两项队列研究中升高的血红蛋白 A1c 与罹患急性呼吸窘迫综合征的风险

{"title":"两项队列研究中升高的血红蛋白 A1c 与罹患急性呼吸窘迫综合征的风险","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.chstcc.2024.100082","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Only a subset of patients at risk for ARDS go on to develop it, and the contribution of preexisting comorbidities (eg, diabetes) to ARDS risk is not well understood. Prior studies of the association between diabetes and ARDS have yielded conflicting results.</p></div><div><h3>Research Question</h3><p>Does assessing ARDS risk based on hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) as a marker of long-term blood glucose levels, rather than a charted diagnosis of diabetes, clarify the relationship between diabetes and ARDS?</p></div><div><h3>Study Design and Methods</h3><p>Using data from two prospective observational cohorts of critically ill adults (Validating Acute Lung Injury Biomarkers for Diagnosis [VALID] and Early Assessment of Renal and Lung Injury [EARLI]), we analyzed the association between clinical HbA1c category and development of ARDS in patients with a risk factor for ARDS and at least one clinical HbA1c measurement within the 180 days prior through 14 days after enrollment.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 599 patients in VALID and 276 in EARLI met inclusion criteria, of whom 164 and 58 developed ARDS, respectively. Patients with a charted diagnosis of diabetes were not shown to be more likely to develop ARDS (VALID: 24.6% ARDS in those categorized as nondiabetic vs 30.0% in those categorized as diabetic, <em>P</em> = .14; EARLI: 19.6% vs 22.8%, respectively; <em>P</em> = .55). However, in VALID, patients categorized as diabetic with inadequate glycemic control based on their HbA1c had an increased risk of developing ARDS compared with those with nondiabetic HbA1c (20.9% vs 34.0%, respectively; <em>P</em> = .0073), a finding that persisted in multivariable analysis (OR for those categorized as diabetic with inadequate glycemic control vs those categorized as nondiabetic range HbA1c, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.01-1.57). These findings were not reproduced in the smaller EARLI cohort, but were appreciated when the cohorts were combined for analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><p>Elevated HbA1c may be associated with risk of developing ARDS, independent of clinical diagnosis of diabetes, but prospective validation is needed. If confirmed, these findings suggest that inadequate glycemic control could be an unrecognized risk factor for ARDS.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":93934,"journal":{"name":"CHEST critical care","volume":"2 3","pages":"Article 100082"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949788424000364/pdfft?md5=5bbe0c5796bf31738e810f7557810907&pid=1-s2.0-S2949788424000364-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Elevated Hemoglobin A1c and the Risk of Developing ARDS in Two Cohort Studies\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.chstcc.2024.100082\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Only a subset of patients at risk for ARDS go on to develop it, and the contribution of preexisting comorbidities (eg, diabetes) to ARDS risk is not well understood. Prior studies of the association between diabetes and ARDS have yielded conflicting results.</p></div><div><h3>Research Question</h3><p>Does assessing ARDS risk based on hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) as a marker of long-term blood glucose levels, rather than a charted diagnosis of diabetes, clarify the relationship between diabetes and ARDS?</p></div><div><h3>Study Design and Methods</h3><p>Using data from two prospective observational cohorts of critically ill adults (Validating Acute Lung Injury Biomarkers for Diagnosis [VALID] and Early Assessment of Renal and Lung Injury [EARLI]), we analyzed the association between clinical HbA1c category and development of ARDS in patients with a risk factor for ARDS and at least one clinical HbA1c measurement within the 180 days prior through 14 days after enrollment.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 599 patients in VALID and 276 in EARLI met inclusion criteria, of whom 164 and 58 developed ARDS, respectively. Patients with a charted diagnosis of diabetes were not shown to be more likely to develop ARDS (VALID: 24.6% ARDS in those categorized as nondiabetic vs 30.0% in those categorized as diabetic, <em>P</em> = .14; EARLI: 19.6% vs 22.8%, respectively; <em>P</em> = .55). However, in VALID, patients categorized as diabetic with inadequate glycemic control based on their HbA1c had an increased risk of developing ARDS compared with those with nondiabetic HbA1c (20.9% vs 34.0%, respectively; <em>P</em> = .0073), a finding that persisted in multivariable analysis (OR for those categorized as diabetic with inadequate glycemic control vs those categorized as nondiabetic range HbA1c, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.01-1.57). These findings were not reproduced in the smaller EARLI cohort, but were appreciated when the cohorts were combined for analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><p>Elevated HbA1c may be associated with risk of developing ARDS, independent of clinical diagnosis of diabetes, but prospective validation is needed. If confirmed, these findings suggest that inadequate glycemic control could be an unrecognized risk factor for ARDS.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93934,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CHEST critical care\",\"volume\":\"2 3\",\"pages\":\"Article 100082\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949788424000364/pdfft?md5=5bbe0c5796bf31738e810f7557810907&pid=1-s2.0-S2949788424000364-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CHEST critical care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949788424000364\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CHEST critical care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949788424000364","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

背景只有一部分有ARDS风险的患者会发展为ARDS,而原有合并症(如糖尿病)对ARDS风险的影响尚不十分清楚。研究问题根据血红蛋白 A1c(HbA1c)作为长期血糖水平的标志物来评估 ARDS 风险,而不是根据糖尿病的病历诊断来评估 ARDS 风险,是否能阐明糖尿病与 ARDS 之间的关系?研究设计与方法利用两个前瞻性成人重症患者观察队列(急性肺损伤诊断生物标志物验证 [VALID] 和肾肺损伤早期评估 [EARLI])的数据,我们分析了具有 ARDS 危险因素且在入组前 180 天到入组后 14 天内至少进行过一次临床 HbA1c 测量的患者的临床 HbA1c 类别与 ARDS 发生之间的关系。结果 VALID共有599名患者符合纳入标准,EARLI共有276名患者符合纳入标准,其中分别有164名和58名患者发生了ARDS。病历诊断为糖尿病的患者发生 ARDS 的几率并不高(VALID:24.6% 的非糖尿病患者发生 ARDS,30.0% 的糖尿病患者发生 ARDS,P = .14;EARLI:19.6% 的糖尿病患者发生 ARDS,22.8% 的糖尿病患者发生 ARDS,P = .55)。然而,在 VALID 中,与非糖尿病 HbA1c 患者相比,根据 HbA1c 被归类为血糖控制不足的糖尿病患者发生 ARDS 的风险更高(分别为 20.9% vs 34. 0%;P = .14)。0%;P = .0073),这一结果在多变量分析中依然存在(血糖控制不佳的糖尿病患者与 HbA1c 范围为非糖尿病患者的 OR 值为 1.25;95% CI,1.01-1.57)。解释HbA1c升高可能与罹患ARDS的风险有关,与糖尿病的临床诊断无关,但需要进行前瞻性验证。如果得到证实,这些研究结果表明血糖控制不足可能是导致 ARDS 的一个未被发现的风险因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Elevated Hemoglobin A1c and the Risk of Developing ARDS in Two Cohort Studies

Background

Only a subset of patients at risk for ARDS go on to develop it, and the contribution of preexisting comorbidities (eg, diabetes) to ARDS risk is not well understood. Prior studies of the association between diabetes and ARDS have yielded conflicting results.

Research Question

Does assessing ARDS risk based on hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) as a marker of long-term blood glucose levels, rather than a charted diagnosis of diabetes, clarify the relationship between diabetes and ARDS?

Study Design and Methods

Using data from two prospective observational cohorts of critically ill adults (Validating Acute Lung Injury Biomarkers for Diagnosis [VALID] and Early Assessment of Renal and Lung Injury [EARLI]), we analyzed the association between clinical HbA1c category and development of ARDS in patients with a risk factor for ARDS and at least one clinical HbA1c measurement within the 180 days prior through 14 days after enrollment.

Results

A total of 599 patients in VALID and 276 in EARLI met inclusion criteria, of whom 164 and 58 developed ARDS, respectively. Patients with a charted diagnosis of diabetes were not shown to be more likely to develop ARDS (VALID: 24.6% ARDS in those categorized as nondiabetic vs 30.0% in those categorized as diabetic, P = .14; EARLI: 19.6% vs 22.8%, respectively; P = .55). However, in VALID, patients categorized as diabetic with inadequate glycemic control based on their HbA1c had an increased risk of developing ARDS compared with those with nondiabetic HbA1c (20.9% vs 34.0%, respectively; P = .0073), a finding that persisted in multivariable analysis (OR for those categorized as diabetic with inadequate glycemic control vs those categorized as nondiabetic range HbA1c, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.01-1.57). These findings were not reproduced in the smaller EARLI cohort, but were appreciated when the cohorts were combined for analysis.

Interpretation

Elevated HbA1c may be associated with risk of developing ARDS, independent of clinical diagnosis of diabetes, but prospective validation is needed. If confirmed, these findings suggest that inadequate glycemic control could be an unrecognized risk factor for ARDS.

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
CHEST critical care
CHEST critical care Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine, Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
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