子和Lac在脓毒症病情及预后中的评估价值[J].中华医院感染学杂志202131(20):3051-3055.
22
Basham MA, Ghumro HA, Syed MUS, et al. Validity of sequential organ failure assessment and quick sequential organ failure assessment in assessing mortality rate in the intensive care unit with or without sepsis[J]. Cureus, 2020, 12 (10): e11071.
23
王子文,王登基,徐晓梅,等. APACHEⅡ评分联合血清PCT、D-D、LCR对脓毒症患者预后不良的预测研究[J].临床急诊杂志202122(2):126-130.
[1] 张晓宇, 殷雨来, 张银旭. 阿帕替尼联合新辅助化疗对三阴性乳腺癌的疗效及预后分析[J/OL]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 346-352.
[2] 许杰, 李亚俊, 韩军伟. 两种入路下腹腔镜根治性全胃切除术治疗超重胃癌的效果比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 19-22.
[3] 高杰红, 黎平平, 齐婧, 代引海. ETFA和CD34在乳腺癌中的表达及与临床病理参数和预后的关系研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 64-67.
[4] 李代勤, 刘佩杰. 动态增强磁共振评估中晚期低位直肠癌同步放化疗后疗效及预后的价值[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 100-103.
[5] 屈翔宇, 张懿刚, 李浩令, 邱天, 谈燚. USP24及其共表达肿瘤代谢基因在肝细胞癌中的诊断和预后预测作用[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 659-662.
[6] 顾雯, 凌守鑫, 唐海利, 甘雪梅. 两种不同手术入路在甲状腺乳头状癌患者开放性根治性术中的应用比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 687-690.
[7] 贺斌, 马晋峰. 胃癌脾门淋巴结转移危险因素[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 694-699.
[8] 李伟, 宋子健, 赖衍成, 周睿, 吴涵, 邓龙昕, 陈锐. 人工智能应用于前列腺癌患者预后预测的研究现状及展望[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 541-546.
[9] 关小玲, 周文营, 陈洪平. PTAAR在乙肝相关慢加急性肝衰竭患者短期预后中的预测价值[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 841-845.
[10] 张润锦, 阳盼, 林燕斯, 刘尊龙, 刘建平, 金小岩. EB病毒相关胆管癌伴多发转移一例及国内文献复习[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 865-869.
[11] 陈晓鹏, 王佳妮, 练庆海, 杨九妹. 肝细胞癌VOPP1表达及其与预后的关系[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 876-882.
[12] 韩加刚, 王振军. 梗阻性左半结肠癌的治疗策略[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 450-458.
[13] 王景明, 王磊, 许小多, 邢文强, 张兆岩, 黄伟敏. 腰椎椎旁肌的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(09): 846-852.
[14] 颜世锐, 熊辉. 感染性心内膜炎合并急性肾损伤患者的危险因素探索及死亡风险预测[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(07): 618-624.
[15] 郭曌蓉, 王歆光, 刘毅强, 何英剑, 王立泽, 杨飏, 汪星, 曹威, 谷重山, 范铁, 李金锋, 范照青. 不同亚型乳腺叶状肿瘤的临床病理特征及预后危险因素分析[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 524-532.
阅读次数
全文


摘要