切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志 ›› 2013, Vol. 02 ›› Issue (04): 235 -239. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3232.2013.04.007

所属专题: 专题评论 文献

临床研究

急性生理学和慢性健康状况Ⅳ评分在评估肝移植术后患者预后中的应用
胡月云1, 刘媛2, 刘波2, 马盈盈3, 颜君1, 李铁花4, 胡爱玲5,()   
  1. 1. 510080 广州,中山大学护理学院
    2. 中山大学附属第三医院岭南医院普外科
    3. 中山大学附属第三医院肝移植中心
    4. 中山大学附属第三医院内科重症监护病房
    5. 中山大学附属第三医院护理部
  • 收稿日期:2013-05-14 出版日期:2013-08-10
  • 通信作者: 胡爱玲

Application of acute physiology and chronic health evaluation IV in predicting the prognosis of patients after liver transplantation

Yue-yun HU1, Yuan LIU2, Bo LIU2, Ying-ying MA3, Jun YAN1, Tie-hua LI4, Ai-ling HU5,()   

  1. 1. School of Nursing, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510080, China
  • Received:2013-05-14 Published:2013-08-10
  • Corresponding author: Ai-ling HU
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: HU Ai-ling, Email:
目的

探讨急性生理学和慢性健康状况(APACHE)Ⅳ评分用于预测肝移植患者术后住院期间病死率和入住重症监护病房(ICU)时间的价值。

方法

回顾性研究2006年2月至2009年7月在中山大学附属第三医院肝移植中心接受同种异体原位肝移植的195例患者临床资料。其中男171例,女24例;年龄(48±11)岁。所有患者均签署知情同意书,符合医学伦理学规定。收集患者APACHE Ⅳ评分所需要的参数、实际入住ICU时间、住院期间死亡情况,并计算患者APACHE Ⅳ评分分值、实际病死率、预测入住ICU时间、预测病死率,并绘制其预测患者死亡的受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线。观察患者住院期间存活和死亡情况及其APACHE Ⅳ评分。应用ROC曲线研究APACHE Ⅳ评分预测患者住院期间死亡能力。采用Hosmer-Lemeshow拟合优度检验校准度分析APACHE Ⅳ评分系统预测患者住院期间死亡的准确性。住院期间存活者的实际入住ICU时间与预测入住ICU时间的比较采用Wilcoxon秩和检验,两者相关性研究采用Spearman秩相关分析。

结果

本研究195例患者中,存活168例,死亡27例,病死率为13.8%;总体患者APACHE Ⅳ评分为(41±22)分,其中存活患者的APACHEⅣ评分为(36±16)分,死亡患者为(75±25)分。APACHE Ⅳ评分预测患者住院期间死亡的ROC曲线下面积(A)为0.937,其对患者住院期间死亡的预测切点为56分,灵敏度为0.85,特异度为0.91,Youden指数为0.76。患者实际病死率为13.8%,APACHE Ⅳ评分预测患者病死率为3.8%。APACHE Ⅳ总体评分及30~60分、>60分组实际病死率的预测存在低估情况。经Hosmer-Lemeshow拟合优度检验发现APACHE Ⅳ评分对患者住院期间死亡预测拟合良好,校准度高(χ2=1.568,P>0.05)。患者实际入住ICU时间中位数为3.7(2.4,5.5)d,预测入住ICU时间为3.2(2.4~4.8)d。实际入住ICU时间明显长于预测入住ICU时间,两者差异有统计学意义(Z=3.760,P<0.05)。Spearman秩相关分析显示两者呈正相关(r=0.467,P<0.05)。

结论

APACHE Ⅳ评分对肝移植术后患者住院期间病死率有一定的预测价值,但对患者病死率和入住ICU时间存在低估情况。

Objective

To explore the value of acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) Ⅳ in predicting mortality during hospital stay and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS) of patients after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT).

Methods

Clinical data of 195 patients [171 males, 24 females, mean age of (48±11) years old] who underwent OLT from February 2006 to July 2009 in Liver Transplantation Center, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sun University were studied retrospectively.The informed consents of all patients were obtained and the ethical committee approval was received. The required parameters for APACHE IV, actual ICU LOS and mortality during hospital stay were collected. The APACHE Ⅳ scores, actual mortality, estimated ICU LOS, estimated mortality were calculated and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of predicting the patients' mortality was drawn. The survival, mortality and APACHE Ⅳ scores of patients during hospital stay were observed. The ability of APACHE Ⅳ in predicting mortality during hospital stay was analyzed using ROC curve, and the accuracy of APACHE Ⅳ in predicting mortality during hospital stay was analyzed using Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test. The actual ICU LOS and estimated ICU LOS of the survivals during hospital stay were compared using Wilcoxon rank sum test. The correlation between them was studied using Spearman rank correlation analysis.

Results

There were 168 survivals and 27 deaths with the mortality of 13.8%. The mean APACHE Ⅳ score was (41±22) for all the patients, was (36±16) for the survivals and(75±25) for the death. The area under the curve(A) value of APACHE Ⅳ in predicting mortality during hospital stay was 0.937. The predictive cutoff point was 56 with the sensitivity 0.85, specificity 0.91 and the Youden index 0.76. The actual mortality of the patients was 13.8% and the estimated mortality by APACHE Ⅳ was 3.8%. The actual mortality was underestimated by APACHE Ⅳ in the overall score, 30-60 scores and >60 scores groups. The Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-offit of APACHE Ⅳ in predicting mortality during hospital stay was good with a high calibration (χ2=1.568, P>0.05) . The median of actual ICU LOS was 3.7(2.4, 5.5)d, and the median of estimated ICU LOS was 3.2(2.4, 4.8)d. The actual ICU LOS was evidently longer than the estimated ICU LOS, and significant difference was observed between them (Z=3.760, P<0.05). There was positive correlation between the actual ICU LOS and the estimated ICU LOS by Spearman rank correlation analysis (r=0.467, P<0.05).

Conclusions

APACHE Ⅳ has a certain value in predicting mortality of patients after OLT during hospital stay, but it underestimates the mortality and ICU LOS.

图1 APACHE Ⅳ评分分辨患者住院期间死亡的ROC曲线
表1 APACHE Ⅳ评分不同分值患者的实际病死率与预测病死率
[1]
Leventhal J,Abecassis M,Miller J, et al. Chimerism and tolerance without GVHD or engraftment syndrome in HLA-mismatched combined kidney and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Sci Transl Med, 2012, 4(124): 124ra28.
[2]
Chaidos A,Patterson S,Szydlo R, et al. Graft invariant natural killer T-cell dose predicts risk of acute graft-versus-host disease in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Blood, 2012, 119(21): 5030-5036.
[3]
Ahmed A,Keeffe EB. Current indications and contraindications for liver transplantation. Clin Liver Dis, 2007, 11(2): 227-247.
[4]
沈中阳,陈新国.临床肝移植. 2版.北京:科学出版社, 2010: 2-4.
[5]
Volk ML,Hernandez JC,Lok AS, et al. Modified Charlson comorbidity index for predicting survival after liver transplantation. Liver Transpl, 2007, 13(11): 1515-1520.
[6]
Zimmerman JE,Kramer AA,McNair DS, et al. Acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) Ⅳ: hospital mortality assessment for today's critically ill patients. Crit Care Med, 2006, 34(5): 1297-1310.
[7]
Zimmerman JE,Kramer AA,McNair DS, et al. Intensive care unit length of stay: benchmarking based on acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) Ⅳ. Crit Care Med, 2006, 34(10): 2517-2529.
[8]
赵耐青.临床医学研究设计和数据分析.上海:复旦大学出版社,2005: 241-252.
[9]
Knaus WA,Zimmerman JE,Wagner DP, et al. APACHE-acute physiology and chronic health evaluation: a physiologically based classification system. Crit Care Med, 1981, 9(8): 591-597.
[10]
Knaus WA,Draper EA,Wagner DP, et al. APACHE Ⅱ: a severity of disease classification system. Crit Care Med, 1985, 13(10): 818-829.
[11]
Knaus WA,Wagner DP,Draper EA, et al. The APACHE Ⅲ prognostic system: risk prediction of hospital mortality for critically ill hospitalized adults. Chest, 1991, 100(6): 1619-1636.
[12]
Doyle HR,Marino IR. Effect of donor age liver allograft function. Transplantation, 1996, 61(7): 1129-1131.
[13]
Yersiz H,Shaked A,Olthoff K, et al. Correlation between donor age and the pattern of liver graft recovery after transplantation. Transplantation, 1995, 60(8): 790-794.
[14]
Brinkman S,Bakhshi-Raiez F,Abu-Hanna A, et al. External validation of acute physiology and chronic health evaluation Ⅳ in Dutch intensive care units and comparison with acute physiology and chronic health evaluation Ⅱ and simplified acute physiology score Ⅱ. J Crit Care, 2011, 26(1): 105.
[15]
Nassar AP Jr,Mocelin AO,Nunes AL, et al. Caution when using prognostic models: a prospective comparison of 3 recent prognostic models. J Crit Care, 2012, 27(4): 423.
[16]
Knaus WA. APACHE 1978-2001: the development of a quality assurance system based on prognosis: milestones and personal reflections. Arch Surg, 2002, 137(1): 37-41.
[17]
Zimmerman JE,Alzola C,Von Rueden KT. The use of benchmarking to identify top performing critical care units: a preliminary assessment of their policies and practices. J Crit Care, 2003, 18(2): 76-86.
[18]
Berenholtz SM,Dorman T,Ngo K, et al. Qualitative review of intensive care unit quality indicators. J Crit Care, 2002, 17(1): 1-12.
[19]
Kramer AA,Zimmerman JE. A predictive model for the early identification of patients at risk for a prolonged intensive care unit length of stay. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak, 2010, 10: 27.
[20]
Vasilevskis EE,Kuzniewicz MW,Cason BA, et al. Mortality probability model Ⅲ and simplified acute physiology score Ⅱ: assessing their value in predicting length of stay and comparison to APACHE Ⅳ. Chest, 2009, 136(1): 89-101.
[1] 曹婉悦, 陆晶, 徐军明. 芳香烃受体的激活在大鼠肝移植免疫应答中的作用及机制研究[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2022, 16(03): 177-182.
[2] 杨占宇, 卢倩. 体外肝切除自体肝移植治疗肝细胞癌[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2022, 16(03): 182-182.
[3] 赵渊宇, 毛家玺, 傅宏, 刘聪, 郭闻渊, 滕飞. 肝移植相关性应激性心肌病临床特征和诊治[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(03): 278-282.
[4] 顾世杰, 马麟, 陈秋源, 崔瑞文, 赖柏聪, 石小红, 孟凡航, 易述红, 曹荣华. 徒手-机器联合复苏在脑死亡供者心脏骤停后器官维护中的作用[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(03): 283-287.
[5] 赵帅, 王健, 韩冰, 张亦弛, 丁瀚, 蔡浩, 顾劲扬. 肝移植治疗儿童Abernethy畸形合并肝肺综合征一例并文献复习[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(03): 288-293.
[6] 江哲龙, 魏志鸿, 杜俊杰, 江艺, 吕立志, 杨芳. FOXC2对肝癌肝移植患者预后的影响[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(03): 309-314.
[7] 阙清扬, 余炯杰, 凌孙彬, 徐骁. 免疫治疗在肝癌肝移植降期治疗中的应用及前景[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(03): 221-224.
[8] 蒋超, 吕国悦, 吴广振, 吴庆远, 王蒙. 胆道闭锁儿童肝移植治疗现状与进展[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(03): 235-238.
[9] 孙克彦, 毛家玺, 刘业, 刘聪, 郭闻渊, 张磊, 滕飞. HBV相关性慢加急性肝衰竭等待肝移植患者血浆置换疗效影响因素[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(03): 252-257.
[10] 刘剑戎, 谢芝芝, 黎利娟, 吕海金, 安玉玲, 易小猛, 魏绪霞, 席云, 易慧敏, 熊天威. 器官保存液病原体与肝移植受者感染关系分析[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(03): 273-277.
[11] 中华医学会外科学分会外科手术学学组, 中华医学会外科学分会移植学组. 劈离式肝移植供体及供肝评估专家共识[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(02): 133-138.
[12] 李晓斌, 冯啸, 谢云亮, 杨洲, 杨卿, 傅斌生, 易述红, 杨扬, 陈规划. Kasai手术对胆道闭锁患儿肝移植疗效的影响[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(02): 149-153.
[13] 李嘉伟, 庄雅峰, 王明, 柯瑞盛, 江艺, 蔡秋程. 肝移植术后长期存活患者生存情况单中心分析[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(02): 182-187.
[14] 肖慜, 顾杨军, 林鑫, 庄莉, 李启勇. T管支撑与内镜综合治疗肝移植术后胆管坏死合并胆管结石一例[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(02): 206-208.
[15] 刘华泽, 黄健峰, 杨静雯, 顾劲扬. 肝移植术后急性肾损伤诊治进展[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(02): 212-214.
阅读次数
全文


摘要