Blood Urea Nitrogen to Albumin Ratio Was Associated With Mortality in Critically Ill Septic Patients: A Multicenter Retrospective Propensity–Adjusted Analysis
{"title":"Blood Urea Nitrogen to Albumin Ratio Was Associated With Mortality in Critically Ill Septic Patients: A Multicenter Retrospective Propensity–Adjusted Analysis","authors":"Tsai-Jung Wang, Shang-Yi Lee, Li-Ting Wong, Wen-Cheng Chao","doi":"10.1155/ijcp/5202122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n <p><b>Background:</b> Sepsis is a leading cause of mortality worldwide, and increasing studies have found that high ratio of blood urea nitrogen to blood albumin ratio (BAR) was associated with mortality in inflammatory diseases. We used a multicenter database and propensity score–adjusted approach to address the mortality association of BAR in critically ill septic patients.</p>\n <p><b>Methods:</b> Using the eICU Collaborative Research Database, we enrolled adult septic patients who fulfilled the sepsis-3 criteria. We used Cox proportional hazards analysis and propensity score–adjusted analyses, consisting of propensity score matching (PSM), inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), and covariate balancing propensity score (CBPS) to determine hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of in-hospital all-cause mortality.</p>\n <p><b>Results:</b> We analyzed data from 8069 critically ill septic patients in 335 ICUs. The median age was 67 (interquartile range, 56–79) years, with 46.9% being female. The nonsurvivors (31.4%) were older and had higher APACHE IV scores, more shock, and more mechanical ventilation usage. Cox regression identified that higher BAR was independently associated with increased mortality (adjusted HR 1.247, 95% CI 1.142–1.361) after adjusting for covariates. The propensity score–based approach found a consistent and robust association, with adjHRs in the PSM, IPTW, and CBPS populations were 1.191 (95% CI 1.074–1.321), 1.178 (95% CI 1.068–1.299), and 1.215 (95% CI 1.111–1.329), respectively.</p>\n <p><b>Conclusions:</b> This multicenter study demonstrated that high BAR, which is a ready-for-use biomarker in critical care, correlated with increased mortality in critically ill septic patients, and more studies are warranted to explore the underlying mechanism.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":13782,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Clinical Practice","volume":"2024 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/ijcp/5202122","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Clinical Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/ijcp/5202122","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Sepsis is a leading cause of mortality worldwide, and increasing studies have found that high ratio of blood urea nitrogen to blood albumin ratio (BAR) was associated with mortality in inflammatory diseases. We used a multicenter database and propensity score–adjusted approach to address the mortality association of BAR in critically ill septic patients.
Methods: Using the eICU Collaborative Research Database, we enrolled adult septic patients who fulfilled the sepsis-3 criteria. We used Cox proportional hazards analysis and propensity score–adjusted analyses, consisting of propensity score matching (PSM), inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), and covariate balancing propensity score (CBPS) to determine hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of in-hospital all-cause mortality.
Results: We analyzed data from 8069 critically ill septic patients in 335 ICUs. The median age was 67 (interquartile range, 56–79) years, with 46.9% being female. The nonsurvivors (31.4%) were older and had higher APACHE IV scores, more shock, and more mechanical ventilation usage. Cox regression identified that higher BAR was independently associated with increased mortality (adjusted HR 1.247, 95% CI 1.142–1.361) after adjusting for covariates. The propensity score–based approach found a consistent and robust association, with adjHRs in the PSM, IPTW, and CBPS populations were 1.191 (95% CI 1.074–1.321), 1.178 (95% CI 1.068–1.299), and 1.215 (95% CI 1.111–1.329), respectively.
Conclusions: This multicenter study demonstrated that high BAR, which is a ready-for-use biomarker in critical care, correlated with increased mortality in critically ill septic patients, and more studies are warranted to explore the underlying mechanism.
背景:脓毒症是世界范围内导致死亡的主要原因,越来越多的研究发现,高血尿素氮与血白蛋白比(BAR)与炎症性疾病的死亡率相关。我们使用一个多中心数据库和倾向评分调整方法来研究BAR与危重脓毒症患者死亡率的关系。方法:使用eICU合作研究数据库,我们招募了符合脓毒症-3标准的成人脓毒症患者。我们使用Cox比例风险分析和倾向评分校正分析,包括倾向评分匹配(PSM)、治疗加权逆概率(IPTW)和协变量平衡倾向评分(CBPS)来确定院内全因死亡率的风险比(HRs)和95%置信区间(CIs)。结果:我们分析了335个icu中8069名重症脓毒症患者的数据。中位年龄为67岁(四分位数范围为56-79),其中46.9%为女性。非幸存者(31.4%)年龄较大,APACHE IV评分较高,休克较多,机械通气使用较多。Cox回归发现,在调整协变量后,较高的BAR与死亡率增加独立相关(校正HR 1.247, 95% CI 1.142-1.361)。基于倾向评分的方法发现了一致且强大的关联,PSM, IPTW和CBPS人群的adjhr分别为1.191 (95% CI 1.074-1.321), 1.178 (95% CI 1.068-1.299)和1.215 (95% CI 1.111-1.329)。结论:这项多中心研究表明,作为危重症患者的一种现成的生物标志物,高BAR与危重症脓毒症患者死亡率增加相关,需要更多的研究来探索其潜在的机制。
期刊介绍:
IJCP is a general medical journal. IJCP gives special priority to work that has international appeal.
IJCP publishes:
Editorials. IJCP Editorials are commissioned. [Peer reviewed at the editor''s discretion]
Perspectives. Most IJCP Perspectives are commissioned. Example. [Peer reviewed at the editor''s discretion]
Study design and interpretation. Example. [Always peer reviewed]
Original data from clinical investigations. In particular: Primary research papers from RCTs, observational studies, epidemiological studies; pre-specified sub-analyses; pooled analyses. [Always peer reviewed]
Meta-analyses. [Always peer reviewed]
Systematic reviews. From October 2009, special priority will be given to systematic reviews. [Always peer reviewed]
Non-systematic/narrative reviews. From October 2009, reviews that are not systematic will be considered only if they include a discrete Methods section that must explicitly describe the authors'' approach. Special priority will, however, be given to systematic reviews. [Always peer reviewed]
''How to…'' papers. Example. [Always peer reviewed]
Consensus statements. [Always peer reviewed] Short reports. [Always peer reviewed]
Letters. [Peer reviewed at the editor''s discretion]
International scope
IJCP publishes work from investigators globally. Around 30% of IJCP articles list an author from the UK. Around 30% of IJCP articles list an author from the USA or Canada. Around 45% of IJCP articles list an author from a European country that is not the UK. Around 15% of articles published in IJCP list an author from a country in the Asia-Pacific region.