Associations Between Elevated Systolic Blood Pressure and Outcomes in Critically Ill Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study and Propensity Analysis.

An-Min Hu, Chao Hai, Hai-Bo Wang, Zhongheng Zhang, Ling-Bin Sun, Zhong-Jun Zhang, Hui-Ping Li
{"title":"Associations Between Elevated Systolic Blood Pressure and Outcomes in Critically Ill Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study and Propensity Analysis.","authors":"An-Min Hu,&nbsp;Chao Hai,&nbsp;Hai-Bo Wang,&nbsp;Zhongheng Zhang,&nbsp;Ling-Bin Sun,&nbsp;Zhong-Jun Zhang,&nbsp;Hui-Ping Li","doi":"10.1097/SHK.0000000000001774","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Studies have shown nonlinear relationships between systolic blood pressure (SBP) and outcomes, with increased risk observed at both low and high blood pressure levels. However, the relationships between cumulative times at different SBP levels and outcomes in critically ill patients remain unclear. We hypothesized that an appropriate SBP level is associated with a decrease in adverse outcomes after intensive care unit (ICU) admission.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study was a retrospective analysis of data from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC) III database, which includes more than 1,000,000 SBP records from 12,820 patients. Associations of cumulative times at four SBP ranges (<100 mm Hg, 100-120 mm Hg, 120-140 mm Hg, and ≥140 mm Hg) with mortality (12-, 3-, 1-month mortality and in-hospital mortality) were evaluated. Restricted cubic splines and multivariable Cox regression models were employed to assess associations between mortality and cumulative times at SBP levels (4 levels: <2, 2-12, 12-36, and ≥36 h) over 72 h of ICU admission. Additionally, 120 mm Hg to 140 mm Hg was subdivided into <12 h (Group L) and ≥12 h (Group M) subsets and subjected to propensity-score matching and subgroup analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At 120 mm Hg to 140 mm Hg, level-4 SBP was associated with lower adjusted risks of mortality at 12 months (OR, 0.71; CI, 0.61-0.81), 3 months (OR, 0.72; CI, 0.61-0.85), and 1 month (OR, 0.61; CI, 0.48-0.79) and in the hospital (OR, 0.71; CI, 0.58-0.88) than level-1 SBP. The cumulative times at the other 3 SBP ranges (<100 mm Hg, 100-120 mm Hg, and ≥140 mm Hg) were not independent risk predictors of prognosis. Furthermore, Group M had lower 12-month mortality than Group L, which remained in the propensity-score matched and subgroup analyses.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>SBP at 120 mm Hg to 140 mm Hg was associated with decreased adverse outcomes. Randomized trials are required to determine whether the outcomes in critically ill patients improve with early maintenance of a SBP level at 120 mm Hg to 140 mm Hg.</p>","PeriodicalId":238832,"journal":{"name":"Shock (Augusta, Ga.)","volume":" ","pages":"557-563"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Shock (Augusta, Ga.)","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SHK.0000000000001774","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Introduction: Studies have shown nonlinear relationships between systolic blood pressure (SBP) and outcomes, with increased risk observed at both low and high blood pressure levels. However, the relationships between cumulative times at different SBP levels and outcomes in critically ill patients remain unclear. We hypothesized that an appropriate SBP level is associated with a decrease in adverse outcomes after intensive care unit (ICU) admission.

Methods: This study was a retrospective analysis of data from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC) III database, which includes more than 1,000,000 SBP records from 12,820 patients. Associations of cumulative times at four SBP ranges (<100 mm Hg, 100-120 mm Hg, 120-140 mm Hg, and ≥140 mm Hg) with mortality (12-, 3-, 1-month mortality and in-hospital mortality) were evaluated. Restricted cubic splines and multivariable Cox regression models were employed to assess associations between mortality and cumulative times at SBP levels (4 levels: <2, 2-12, 12-36, and ≥36 h) over 72 h of ICU admission. Additionally, 120 mm Hg to 140 mm Hg was subdivided into <12 h (Group L) and ≥12 h (Group M) subsets and subjected to propensity-score matching and subgroup analyses.

Results: At 120 mm Hg to 140 mm Hg, level-4 SBP was associated with lower adjusted risks of mortality at 12 months (OR, 0.71; CI, 0.61-0.81), 3 months (OR, 0.72; CI, 0.61-0.85), and 1 month (OR, 0.61; CI, 0.48-0.79) and in the hospital (OR, 0.71; CI, 0.58-0.88) than level-1 SBP. The cumulative times at the other 3 SBP ranges (<100 mm Hg, 100-120 mm Hg, and ≥140 mm Hg) were not independent risk predictors of prognosis. Furthermore, Group M had lower 12-month mortality than Group L, which remained in the propensity-score matched and subgroup analyses.

Conclusions: SBP at 120 mm Hg to 140 mm Hg was associated with decreased adverse outcomes. Randomized trials are required to determine whether the outcomes in critically ill patients improve with early maintenance of a SBP level at 120 mm Hg to 140 mm Hg.

危重患者收缩压升高与预后之间的关系:回顾性队列研究和倾向分析。
研究表明收缩压(SBP)与预后之间存在非线性关系,在低血压和高血压水平下均观察到风险增加。然而,不同收缩压水平累积时间与危重患者预后之间的关系尚不清楚。我们假设适当的收缩压水平与重症监护病房(ICU)入院后不良后果的减少有关。方法:本研究对重症监护医学信息市场(MIMIC) III数据库的数据进行回顾性分析,该数据库包括来自12,820例患者的1,000,000多条收缩压记录。4个收缩压范围累积时间的相关性(结果:在120 mm Hg至140 mm Hg时,4级收缩压与12个月时较低的调整后死亡风险相关(OR, 0.71;CI, 0.61-0.81), 3个月(OR, 0.72;CI, 0.61-0.85)和1个月(OR, 0.61;CI, 0.48-0.79)和在医院(OR, 0.71;CI, 0.58-0.88)高于1级收缩压。其他3个收缩压范围的累积时间(结论:收缩压在120 mm Hg至140 mm Hg时与不良后果的减少有关。需要随机试验来确定早期将收缩压维持在120 ~ 140 mm Hg是否能改善危重患者的预后。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
小红书