Predictive value of the combined application of multiple critical illness scoring systems in neonatal respiratory distress syndrome.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 PEDIATRICS
Translational pediatrics Pub Date : 2025-04-30 Epub Date: 2025-04-27 DOI:10.21037/tp-2024-563
Liqin Yan, Jiayang Mao, Qin Li, Tingting Yu, Lianghua Lu
{"title":"Predictive value of the combined application of multiple critical illness scoring systems in neonatal respiratory distress syndrome.","authors":"Liqin Yan, Jiayang Mao, Qin Li, Tingting Yu, Lianghua Lu","doi":"10.21037/tp-2024-563","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As a severe complication in premature birth, neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (NRDS) significantly threatens the health and life of the neonate. Therefore, the early identification of the severity and mortality risk of NRDS is considered crucial. This study aimed to compare the predictive roles of the neonatal critical illness score (NCIS), the Score for Neonatal Acute Physiology-II (SNAP-II), and the Score for Neonatal Acute Physiology with Perinatal Extension-II (SNAPPE-II) in predicting comorbidities and mortality in NRDS infants.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 192 infants diagnosed with NRDS at the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) of the Children's Hospital of Soochow University between January 2019 and August 2020 were included. Based on discharge outcomes, they were divided into the survival and mortality groups, as well as the complication group and non-complication group. The individual or combination of the NCIS, SNAP-II, and SNAPPE-II scoring systems were applied to evaluate the survival and comorbidities in all infants. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated to compare the area under the curve (AUC) values.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All the three scoring systems exhibited good efficacy in predicting mortality among NRDS infants, with NCIS showing superior performance compared to SNAPPE-II, which was more effective than SNAP-II (P<0.001). The predictive efficacy of the three scoring systems was enhanced when combined in pairs or collectively, with the combination of NCIS and SNAPPE-II exhibiting the highest predictive performance (P<0.001). The three scoring systems were significantly effective in predicting the risk of comorbidities in NRDS (P<0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The NCIS, SNAP-II, and SNAPPE-II scoring systems demonstrate good predictive value for assessing the condition and prognosis of NRDS infants. The combination of NCIS with SNAP-II and SNAPPE-II exhibits high predictive efficacy for estimating mortality in NRDS.</p>","PeriodicalId":23294,"journal":{"name":"Translational pediatrics","volume":"14 4","pages":"597-607"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12079681/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Translational pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/tp-2024-563","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: As a severe complication in premature birth, neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (NRDS) significantly threatens the health and life of the neonate. Therefore, the early identification of the severity and mortality risk of NRDS is considered crucial. This study aimed to compare the predictive roles of the neonatal critical illness score (NCIS), the Score for Neonatal Acute Physiology-II (SNAP-II), and the Score for Neonatal Acute Physiology with Perinatal Extension-II (SNAPPE-II) in predicting comorbidities and mortality in NRDS infants.

Methods: A total of 192 infants diagnosed with NRDS at the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) of the Children's Hospital of Soochow University between January 2019 and August 2020 were included. Based on discharge outcomes, they were divided into the survival and mortality groups, as well as the complication group and non-complication group. The individual or combination of the NCIS, SNAP-II, and SNAPPE-II scoring systems were applied to evaluate the survival and comorbidities in all infants. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated to compare the area under the curve (AUC) values.

Results: All the three scoring systems exhibited good efficacy in predicting mortality among NRDS infants, with NCIS showing superior performance compared to SNAPPE-II, which was more effective than SNAP-II (P<0.001). The predictive efficacy of the three scoring systems was enhanced when combined in pairs or collectively, with the combination of NCIS and SNAPPE-II exhibiting the highest predictive performance (P<0.001). The three scoring systems were significantly effective in predicting the risk of comorbidities in NRDS (P<0.001).

Conclusions: The NCIS, SNAP-II, and SNAPPE-II scoring systems demonstrate good predictive value for assessing the condition and prognosis of NRDS infants. The combination of NCIS with SNAP-II and SNAPPE-II exhibits high predictive efficacy for estimating mortality in NRDS.

多种危重症评分系统联合应用对新生儿呼吸窘迫综合征的预测价值。
背景:新生儿呼吸窘迫综合征(NRDS)是一种严重的早产并发症,严重威胁着新生儿的健康和生命。因此,早期识别NRDS的严重程度和死亡风险是至关重要的。本研究旨在比较新生儿危重疾病评分(NCIS)、新生儿急性生理评分- ii (SNAP-II)和新生儿急性生理评分伴围产期延长- ii (SNAP-II)在预测NRDS婴儿合并症和死亡率方面的预测作用。方法:选取2019年1月至2020年8月在苏州大学儿童医院新生儿重症监护病房(NICU)诊断为NRDS的192例婴儿。根据出院结果分为生存组、死亡组、并发症组和无并发症组。NCIS、SNAP-II和SNAP-II评分系统单独或联合应用于评估所有婴儿的生存和合并症。生成受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线,比较曲线下面积(AUC)值。结果:NCIS、SNAP-II和SNAP-II评分系统对NRDS患儿的病情和预后均有较好的预测效果,NCIS评分系统优于SNAP-II评分系统,SNAP-II评分系统的预测效果优于SNAP-II评分系统。NCIS联合SNAP-II和SNAP-II对估计NRDS的死亡率具有很高的预测效果。
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
Translational pediatrics
Translational pediatrics Medicine-Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
5.00%
发文量
108
期刊介绍: Information not localized
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信