早期与延迟利尿剂循环给药对败血症预后的影响:使用MIMIC-IV数据库的倾向评分匹配分析

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q4 ANDROLOGY
Translational andrology and urology Pub Date : 2025-03-30 Epub Date: 2025-03-26 DOI:10.21037/tau-24-620
Yingxin Wang, Jiaqian Wu, Tenghao Shao, Xiaoxu Ding, Yukun Tian, Ning Li
{"title":"早期与延迟利尿剂循环给药对败血症预后的影响:使用MIMIC-IV数据库的倾向评分匹配分析","authors":"Yingxin Wang, Jiaqian Wu, Tenghao Shao, Xiaoxu Ding, Yukun Tian, Ning Li","doi":"10.21037/tau-24-620","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Fluid resuscitation is a standard intervention for patients with sepsis, however, the ideal timing for initiating fluid deresuscitation has not been well established. This study examines the prognostic impact of early versus delayed initiation of loop diuretics in patients with sepsis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data for this analysis were obtained from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV (MIMIC-IV) database. Patients diagnosed with sepsis were categorized into two groups based on the timing of loop diuretic administration: an early group (within 48 hours of diagnosis) and a late group (after 96 hours).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 8,518 patients with sepsis were included in this study. Of these, 4,485 patients received loop diuretics within the first 48 hours (early group), while the remaining 4,033 patients received loop diuretics after 96 hours (late group). In the early group, 75% of patients required mechanical ventilation, which was significantly lower than the 85.6% in the late group (P<0.001). However, the early group demonstrated a significantly higher 28-day mortality rate compared to the late group (832/4,485 <i>vs.</i> 679/4,033, P=0.03). Cox regression analysis indicated that the early initiation of diuretics was associated with an increased 28-day mortality rate [hazard ratio (HR) =2.590, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.325-2.884, P<0.001]. After adjusting for the proportional hazards assumption, the corrected HR was recalculated as exp[3.55-1.20 × ln(t)]. Propensity score matching (PSM) resulted in two well-matched groups of 1,882 patients each. Post-matching analysis revealed that the early group continued to exhibit significantly higher 28-day and in-hospital mortality (P<0.001) along with a significantly higher incidence of stage 3 acute kidney injury (AKI) (8.1% <i>vs.</i> 5.7%, P=0.004).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While complete adjustment for all potential confounding factors was not possible, the findings suggest that patients who received loop diuretics within 48 hours had more severe kidney injury and a significantly higher mortality rate compared to those who received later administration (after 96 hours). These findings underscore the need for careful consideration when determining the timing of loop diuretic initiation in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":23270,"journal":{"name":"Translational andrology and urology","volume":"14 3","pages":"779-790"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11986544/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prognostic impact of early versus delayed loop diuretic administration in sepsis: a propensity score-matched analysis using the MIMIC-IV database.\",\"authors\":\"Yingxin Wang, Jiaqian Wu, Tenghao Shao, Xiaoxu Ding, Yukun Tian, Ning Li\",\"doi\":\"10.21037/tau-24-620\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Fluid resuscitation is a standard intervention for patients with sepsis, however, the ideal timing for initiating fluid deresuscitation has not been well established. This study examines the prognostic impact of early versus delayed initiation of loop diuretics in patients with sepsis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data for this analysis were obtained from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV (MIMIC-IV) database. Patients diagnosed with sepsis were categorized into two groups based on the timing of loop diuretic administration: an early group (within 48 hours of diagnosis) and a late group (after 96 hours).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 8,518 patients with sepsis were included in this study. Of these, 4,485 patients received loop diuretics within the first 48 hours (early group), while the remaining 4,033 patients received loop diuretics after 96 hours (late group). In the early group, 75% of patients required mechanical ventilation, which was significantly lower than the 85.6% in the late group (P<0.001). However, the early group demonstrated a significantly higher 28-day mortality rate compared to the late group (832/4,485 <i>vs.</i> 679/4,033, P=0.03). Cox regression analysis indicated that the early initiation of diuretics was associated with an increased 28-day mortality rate [hazard ratio (HR) =2.590, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.325-2.884, P<0.001]. After adjusting for the proportional hazards assumption, the corrected HR was recalculated as exp[3.55-1.20 × ln(t)]. Propensity score matching (PSM) resulted in two well-matched groups of 1,882 patients each. Post-matching analysis revealed that the early group continued to exhibit significantly higher 28-day and in-hospital mortality (P<0.001) along with a significantly higher incidence of stage 3 acute kidney injury (AKI) (8.1% <i>vs.</i> 5.7%, P=0.004).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While complete adjustment for all potential confounding factors was not possible, the findings suggest that patients who received loop diuretics within 48 hours had more severe kidney injury and a significantly higher mortality rate compared to those who received later administration (after 96 hours). These findings underscore the need for careful consideration when determining the timing of loop diuretic initiation in clinical practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23270,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Translational andrology and urology\",\"volume\":\"14 3\",\"pages\":\"779-790\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11986544/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Translational andrology and urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21037/tau-24-620\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/3/26 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ANDROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Translational andrology and urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/tau-24-620","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ANDROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:液体复苏是脓毒症患者的标准干预措施,然而,启动液体复苏的理想时机尚未得到很好的确定。本研究探讨了早期与延迟使用利尿剂对脓毒症患者预后的影响。方法:本分析的数据来自重症监护医学信息市场IV (MIMIC-IV)数据库。诊断为败血症的患者根据利尿剂循环给药时间分为两组:早期组(诊断后48小时内)和晚期组(96小时后)。结果:共有8518例脓毒症患者纳入本研究。其中,4485例患者在前48小时内(早期组)接受利尿剂循环治疗,而其余4033例患者在96小时后(晚期组)接受利尿剂循环治疗。早期组75%的患者需要机械通气,明显低于晚期组85.6% (vs. 679/4,033, P=0.03)。Cox回归分析显示,早期开始使用利尿剂与28天死亡率增加相关[风险比(HR) =2.590, 95%可信区间(CI): 2.325-2.884,风险比5.7%,P=0.004]。结论:虽然不可能完全调整所有潜在的混杂因素,但研究结果表明,48小时内使用利尿剂的患者肾损伤更严重,死亡率明显高于较晚(96小时后)使用利尿剂的患者。这些发现强调在临床实践中确定利尿剂起始时间时需要仔细考虑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Prognostic impact of early versus delayed loop diuretic administration in sepsis: a propensity score-matched analysis using the MIMIC-IV database.

Background: Fluid resuscitation is a standard intervention for patients with sepsis, however, the ideal timing for initiating fluid deresuscitation has not been well established. This study examines the prognostic impact of early versus delayed initiation of loop diuretics in patients with sepsis.

Methods: Data for this analysis were obtained from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV (MIMIC-IV) database. Patients diagnosed with sepsis were categorized into two groups based on the timing of loop diuretic administration: an early group (within 48 hours of diagnosis) and a late group (after 96 hours).

Results: A total of 8,518 patients with sepsis were included in this study. Of these, 4,485 patients received loop diuretics within the first 48 hours (early group), while the remaining 4,033 patients received loop diuretics after 96 hours (late group). In the early group, 75% of patients required mechanical ventilation, which was significantly lower than the 85.6% in the late group (P<0.001). However, the early group demonstrated a significantly higher 28-day mortality rate compared to the late group (832/4,485 vs. 679/4,033, P=0.03). Cox regression analysis indicated that the early initiation of diuretics was associated with an increased 28-day mortality rate [hazard ratio (HR) =2.590, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.325-2.884, P<0.001]. After adjusting for the proportional hazards assumption, the corrected HR was recalculated as exp[3.55-1.20 × ln(t)]. Propensity score matching (PSM) resulted in two well-matched groups of 1,882 patients each. Post-matching analysis revealed that the early group continued to exhibit significantly higher 28-day and in-hospital mortality (P<0.001) along with a significantly higher incidence of stage 3 acute kidney injury (AKI) (8.1% vs. 5.7%, P=0.004).

Conclusions: While complete adjustment for all potential confounding factors was not possible, the findings suggest that patients who received loop diuretics within 48 hours had more severe kidney injury and a significantly higher mortality rate compared to those who received later administration (after 96 hours). These findings underscore the need for careful consideration when determining the timing of loop diuretic initiation in clinical practice.

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
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
5.00%
发文量
80
期刊介绍: ranslational Andrology and Urology (Print ISSN 2223-4683; Online ISSN 2223-4691; Transl Androl Urol; TAU) is an open access, peer-reviewed, bi-monthly journal (quarterly published from Mar.2012 - Dec. 2014). The main focus of the journal is to describe new findings in the field of translational research of Andrology and Urology, provides current and practical information on basic research and clinical investigations of Andrology and Urology. Specific areas of interest include, but not limited to, molecular study, pathology, biology and technical advances related to andrology and urology. Topics cover range from evaluation, prevention, diagnosis, therapy, prognosis, rehabilitation and future challenges to urology and andrology. Contributions pertinent to urology and andrology are also included from related fields such as public health, basic sciences, education, sociology, and nursing.
×
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