Association between Albumin Administration and Pulmonary Complications in Patients with Septic Shock: An Analysis Using the MIMIC-IV Database.

IF 2.9 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Infection and Chemotherapy Pub Date : 2025-09-01 Epub Date: 2025-07-18 DOI:10.3947/ic.2025.0048
Jongheon Kim, Yongseop Lee, Jun Hye Seo, Jaeeun Seong, Jung Ah Lee, Jung Ho Kim, Jin Young Ahn, Su Jin Jeong, Nam Su Ku, Jun Yong Choi, Joon-Sup Yeom
{"title":"Association between Albumin Administration and Pulmonary Complications in Patients with Septic Shock: An Analysis Using the MIMIC-IV Database.","authors":"Jongheon Kim, Yongseop Lee, Jun Hye Seo, Jaeeun Seong, Jung Ah Lee, Jung Ho Kim, Jin Young Ahn, Su Jin Jeong, Nam Su Ku, Jun Yong Choi, Joon-Sup Yeom","doi":"10.3947/ic.2025.0048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Albumin administration in patients with septic shock has shown potential benefits, but its association with the development of pulmonary complications remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate the impact of albumin administration on acute respiratory distress syndrome development in patients with septic shock.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We analyzed clinical data from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV database and included adult patients with septic shock. Propensity score matching was used to balance the covariates between the albumin and non-albumin groups. The primary outcome was the development of moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome within 7 days. Survival analysis using the log-rank test compared acute respiratory distress syndrome development rates between the groups. Subgroup analysis was used to evaluate the effect of albumin administration on the primary outcome in various subgroups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 2,132 eligible patients, 1,572 (73.7%) did not receive albumin, whereas 560 (26.3%) received albumin. After propensity score matching, the primary outcome was not significantly different between the two groups (17.5% in the albumin group <i>vs.</i> 16.3% in the non-albumin group; <i>P</i>=0.708). The Kaplan-Meier curve demonstrated no difference in the primary outcome between the groups. Subgroup analysis showed no significant association between albumin administration and increased acute respiratory distress syndrome development rate across various subgroups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>No significant difference in acute respiratory distress syndrome development was found between albumin and non-albumin groups of patients with septic shock. Albumin administration in patients with septic shock should be considered when clinically indicated, without undue concerns about acute respiratory distress syndrome development.</p>","PeriodicalId":51616,"journal":{"name":"Infection and Chemotherapy","volume":" ","pages":"378-388"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12511753/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infection and Chemotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3947/ic.2025.0048","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Albumin administration in patients with septic shock has shown potential benefits, but its association with the development of pulmonary complications remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate the impact of albumin administration on acute respiratory distress syndrome development in patients with septic shock.

Materials and methods: We analyzed clinical data from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV database and included adult patients with septic shock. Propensity score matching was used to balance the covariates between the albumin and non-albumin groups. The primary outcome was the development of moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome within 7 days. Survival analysis using the log-rank test compared acute respiratory distress syndrome development rates between the groups. Subgroup analysis was used to evaluate the effect of albumin administration on the primary outcome in various subgroups.

Results: Among the 2,132 eligible patients, 1,572 (73.7%) did not receive albumin, whereas 560 (26.3%) received albumin. After propensity score matching, the primary outcome was not significantly different between the two groups (17.5% in the albumin group vs. 16.3% in the non-albumin group; P=0.708). The Kaplan-Meier curve demonstrated no difference in the primary outcome between the groups. Subgroup analysis showed no significant association between albumin administration and increased acute respiratory distress syndrome development rate across various subgroups.

Conclusion: No significant difference in acute respiratory distress syndrome development was found between albumin and non-albumin groups of patients with septic shock. Albumin administration in patients with septic shock should be considered when clinically indicated, without undue concerns about acute respiratory distress syndrome development.

脓毒性休克患者白蛋白给药与肺部并发症的关系:使用MIMIC-IV数据库的分析
背景:对脓毒性休克患者给予白蛋白已显示出潜在的益处,但其与肺部并发症的关系尚不清楚。我们的目的是评估白蛋白给药对感染性休克患者急性呼吸窘迫综合征发展的影响。材料和方法:我们分析了重症监护医学信息市场IV数据库中的临床资料,包括感染性休克的成年患者。倾向评分匹配用于平衡白蛋白组和非白蛋白组之间的协变量。主要结局是7天内出现中度至重度急性呼吸窘迫综合征。生存分析采用log-rank检验比较两组间急性呼吸窘迫综合征的发生率。采用亚组分析评价白蛋白给药对各亚组主要转归的影响。结果:在2132例符合条件的患者中,1572例(73.7%)未接受白蛋白治疗,560例(26.3%)接受了白蛋白治疗。倾向评分匹配后,两组间主要转归无显著差异(白蛋白组17.5% vs非白蛋白组16.3%;P = 0.708)。Kaplan-Meier曲线显示各组间的主要结果无差异。亚组分析显示,在各个亚组中,白蛋白给药与急性呼吸窘迫综合征发生率增加之间没有显著关联。结论:白蛋白组与非白蛋白组脓毒性休克患者急性呼吸窘迫综合征的发生无显著性差异。脓毒性休克患者应考虑在临床指征时给予白蛋白,而不必过分担心急性呼吸窘迫综合征的发展。
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
Infection and Chemotherapy
Infection and Chemotherapy INFECTIOUS DISEASES-
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
11.90%
发文量
71
审稿时长
22 weeks
×
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