在 ARDS 中纵向使用 APACHE 评估疾病严重程度

A. Patel, A. Lucia Fuentes, A. Malhotra, L. C. Crotty Alexander
{"title":"在 ARDS 中纵向使用 APACHE 评估疾病严重程度","authors":"A. Patel, A. Lucia Fuentes, A. Malhotra, L. C. Crotty Alexander","doi":"10.1164/ajrccm-conference.2021.203.1_meetingabstracts.a2849","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The acute physiology, age, chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score has been used to assess risk of mortality in admitted intensive care unit (ICU) patients since 1985. There are few examples of a longitudinal correlation over time. As the scores rises from 0 to 71, risk of mortality increases. For this study, other scores were also considered - SOFA (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment) was excluded due to a lack of variable diversity and small range of values. APACHE III and IV are more complex scores with additional variables, such that calculating daily scores manually was impracticable. APACHE II has consistent calibration compared to III and IV. We assessed whether APACHE III and IV scores had any additional benefit over APACHE II. Methods: APACHE II score was used to determine clinical severity daily of sixteen critically ill COVID-19 patients and compared to daily changes in cytokine levels. If any studies were unavailable for a given day, data was pulled from a maximum of 24 hours before or after the day of interest. Although GCS (Glasgow Coma Scale) is a large part of the score, and difficult to assess in an intubated patient, however it contributed to documenting sedation and intubation state. Results: APACHE II score assessed clinical severity daily in COVID-19 more effectively relative to SOFA. The wide score range allowed comparison of patients without overlap, as compared to SOFA which has a range of 0-24. With a larger range of 0-71, we believe that it increased the sensitivity for detection of small changes in clinical status. We analyzed APACHE II in context of absolute neutrophil count, plasma cytokine levels, as well as neutrophil functional studies. For our study, APACHE II, not SOFA, was helpful in demonstrating changes in severity of illness, which correlated with some of these assessments. For example, APACHE II showed a significant linear correlation with pro-inflammatory cytokine IL-8 in plasma (r2=0.47, p=0.0017;Fig 1). Conclusion: APACHE II was able to define the severity of illness in COVID-19 patients on a daily basis. APACHE II score allowed us to tie immunophenotyping to clinical disease severity over time and was helpful in broadening our approach to data comparison with clinical status. This was a pilot study to assess the ability of APACHE II to track severity of illness, but in the future, we plan to correlate APACHE II in a larger cohort of a variety of ARDS patients.","PeriodicalId":255004,"journal":{"name":"TP55. TP055 MECHANICAL VENTILATION, ICU MANAGEMENT, AND CV","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using APACHE Longitudinally in ARDS to Assess Disease Severity\",\"authors\":\"A. Patel, A. Lucia Fuentes, A. Malhotra, L. C. Crotty Alexander\",\"doi\":\"10.1164/ajrccm-conference.2021.203.1_meetingabstracts.a2849\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: The acute physiology, age, chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score has been used to assess risk of mortality in admitted intensive care unit (ICU) patients since 1985. There are few examples of a longitudinal correlation over time. As the scores rises from 0 to 71, risk of mortality increases. For this study, other scores were also considered - SOFA (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment) was excluded due to a lack of variable diversity and small range of values. APACHE III and IV are more complex scores with additional variables, such that calculating daily scores manually was impracticable. APACHE II has consistent calibration compared to III and IV. We assessed whether APACHE III and IV scores had any additional benefit over APACHE II. Methods: APACHE II score was used to determine clinical severity daily of sixteen critically ill COVID-19 patients and compared to daily changes in cytokine levels. If any studies were unavailable for a given day, data was pulled from a maximum of 24 hours before or after the day of interest. Although GCS (Glasgow Coma Scale) is a large part of the score, and difficult to assess in an intubated patient, however it contributed to documenting sedation and intubation state. Results: APACHE II score assessed clinical severity daily in COVID-19 more effectively relative to SOFA. The wide score range allowed comparison of patients without overlap, as compared to SOFA which has a range of 0-24. With a larger range of 0-71, we believe that it increased the sensitivity for detection of small changes in clinical status. We analyzed APACHE II in context of absolute neutrophil count, plasma cytokine levels, as well as neutrophil functional studies. For our study, APACHE II, not SOFA, was helpful in demonstrating changes in severity of illness, which correlated with some of these assessments. For example, APACHE II showed a significant linear correlation with pro-inflammatory cytokine IL-8 in plasma (r2=0.47, p=0.0017;Fig 1). Conclusion: APACHE II was able to define the severity of illness in COVID-19 patients on a daily basis. APACHE II score allowed us to tie immunophenotyping to clinical disease severity over time and was helpful in broadening our approach to data comparison with clinical status. This was a pilot study to assess the ability of APACHE II to track severity of illness, but in the future, we plan to correlate APACHE II in a larger cohort of a variety of ARDS patients.\",\"PeriodicalId\":255004,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"TP55. TP055 MECHANICAL VENTILATION, ICU MANAGEMENT, AND CV\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"TP55. TP055 MECHANICAL VENTILATION, ICU MANAGEMENT, AND CV\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm-conference.2021.203.1_meetingabstracts.a2849\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TP55. TP055 MECHANICAL VENTILATION, ICU MANAGEMENT, AND CV","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm-conference.2021.203.1_meetingabstracts.a2849","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介自 1985 年以来,急性生理学、年龄、慢性健康评估(APACHE)II 评分一直被用于评估重症监护室(ICU)住院病人的死亡风险。很少有纵向相关性的例子。随着分数从 0 升至 71,死亡风险也随之增加。在这项研究中,还考虑了其他评分--SOFA(序贯器官衰竭评估)因缺乏变量多样性和数值范围较小而被排除在外。APACHE III 和 IV 评分较为复杂,带有额外的变量,因此手动计算每日评分并不可行。与 APACHE III 和 IV 相比,APACHE II 的校准比较一致。我们评估了 APACHE III 和 IV 评分是否比 APACHE II 更有优势。方法:使用 APACHE II 评分确定 16 名 COVID-19 重症患者每日的临床严重程度,并与细胞因子水平的每日变化进行比较。如果某天没有任何研究数据,则从该天前后最多 24 小时的数据中提取。尽管GCS(格拉斯哥昏迷量表)是评分的重要组成部分,而且很难对插管患者进行评估,但它有助于记录镇静和插管状态。结果与 SOFA 相比,APACHE II 评分能更有效地评估 COVID-19 每天的临床严重程度。与 SOFA(评分范围为 0-24)相比,APACHE II 的评分范围更广,可以在不重叠的情况下对患者进行比较。由于 0-71 分的范围更大,我们认为它提高了检测临床状态微小变化的灵敏度。我们结合中性粒细胞绝对计数、血浆细胞因子水平以及中性粒细胞功能研究对 APACHE II 进行了分析。在我们的研究中,APACHE II(而非 SOFA)有助于显示病情严重程度的变化,这与其中一些评估结果相关。例如,APACHE II 与血浆中的促炎细胞因子 IL-8 呈显著线性相关(r2=0.47,p=0.0017;图 1)。结论APACHE II 能够确定 COVID-19 患者每天的病情严重程度。APACHE II 评分使我们能够将免疫分型与临床疾病的严重程度结合起来,并有助于拓宽我们与临床状况进行数据比较的方法。这是一项评估 APACHE II 追踪病情严重程度能力的试验性研究,但我们计划将来在更大的 ARDS 患者群中对 APACHE II 进行相关分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Using APACHE Longitudinally in ARDS to Assess Disease Severity
Introduction: The acute physiology, age, chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score has been used to assess risk of mortality in admitted intensive care unit (ICU) patients since 1985. There are few examples of a longitudinal correlation over time. As the scores rises from 0 to 71, risk of mortality increases. For this study, other scores were also considered - SOFA (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment) was excluded due to a lack of variable diversity and small range of values. APACHE III and IV are more complex scores with additional variables, such that calculating daily scores manually was impracticable. APACHE II has consistent calibration compared to III and IV. We assessed whether APACHE III and IV scores had any additional benefit over APACHE II. Methods: APACHE II score was used to determine clinical severity daily of sixteen critically ill COVID-19 patients and compared to daily changes in cytokine levels. If any studies were unavailable for a given day, data was pulled from a maximum of 24 hours before or after the day of interest. Although GCS (Glasgow Coma Scale) is a large part of the score, and difficult to assess in an intubated patient, however it contributed to documenting sedation and intubation state. Results: APACHE II score assessed clinical severity daily in COVID-19 more effectively relative to SOFA. The wide score range allowed comparison of patients without overlap, as compared to SOFA which has a range of 0-24. With a larger range of 0-71, we believe that it increased the sensitivity for detection of small changes in clinical status. We analyzed APACHE II in context of absolute neutrophil count, plasma cytokine levels, as well as neutrophil functional studies. For our study, APACHE II, not SOFA, was helpful in demonstrating changes in severity of illness, which correlated with some of these assessments. For example, APACHE II showed a significant linear correlation with pro-inflammatory cytokine IL-8 in plasma (r2=0.47, p=0.0017;Fig 1). Conclusion: APACHE II was able to define the severity of illness in COVID-19 patients on a daily basis. APACHE II score allowed us to tie immunophenotyping to clinical disease severity over time and was helpful in broadening our approach to data comparison with clinical status. This was a pilot study to assess the ability of APACHE II to track severity of illness, but in the future, we plan to correlate APACHE II in a larger cohort of a variety of ARDS patients.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信