PREDICTING SEPSIS-INDUCED HYPOTENSION PATIENT ATTRIBUTES FOR RESTRICTIVE VERSUS LIBERAL FLUID STRATEGY.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
SHOCK Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-11-18 DOI:10.1097/SHK.0000000000002506
Pulakesh Upadhyaya, Jeffrey Wang, Daniel T Mathew, Ayman Ali, Simon Tallowin, Eric Gann, Felipe A Lisboa, Seth A Schobel, Eric A Elster, Timothy G Buchman, Christopher J Dente, Rishikesan Kamaleswaran
{"title":"PREDICTING SEPSIS-INDUCED HYPOTENSION PATIENT ATTRIBUTES FOR RESTRICTIVE VERSUS LIBERAL FLUID STRATEGY.","authors":"Pulakesh Upadhyaya, Jeffrey Wang, Daniel T Mathew, Ayman Ali, Simon Tallowin, Eric Gann, Felipe A Lisboa, Seth A Schobel, Eric A Elster, Timothy G Buchman, Christopher J Dente, Rishikesan Kamaleswaran","doi":"10.1097/SHK.0000000000002506","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Background : Patients with sepsis-induced hypotension are generally treated with a combination of intravenous fluids and vasopressors. The attributes of patients receiving a liberal compared to a restrictive fluid strategy have not been fully characterized. We use machine learning (ML) techniques to identify key predictors of restrictive versus liberal fluids strategy, and the likelihood of receiving each strategy in distinct patient phenotypes. Methods: We performed a retrospective observational study of patients at Emory University Hospital from 2014 to 2021 that were hypotensive, met Sepsis-3 criteria, and received at least 1 L of intravenous crystalloid fluids. We excluded patients with nonseptic etiologies of hypotension. Supervised ML techniques were used to identify key predictors for the two strategies. Additionally, subset analyses were performed on patients with pneumonia, congestive heart failure (CHF), or chronic kidney disease (CKD). Using unsupervised ML techniques, we also identified three distinct sepsis-induced hypotension phenotypes and evaluated their likelihood of receiving either strategy. Results: We identified N = 15,292 patients and randomly split them into training (n = 12,233) and validation (n = 3,059) datasets. XGBoost was the most accurate model (AUC: 0.84) for predicting the strategies. While worse oxygenation was the strongest predictor of utilizing a restrictive fluid strategy, top predictors of a liberal fluid strategy included higher pulse and blood urea nitrogen. In subset analyses, CHF, CKD, and pneumonia were predictive of restrictive fluid strategy. We identified three distinct sepsis-induced hypotension phenotypes: 1) mild organ injury, 2) severe hypoxemia, and 3) renal dysfunction. Conclusions: We identified key predictors of restrictive versus liberal fluids strategy and distinct patient phenotypes for sepsis-induced hypotension.</p>","PeriodicalId":21667,"journal":{"name":"SHOCK","volume":" ","pages":"399-405"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SHOCK","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SHK.0000000000002506","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: Background : Patients with sepsis-induced hypotension are generally treated with a combination of intravenous fluids and vasopressors. The attributes of patients receiving a liberal compared to a restrictive fluid strategy have not been fully characterized. We use machine learning (ML) techniques to identify key predictors of restrictive versus liberal fluids strategy, and the likelihood of receiving each strategy in distinct patient phenotypes. Methods: We performed a retrospective observational study of patients at Emory University Hospital from 2014 to 2021 that were hypotensive, met Sepsis-3 criteria, and received at least 1 L of intravenous crystalloid fluids. We excluded patients with nonseptic etiologies of hypotension. Supervised ML techniques were used to identify key predictors for the two strategies. Additionally, subset analyses were performed on patients with pneumonia, congestive heart failure (CHF), or chronic kidney disease (CKD). Using unsupervised ML techniques, we also identified three distinct sepsis-induced hypotension phenotypes and evaluated their likelihood of receiving either strategy. Results: We identified N = 15,292 patients and randomly split them into training (n = 12,233) and validation (n = 3,059) datasets. XGBoost was the most accurate model (AUC: 0.84) for predicting the strategies. While worse oxygenation was the strongest predictor of utilizing a restrictive fluid strategy, top predictors of a liberal fluid strategy included higher pulse and blood urea nitrogen. In subset analyses, CHF, CKD, and pneumonia were predictive of restrictive fluid strategy. We identified three distinct sepsis-induced hypotension phenotypes: 1) mild organ injury, 2) severe hypoxemia, and 3) renal dysfunction. Conclusions: We identified key predictors of restrictive versus liberal fluids strategy and distinct patient phenotypes for sepsis-induced hypotension.

预测脓毒症引起的低血压患者的属性限制与自由液体策略。
背景:脓毒症引起的低血压患者通常采用静脉输液和血管加压药物联合治疗。与限制性液体策略相比,接受自由液体策略的患者的属性尚未完全表征。我们使用机器学习(ML)技术来确定限制性和自由液体策略的关键预测因素,以及在不同患者表型中接受每种策略的可能性。方法:我们对2014-2021年在埃默里大学医院(Emory University Hospital)接受过至少1l静脉结晶液治疗的低血压、符合败血症-3标准的患者进行了回顾性观察研究。我们排除了非感染性低血压病因的患者。监督式机器学习技术用于识别这两种策略的关键预测因子。此外,还对肺炎、充血性心力衰竭(CHF)或慢性肾病(CKD)患者进行了亚群分析。使用无监督ML技术,我们还确定了三种不同的败血症诱导的低血压表型,并评估了它们接受任何一种策略的可能性。结果:我们确定了N = 15292例患者,并将其随机分为训练(N = 12233)和验证(N = 3059)数据集。XGBoost是预测策略最准确的模型(AUC:0.84)。虽然较差的氧合是使用限制性液体策略的最强预测因子,但自由液体策略的主要预测因子包括较高的脉搏和血尿素氮。在亚组分析中,CHF、CKD和肺炎可预测限制性输液策略。我们确定了三种不同的败血症诱导的低血压表型;1)器官轻度损伤;2)严重低氧血症;3)肾功能不全。结论:我们确定了脓毒症诱导的低血压的限制性与自由液体策略和不同患者表型的关键预测因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
SHOCK
SHOCK 医学-外科
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
3.20%
发文量
199
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: SHOCK®: Injury, Inflammation, and Sepsis: Laboratory and Clinical Approaches includes studies of novel therapeutic approaches, such as immunomodulation, gene therapy, nutrition, and others. The mission of the Journal is to foster and promote multidisciplinary studies, both experimental and clinical in nature, that critically examine the etiology, mechanisms and novel therapeutics of shock-related pathophysiological conditions. Its purpose is to excel as a vehicle for timely publication in the areas of basic and clinical studies of shock, trauma, sepsis, inflammation, ischemia, and related pathobiological states, with particular emphasis on the biologic mechanisms that determine the response to such injury. Making such information available will ultimately facilitate improved care of the traumatized or septic individual.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信