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) ›› 2026, Vol. 19 ›› Issue (03) : 198 -207. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-6880.2026.03.002

论著

多种机器学习算法比较下急性左心衰竭患者住院期间死亡风险预测模型的构建与外部验证
周文考1,2, 张佳坡3, 黄培培3, 潘艺梅4, 朱琳5, 李诗睿6, 孙慧敏7,()   
  1. 1361100 厦门,厦门大学附属翔安医院急诊医学科(医务室)
    3361100 厦门,厦门大学附属翔安医院护理部
    4361100 厦门,厦门大学附属翔安医院急诊医学科
    7361100 厦门,厦门大学附属翔安医院中心实验室
    2230022 合肥,安徽医科大学第一附属医院普通外科
    5650000 昆明,昆明医科大学附属延安医院心脏大血管外科
    6361100 厦门,厦门大学医学院
  • 收稿日期:2025-07-29 出版日期:2026-06-30
  • 通信作者: 孙慧敏
  • 基金资助:
    厦门市医疗卫生指导性项目(3502Z20254ZD1257); 国家自然科学基金资助项目(82472738)

Development and external validation of a in-hospital mortality risk prediction model for acute left heart failure patients based on comparison of multiple machine learning algorithms

Wenkao Zhou1,2, Jiapo Zhang3, Peipei Huang3, Yimei Pan4, Lin Zhu5, Shirui Li6, Huimin Sun7,()   

  1. 1Department of Emergency (Medical Office), Xiang'an Hospital of Xiamen University, Xiamen 361100, China
    3Department of Nursing, Xiang'an Hospital of Xiamen University, Xiamen 361100, China
    4Department of Emergency, Xiang'an Hospital of Xiamen University, Xiamen 361100, China
    7Central Laboratory, Xiang'an Hospital of Xiamen University, Xiamen 361100, China
    2Department of General Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei 230022, China
    5Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Yan'an Hospital Affiliated to Kunming Medical University, Kunming 650000, China
    6School of Medicine, Xiamen University, Xiamen 361100, China
  • Received:2025-07-29 Published:2026-06-30
  • Corresponding author: Huimin Sun
引用本文:

周文考, 张佳坡, 黄培培, 潘艺梅, 朱琳, 李诗睿, 孙慧敏. 多种机器学习算法比较下急性左心衰竭患者住院期间死亡风险预测模型的构建与外部验证[J/OL]. 中华危重症医学杂志(电子版), 2026, 19(03): 198-207.

Wenkao Zhou, Jiapo Zhang, Peipei Huang, Yimei Pan, Lin Zhu, Shirui Li, Huimin Sun. Development and external validation of a in-hospital mortality risk prediction model for acute left heart failure patients based on comparison of multiple machine learning algorithms[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Critical Care Medicine(Electronic Edition), 2026, 19(03): 198-207.

目的

机器学习评估急性左心衰竭(ALHF)患者住院期间死亡的最优算法,基于此算法进行危险因素分析、预测模型的构建与外部验证。

方法

研究纳入美国重症监护医学信息数据库Ⅳ 3.1中15 983例(模型组)和eICU数据库中14 428例(外部验证组)诊断为ALHF的患者。以ALHF患者住院期间是否死亡为因变量进行机器学习,使用logistic回归、神经网络、随机梯度下降、评分卡、自适应提升、k-近邻、分类树和随机森林算法进行深度分析。单因素和多因素logistic回归分析对模型组影响ALHF患者住院期间死亡的影响因素进行回归分析。将模型组数据中多因素logistic回归分析结果比值比(OR)≥ 1.2的独立危险因素纳入列线图绘制,并采用外部验证组数据对该列线图模型进行验证。同时绘制受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线、校正曲线以及临床决策曲线(DCA)。

结果

Logistic回归算法的综合性能优于其他模型,曲线下面积(AUC)为0.749,在所有模型中最高,F1分数为0.322,Matthews相关系数为0.260。在模型组数据中,多因素logistic回归分析结果OR ≥ 1.2,由高到低分别是血管加压素、多巴胺、恶性肿瘤、肝功能衰竭、气管插管、去甲肾上腺素、肾上腺素、使用呼吸机和急性心肌梗死。基于上述模型组因素构建的列线图具有较高的预测效能,外部验证效果佳,模型组AUC为0.768,外部验证组0.770。模型组和外部验证组预测概率与实际概率较为一致,其曲线趋势均接近理想参考线,具有良好的拟合度。DCA结果显示,当模型组高风险阈值为0.13 ~ 0.92时,该模型的净收益明显高于"全部干预"和"无干预"两种策略,提示该模型在多数临床决策情境下具有良好的实用性。外部验证组高风险阈值在0.13 ~ 0.93之间时显示出优越的净收益。

结论

多种机器学习算法比较中,logistic回归模型在预测ALHF患者住院期间死亡风险方面表现最优。该模型识别出多种与死亡密切相关的危险因素,据此构建的列线图具备良好的预测效能,为临床识别高风险患者、优化治疗决策方面提供了有力支持。

Objective

To evaluate multiple machine learning algorithms for predicting in-hospital mortality among patients with acute left heart failure (ALHF), and to construct and externally validate a risk prediction model based on the optimal algorithm.

Methods

A total of 15 983 patients from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care-Ⅳ 3.1 database (training cohort) and 14 428 patients from the eICU database (external validation cohort) diagnosed with ALHF were included in this study. The outcome variable was in-hospital mortality among patients with ALHF. Machine learning analyses were performed using logistic regression, neural networks, stochastic gradient descent, scorecard modeling, adaptive boosting, k-nearest neighbors, classification and regression tree, and random forest algorithms. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted in the training cohort to identify influencing factors associated with in-hospital mortality in patients with ALHF. Independent risk factors with an odds ratio (OR) ≥ 1.2 identified from the multivariate logistic regression were incorporated into a nomogram. The nomogram model was further validated using the external validation cohort. The predictive performance of the model was assessed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration curves, and decision curve analysis (DCA).

Results

Logistic regression demonstrated superior overall performance among all models, achieving the highest area under the curve (AUC) of 0.749, F1 score of 0.322, and Matthews correlation coefficient of 0.260. Multivariate logistic regression in the training cohort identified vasopressin, dopamine, malignant tumor, liver failure, endotracheal intubation, norepinephrine, epinephrine, mechanical ventilation, and acute myocardial infarction as independent risk factors with the OR ≥ 1.2. The nomogram constructed from these factors exhibited strong predictive performance with an AUC of 0.768 in the training cohort and 0.770 in the external validation cohort. Predicted probabilities closely matched observed outcomes in both cohorts, with calibration curves approaching the ideal reference line, indicating a good fit. DCA showed that within a high-risk threshold range of 0.13-0.92 in the training cohort, the model's net benefits significantly exceeded those of the "intervene-all" and "intervene-none" strategies, demonstrating robust clinical utility. Similar findings were observed in the external validation cohort within a high-risk threshold range of 0.13-0.93.

Conclusions

Among multiple machine learning algorithms, logistic regression provides the optimal prediction of in-hospital mortality risk for ALHF patients. The constructed nomogram incorporating key risk factors demonstrates favorable predictive accuracy and external validity, offering strong support for clinical identification of high-risk patients and optimization of therapeutic decision-making.

表1 模型组ALHF患者组间基线资料比较
项目 存活组(n = 13 995) 死亡组(n = 1 988) t/χ2 P
年龄(岁, ± s 72 ± 14 77 ± 12 13.473 <0.001
男性[例(%)] 7 658(54.7) 1 075(54.1) 0.292 0.589
SOFA评分(分, ± s 3.1 ± 2.6 6.0 ± 3.9 43.426 <0.001
APACHEⅡ评分(分, ± s 49 ± 18 79 ± 26 63.999 <0.001
体温(℃, ± s 36.8 ± 0.5 36.6 ± 0.8 8.894 <0.001
呼吸频率(次/min, ± s 20 ± 4 21 ± 4 18.556 <0.001
心率(次/min, ± s 84 ± 16 89 ± 18 13.837 <0.001
收缩压(mmHg, ± s 117 ± 17 109 ± 16 21.049 <0.001
阴离子间隙(mmol/L, ± s 15 ± 4 18 ± 6 26.434 <0.001
血尿素氮(mmol/L, ± s 12 ± 9 17 ± 11 19.331 <0.001
血清钙(mmol/L, ± s 2.12 ± 0.19 2.09 ± 0.29 6.216 <0.001
血清氯(mmol/L, ± s 102 ± 7 102 ± 8 4.592 <0.001
血肌酐(μmol/L, ± s 164 ± 158 198 ± 148 8.941 <0.001
血红蛋白(g/L, ± s 103 ± 22 101 ± 21 3.356 <0.001
平均红细胞血红蛋白量(pg/L, ± s 29.5 ± 2.8 29.6 ± 3.0 0.574 0.566
平均红细胞血红蛋白浓度(g/L, ± s 324 ± 17 318 ± 18 14.579 <0.001
平均红细胞体积(fL, ± s 91 ± 7 93 ± 8 10.503 <0.001
血小板计数(× 109/L, ± s 209 ± 99 208 ± 118 0.642 0.521
血清钾(mmol/L, ± s 4.3 ± 0.8 4.5 ± 0.9 8.082 <0.001
血清钠(mmol/L, ± s 138 ± 5 138 ± 7 1.143 0.253
红细胞计数(× 109/L, ± s 3.5 ± 0.8 3.4 ± 0.8 3.053 0.002
红细胞分布宽度(%, ± s 15.7 ± 2.3 16.8 ± 2.7 19.188 <0.001
白细胞计数(× 109/L, ± s 12 ± 8 14 ± 12 14.122 <0.001
去甲肾上腺素[例(%)] 2 678(19.1) 1 210(60.9) 1 646.675 <0.001
多巴胺[例(%)] 230(1.6) 249(12.5) 709.026 <0.001
肾上腺素[例(%)] 471(3.4) 267(13.4) 400.405 <0.001
血管加压素[例(%)] 550(3.9) 616(31.0) 1 884.144 <0.001
呼吸机[例(%)] 11 837(84.6) 1 871(94.1) 129.624 <0.001
气管插管[例(%)] 3 794(27.1) 957(48.1) 368.510 <0.001
慢性阻塞性肺疾病[例(%)] 5 526(39.5) 783(39.4) 0.007 0.933
急性心肌梗死[例(%)] 4 344(31.0) 713(35.9) 18.741 <0.001
恶性肿瘤[例(%)] 1 296(9.3) 313(15.7) 80.836 <0.001
糖尿病[例(%)] 6 203(44.3) 860(43.3) 0.798 0.372
肝功能衰竭[例(%)] 323(2.3) 115(5.8) 78.946 <0.001
表2 外部验证ALHF患者组间基线资料比较
项目 存活组(n = 12 576) 死亡组(n = 1 852) t/χ2 P
年龄(岁, ± s 70 ± 14 74 ± 13 12.212 <0.001
男性[例(%)] 6 572(52.3) 990(53.5) 0.928 0.335
SOFA评分(分, ± s 5.2 ± 3.0 7.8 ± 3.4 33.632 <0.001
APACHEⅡ评分(分, ± s 48 ± 26 68 ± 33 29.567 <0.001
体温(℃, ± s 36.4 ± 0.8 36.1 ± 1.3 12.891 <0.001
呼吸频率(次/min, ± s 27 ± 14 30 ± 14 8.092 <0.001
心率(次/min, ± s 99 ± 30 106 ± 34 9.899 <0.001
收缩压(mmHg, ± s 122 ± 27 112 ± 29 15.366 <0.001
阴离子间隙(mmol/L, ± s 11 ± 5 13 ± 5 12.682 <0.001
血尿素氮(mmol/L, ± s 12 ± 8 16 ± 10 19.235 <0.001
血清钙(mmol/L, ± s 2.16 ± 0.18 2.12 ± 0.23 10.331 <0.001
血清氯(mmol/L, ± s 90 ± 8 92 ± 7 0.413 0.679
血肌酐(μmol/L, ± s 173 ± 172 189 ± 134 3.779 <0.001
血红蛋白(g/L, ± s 112 ± 23 107 ± 23 7.317 <0.001
平均红细胞血红蛋白量(pg/L, ± s 29.2 ± 2.8 29.4 ± 2.8 1.886 0.059
平均红细胞血红蛋白浓度(g/L, ± s 324 ± 15 321 ± 15 6.137 <0.001
血小板计数(× 109/L, ± s 216 ± 99 203 ± 104 5.506 <0.001
血清钾(mmol/L, ± s 4.2 ± 0.7 4.4 ± 0.9 10.474 <0.001
血清钠(mmol/L, ± s 138 ± 5 138 ± 6 0.282 0.778
红细胞计数(× 109/L, ± s 3.8 ± 0.8 3.7 ± 0.8 7.070 <0.001
红细胞分布宽度(%, ± s 16.1 ± 2.5 17.1 ± 2.8 14.959 <0.001
白细胞计数(× 109/L, ± s 11 ± 7 14 ± 13 15.846 <0.001
去甲肾上腺素[例(%)] 500(4.0) 204(11.0) 172.343 <0.001
多巴胺[例(%)] 59(0.5) 14(0.8) 2.638 0.104
肾上腺素[例(%)] 62(0.5) 22(1.2) 13.468 <0.001
血管加压素[例(%)] 20(0.2) 15(0.8) 28.262 <0.001
呼吸机[例(%)] 7 080(56.3) 1 316(71.1) 144.565 <0.001
气管插管[例(%)] 1 563(12.4) 472(25.5) 227.180 <0.001
慢性阻塞性肺疾病[例(%)] 2 642(21.0) 370(20.0) 1.037 0.309
急性心肌梗死[例(%)] 215(1.7) 35(1.9) 0.308 0.579
恶性肿瘤[例(%)] 130(1.0) 27(1.5) 2.698 0.100
糖尿病[例(%)] 4 016(31.9) 516(27.9) 12.424 <0.001
肝功能衰竭[例(%)] 124(1.0) 18(1.0) 0.003 0.954
表3 不同机器学习算法预测ALHF患者住院期间死亡的模型性能比较
表4 模型组ALHF患者住院期间死亡的logistic回归分析
项目 单因素logistic回归分析 多因素logistic回归分析
OR值(95%CI P OR值(95%CI P
年龄(岁) 1.027(1.023 ~ 1.031) <0.001 1.040(1.035 ~ 1.046) <0.001
SOFA评分(分) 1.321(1.302 ~ 1.342) <0.001 1.082(1.060 ~ 1.105) <0.001
APACHEⅡ评分(分) 1.057(1.055 ~ 1.060) <0.001 1.038(1.035 ~ 1.041) <0.001
体温(℃) 0.674(0.618 ~ 0.736) <0.001 0.822(0.740 ~ 0.912) <0.001
呼吸频率(次/min) 1.113(1.100 ~ 1.126) <0.001 1.062(1.046 ~ 1.079) <0.001
心率(次/min) 1.020(1.017 ~ 1.023) <0.001 1.003(0.999 ~ 1.007) 0.125
收缩压(mmHg) 0.965(0.962 ~ 0.969) <0.001 0.994(0.990 ~ 0.998) 0.007
阴离子间隙(mmol/L) 1.129(1.118 ~ 1.140) <0.001 1.039(1.024 ~ 1.055) <0.001
血尿素氮(mmol/L) 1.014(1.013 ~ 1.016) <0.001 1.003(1.000 ~ 1.006) 0.027
血清钙(mmol/L) 0.825(0.778 ~ 0.876) <0.001 1.013(0.947 ~ 1.083) 0.710
血清氯(mmol/L) 0.985(0.978 ~ 0.991) <0.001 0.983(0.975 ~ 0.992) <0.001
血肌酐(μmol/L) 1.103(1.079 ~ 1.127) <0.001 0.908(0.865 ~ 0.952) <0.001
血红蛋白(g/L) 0.963(0.942 ~ 0.984) <0.001 0.959(0.766 ~ 1.199) 0.711
平均红细胞血红蛋白浓度(g/L) 0.822(0.800 ~ 0.844) <0.001 0.938(0.865 ~ 1.017) 0.119
平均红细胞体积(fL) 1.034(1.028 ~ 1.041) <0.001 1.028(1.002 ~ 1.054) 0.036
血清钾(mmol/L) 1.255(1.187 ~ 1.326) <0.001 0.938(0.870 ~ 1.012) 0.097
红细胞计数(× 109/L) 0.907(0.852 ~ 0.966) 0.002 1.308(0.677 ~ 2.527) 0.424
红细胞分布宽度(%) 1.178(1.158 ~ 1.199) <0.001 1.105(1.077 ~ 1.135) <0.001
白细胞计数(× 109/L) 1.030(1.025 ~ 1.035) <0.001 1.001(0.995 ~ 1.006) 0.785
去甲肾上腺素 6.572(5.950 ~ 7.260) <0.001 1.415(1.205 ~ 1.661) <0.001
多巴胺 8.569(7.114 ~ 10.322) <0.001 1.783(1.400 ~ 2.271) <0.001
肾上腺素 4.455(3.802 ~ 5.219) <0.001 1.288(1.070 ~ 1.552) 0.008
血管加压素 10.976(9.660 ~ 12.470) <0.001 2.361(1.943 ~ 2.870) <0.001
呼吸机 2.915(2.405 ~ 3.534) <0.001 1.265(1.010 ~ 1.584) 0.041
气管插管 2.496(2.268 ~ 2.746) <0.001 1.423(1.240 ~ 1.633) <0.001
急性心肌梗死 1.242(1.126 ~ 1.371) <0.001 1.208(1.025 ~ 1.315) 0.019
恶性肿瘤 1.831(1.602 ~ 2.093) <0.001 1.744(1.474 ~ 2.064) <0.001
肝功能衰竭 2.599(2.089 ~ 3.233) <0.001 1.620(1.204 ~ 2.180) 0.001
表5 外部验证组ALHF患者住院期间死亡的影响因素验证分析结果
项目 单因素logistic回归分析 多因素logistic回归分析
OR值(95%CI P OR值(95%CI P
年龄(岁) 1.024(1.020 ~ 1.028) <0.001 1.026(1.022 ~ 1.031) <0.001
SOFA评分(分) 1.276(1.256 ~ 1.297) <0.001 1.154(1.131 ~ 1.178) <0.001
APACHEⅡ评分(分) 1.021(1.020 ~ 1.023) <0.001 1.011(1.009 ~ 1.013) <0.001
体温(℃) 0.739(0.704 ~ 0.776) <0.001 0.900(0.855 ~ 0.948) <0.001
呼吸频率(次/min) 1.014(1.011 ~ 1.018) <0.001 1.011(1.007 ~ 1.015) <0.001
心率(次/min) 1.008(1.007 ~ 1.010) <0.001 1.004(1.003 ~ 1.006) <0.001
收缩压(mmHg) 0.986(0.984 ~ 0.987) <0.001 0.992(0.990 ~ 0.994) <0.001
阴离子间隙(mmol/L) 1.064(1.053 ~ 1.074) <0.001 1.048(1.036 ~ 1.061) <0.001
血尿素氮(mmol/L) 1.017(1.015 ~ 1.019) <0.001 1.010(1.008 ~ 1.013) <0.001
血清钙(mmol/L) 0.715(0.670 ~ 0.762) <0.001 0.862(0.804 ~ 0.925) <0.001
血肌酐(μmol/L) 1.045(1.021 ~ 1.069) <0.001 0.863(0.828 ~ 0.900) <0.001
血红蛋白(g/L) 0.923(0.904 ~ 0.943) <0.001 0.956(0.911 ~ 1.002) 0.062
平均红细胞血红蛋白浓度(g/L) 0.907(0.879 ~ 0.936) <0.001 0.975(0.936 ~ 1.016) 0.231
血小板计数(× 109/L) 0.998(0.998 ~ 0.999) <0.001 1.000(0.999 ~ 1.001) 0.969
血清钾(mmol/L) 1.377(1.296 ~ 1.463) <0.001 1.148(1.069 ~ 1.233) <0.001
红细胞计数(× 109/L) 0.799(0.751 ~ 0.851) <0.001 1.152(1.001 ~ 1.325) 0.048
红细胞分布宽度(%) 1.133(1.114 ~ 1.152) <0.001 1.085(1.062 ~ 1.109) <0.001
白细胞计数(× 109/L) 1.044(1.037 ~ 1.051) <0.001 1.024(1.018 ~ 1.031) <0.001
去甲肾上腺素 2.990(2.520 ~ 3.546) <0.001 1.470(1.205 ~ 1.793) <0.001
肾上腺素 2.426(1.488 ~ 3.956) <0.001 2.120(1.213 ~ 3.707) 0.008
血管加压素 5.126(2.620 ~ 10.031) <0.001 1.638(0.724 ~ 3.707) 0.236
呼吸机 1.906(1.713 ~ 2.120) <0.001 1.379(1.222 ~ 1.557) <0.001
气管插管 2.410(2.143 ~ 2.710) <0.001 1.149(0.991 ~ 1.333) 0.066
糖尿病 0.823(0.739 ~ 0.917) <0.001 0.862(0.764 ~ 0.973) 0.017
图1 预测ALHF患者住院期间发生死亡的列线图注:ALHF.急性左心衰竭
图2 ALHF患者住院期间死亡预测模型在模型组(a)和外部验证组(b)中的ROC曲线注:ALHF.急性左心衰竭;ROC.受试者工作特征
图3 预测ALHF患者住院期间死亡的列线图校准曲线(a)和DCA曲线(b)注:ALHF.急性左心衰竭;DCA.决策曲线分析
1
中国医疗保健国际交流促进会急诊医学分会,中华医学会急诊医学分会,中国医师协会急诊医师分会,等.急性心力衰竭中国急诊管理指南(2022)[J].中华急诊医学杂志202231(8):1016-1041.
2
Giannakoulas G, Farmakis IT, Hobohm L, et al. Acute right ventricular failure: pathophysiology, aetiology, assessment, and management[J]. Eur Heart J, 2025, 46 (26): 2520-2535.
3
王朋飞,裴源源,石芳娥,等.急诊急性心力衰竭单元收治患者出院后6个月内再入院率和病死率分析[J].中华急诊医学杂志202231(7):886-894.
4
Beghini A, Sammartino AM, Papp Z, et al. 2024 update in heart failure [J]. ESC Heart Fail, 2025, 12 (1): 8-42.
5
Liao T, Su T, Lu Y, et al. Development and validation of a dynamic nomogram for short-term survival in acute heart failure patients with acute kidney injury upon ICU admission [J]. Heliyon, 2024, 10 (20): e39494-e39505.
6
Yu Q, Hou Z, Wang Z. Predictive modeling of preoperative acute heart failure in older adults with hypertension: a dual perspective of SHAP values and interaction analysis [J]. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak, 2024, 24 (1): 329.
7
Zhang B, Sui F, Yuan P. Risk factors for in-hospital heart failure in patients with acute myocardial infarction and construction of predictive models[J]. Am J Transl Res, 2025, 17 (6): 4323-4330.
8
Xu R, Chen K, Wang Q, et al. Nomogram model to predict acute kidney injury in hospitalized patients with heart failure [J]. Rev Cardiovasc Med, 2024, 25 (8): 293.
9
曹丽萍,李亮,任艺,等.心搏骤停复苏后患者急性肝损伤发生的危险因素及对预后的影响[J].中华急诊医学杂志202130(2):213-216.
10
Frantz S, Hundertmark MJ, Schulz-Menger J, et al. Left ventricular remodelling post-myocardial infarction: pathophysiology, imaging, and novel therapies [J]. Eur Heart J, 2022, 43 (27): 2549-2561.
11
Del Buono MG, Moroni F, Montone RA, et al. Ischemic cardiomyopathy and heart failure after acute myocardial infarction [J]. Curr Cardiol Rep, 2022, 24 (10): 1505-1515.
12
刘一凡,高迪,董佳,等.可溶性生长刺激表达基因2蛋白对急性心力衰竭住院患者的预后评估价值[J/OL].中华危重症医学杂志(电子版)202316(1):13-19.
13
Zeder K, Mak S, Galie N, et al. Right heart catheterization in heart failure: indications, interpretation, and pitfalls [J]. Eur Heart J, 2025, 46 (34): 3354-3372.
14
Tromp J, Kosiborod MN, Angermann CE, et al. Treatment effects of empagliflozin in hospitalized heart failure patients across the range of left ventricular ejection fraction—results from the EMPULSE trial [J]. Eur J Heart Fail, 2024, 26 (4): 963-970.
15
Baudry G, Lescroart M, Kimmoun A. Are left ventricular ejection fraction phenotypes meaningful in acute heart failure?[J]. Eur J Heart Fail, 2023, 25 (6): 829-831.
16
Palazzuoli A, Ruocco G, Pellicori P, et al. Multi-modality assessment of congestion in acute heart failure: associations with left ventricular ejection fraction and prognosis [J]. Curr Probl Cardiol, 2024, 49 (3): 102374.
17
Hu MJ, Wang XN, Tan JS, et al. Association of beta-blocker therapy at discharge with clinical outcomes in patients without heart failure or left ventricular systolic dysfunction after acute coronary syndrome: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis [J]. Arch Cardiovasc Dis, 2022, 115 (12): 637-646.
18
Kitada S, Kawada Y, Nakasuka K, et al. Elevated arginine vasopressin levels surrogate acute lung injury in acute decompensated heart failure[J]. Heart Vessels, 2024, 39 (12): 1018-1028.
19
Frea S, Gravinese C, Boretto P, et al. Comprehensive non-invasive haemodynamic assessment in acute decompensated heart failure-related cardiogenic shock: a step towards echodynamics [J]. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care, 2024, 13 (9): 646-655.
20
Bogoviku J, Nguyen TD, Westphal JG, et al. Acute effects of empagliflozin on left atrial and ventricular filling parameters using echocardiography—a subanalysis of the EMPAG-HF trial [J]. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Pharmacother, 2025, 11 (2): 190-197.
21
Lv Q, Wu Q, Yang Y, et al. Comparative efficacy of different drugs in acute heart failure with renal dysfunction: a systematic review and network meta-analysis[J]. Front Cardiovasc Med, 2024, 11: 1444068.
22
Kourek C, Xanthopoulos A, Giamouzis G, et al. Neurohormonal effects of intravenous dopamine in patients with acute heart failure[J]. J Clin Med, 2024, 13 (19): 5567-5581.
23
Ahn C, Yu G, Shin TG, et al. Comparison of early and late norepinephrine administration in patients with septic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis [J]. Chest, 2024, 166 (6): 1417-1430.
24
Williams CA, Fairley HE, Tran QK, et al. Use of epinephrine in cardiac arrest: advances and future challenges[J]. Medicina (Kaunas), 2024, 60 (11): 1904.
25
Sekmek S, Bayram D, Seven I, et al. Letrozole-induced reversible acute heart failure[J]. J Oncol Pharm Pract, 2025, 31 (2): 341-343.
26
Myhre PL, Grupper A, Mebazaa A, et al. Changes in liver function tests, congestion, and prognosis after acute heart failure: the STRONG-HF trial [J]. JACC Adv, 2025, 4 (3): 101607.
27
Takeuchi S, Honda S, Nishihira K, et al. Prognostic impact of heart failure admission in survivors of acute myocardial infarction[J]. ESC Heart Fail, 2024, 11 (4): 2344-2353.
28
Barki M, Losito M, Caracciolo MM, et al. Left atrial strain in acute heart failure: clinical and prognostic insights [J]. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging, 2024, 25 (3): 315-324.
29
吴义刚,潘裕民,吴姗姗,等.左西孟旦治疗肺动脉高压合并右心衰竭患者疗效分析——Meta分析[J/OL].中华危重症医学杂志(电子版)202417(5):385-391.
30
Saijo T, Yasumoto K, Ryomoto K, et al. Association between enteral nutrition initiation within 48 h of intubation and 90-day mortality in patients with severe acute heart failure requiring mechanical circulatory support: a retrospective cohort study [J]. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr, 2025, 49 (5): 619-632.
31
Tun HN, Almaghraby A, Kavalerchyk V, et al. Acute right ventricular failure: pathophysiology, diagnostic approach with emphasis on the role of echocardiography [J]. Curr Cardiol Rev, 2023, 19 (4): e060223213452.
[1] 邬明嫄, 李婷婷, 鲜欣欣, 罗朝阳, 杨青, 卢漫. 基于超微血流成像血管指数的列线图模型诊断肢端黑色素瘤引流区域淋巴结的价值[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2026, 23(04): 276-282.
[2] 刘枭雄, 苏玲, 张晓波, 叶颖子, 桂永浩, 谭申生, 马晴, 柳龚堡, 陈尔真, 叶宁, 董晨杰, 王艺, 顾丹萍. 2020—2025年上海市儿童社区获得性肺炎单病种10项质量控制指标的监测结果趋势分析[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2026, 22(04): 305-314.
[3] 李琳, 庞乐, 潘霞, 朱磊, 王桂子, 刘梅. 汉中社区老年人口腔衰弱与躯体衰弱的横断面关联分析及风险评估模型构建[J/OL]. 中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(03): 217-224.
[4] 江伟东, 陈博. 早发性可切除胃癌的临床病理特征及预后列线图模型的建立[J/OL]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2026, 20(04): 230-237.
[5] 罗文勇, 黄文龙, 阮沁桐, 蔡莹, 王欣, 吴柱国, 王利玲, 于海兵. 甲状腺癌术后并发低钙血症的发病风险预测模型构建[J/OL]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2026, 20(04): 257-264.
[6] 刘洵, 毕亮, 郎韧, 吴安石. 同种异体原位肝移植术后早期死亡的危险因素分析[J/OL]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2026, 20(03): 150-156.
[7] 张彬, 王敏, 郑鹏, 冯犁, 李鑫, 赵高平. 早期胃癌淋巴结转移的危险因素及预后分析[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(04): 337-342.
[8] 杨敏, 杜峻峰, 辛林璞. 腹腔镜胃癌根治术后常见并发症防治与管理[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(04): 352-355.
[9] 李若隐, 罗义, 张雪琳, 雷李凤, 李思丽. MDSCs相关基因在乳腺癌中表达特征分析与风险预测模型构建[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(04): 366-373.
[10] 辛林璞, 杨敏, 杜峻峰. 腹腔镜结直肠癌根治术后常见并发症防治与管理[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(03): 248-251.
[11] 谢吉艳, 江志鹏, 何立锐. 复发性腹壁疝的危险因素及治疗策略[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(04): 471-476.
[12] 宋学虎, 骆助林, 谭震, 翁敏. 川芎嗪通过调控SLC7A11/GPX4通路抑制铁死亡减轻小鼠肝纤维化的研究[J/OL]. 中华细胞与干细胞杂志(电子版), 2026, 16(04): 201-208.
[13] 方荣焕, 孟子凡, 李馥彤, 鹿云皓, 杨永生. 肝硬化门静脉高压症脾切除术后并发症研究进展[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2026, 15(04): 642-647.
[14] 陈志坚, 俞建达, 林泽润, 林宏焕, 易长昱, 池小斌, 吕立志, 陈永标. 基于术前影像肿瘤负荷评分的模型对单发肝细胞癌微血管侵犯的预测价值[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2026, 15(03): 379-385.
[15] 陈艳, 郑升春, 白云凤, 邓蔚竹, 龚娜, 傅一飞, 张紫玥, 邢增辉, 陈香美, 洪权, 孙雪峰. 基于转录组学解析铁死亡相关基因参与恩格列净诱导小鼠远端肾小管细胞p21早期上调[J/OL]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2026, 15(03): 137-143.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?