期刊文献+

Procalcitonin could be a reliable marker in differential diagnosis of post-implantation syndrome and infection after percutaneous endovascular aortic repair 被引量:8

Procalcitonin could be a reliable marker in differential diagnosis of post-implantation syndrome and infection after percutaneous endovascular aortic repair
原文传递
导出
摘要 Background Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is an emerging treatment moaality, wnicn nas been rapidly embraced by clinicians treating thoracic aortic disease. However, the clinical manifestations of systemic inflammatory response after TEVAR as post-implantation syndrome (PIS) resemble the perioperative infection. This study aimed to evaluate changes and diagnostic value of procalcitonin (PCT) and other traditional inflammatory markers for infections after TEVAR. Methods We conducted a prospective clinical study that enrolled 162 consecutive aortic dissection cases. who underwent TEVAR in our institution between July 2011 and November 2012. The PCT, C-response protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and blood routine examination were monitored before the operation and on days 1, 2, 3 and 5 after the operation. The diagnosis of infection was confirmed by the infection control committee with reference to Hospital Acquired Infection Diagnostic Criteria Assessment, released by the Ministry of Health of the People's Republic of China. Results Post endovascular repair of thoracic aorta, PCT changes significantly at different time points (X^2= 13.225, P=0.021), without significant difference between the PIS group and the control group (0.24±0.04 vs.0.26±0.10, P=0.804). PCT values were significantly higher in the first day after TEVAR than the preoperative levels (0.18±0.03 vs. 0.11±0.02, P 〈0.001). Compared with PIS patients, the level of PCT, CRP, White blood cell (WBC) and neutrophil (NEU) in the infection patients elevated significantly (relatively X2=6.062, P=0.048; X2=6.081, P=0.048; X2=11.030, P=0.004; X2=14.632, P=0.001). According to the ROC analysis, the PCT levels in the first day after TEVAR (AUC=0.785, P=0.012) had better predictive values of infection than WBC, NEU CRP and ESR (AUC=0.720, P=0.040; AUC=0.715, P=0.045; AUC=0.663, P=0.274; AUC=0.502, P=0.991). The best predictive index was the changes of PCT between preoperative and postoperative (PCT), which possess AUC as 0.803 (P=0.014). And PCT=0.055 could be considered as an infection diagnosis cutoff value with a sensitivity of 83.3% and specificity 69.0%. Background Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is an emerging treatment moaality, wnicn nas been rapidly embraced by clinicians treating thoracic aortic disease. However, the clinical manifestations of systemic inflammatory response after TEVAR as post-implantation syndrome (PIS) resemble the perioperative infection. This study aimed to evaluate changes and diagnostic value of procalcitonin (PCT) and other traditional inflammatory markers for infections after TEVAR. Methods We conducted a prospective clinical study that enrolled 162 consecutive aortic dissection cases. who underwent TEVAR in our institution between July 2011 and November 2012. The PCT, C-response protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and blood routine examination were monitored before the operation and on days 1, 2, 3 and 5 after the operation. The diagnosis of infection was confirmed by the infection control committee with reference to Hospital Acquired Infection Diagnostic Criteria Assessment, released by the Ministry of Health of the People's Republic of China. Results Post endovascular repair of thoracic aorta, PCT changes significantly at different time points (X^2= 13.225, P=0.021), without significant difference between the PIS group and the control group (0.24±0.04 vs.0.26±0.10, P=0.804). PCT values were significantly higher in the first day after TEVAR than the preoperative levels (0.18±0.03 vs. 0.11±0.02, P 〈0.001). Compared with PIS patients, the level of PCT, CRP, White blood cell (WBC) and neutrophil (NEU) in the infection patients elevated significantly (relatively X2=6.062, P=0.048; X2=6.081, P=0.048; X2=11.030, P=0.004; X2=14.632, P=0.001). According to the ROC analysis, the PCT levels in the first day after TEVAR (AUC=0.785, P=0.012) had better predictive values of infection than WBC, NEU CRP and ESR (AUC=0.720, P=0.040; AUC=0.715, P=0.045; AUC=0.663, P=0.274; AUC=0.502, P=0.991). The best predictive index was the changes of PCT between preoperative and postoperative (PCT), which possess AUC as 0.803 (P=0.014). And PCT=0.055 could be considered as an infection diagnosis cutoff value with a sensitivity of 83.3% and specificity 69.0%.
出处 《Chinese Medical Journal》 SCIE CAS CSCD 2014年第14期2578-2582,共5页 中华医学杂志(英文版)
关键词 aortic dissection inflammatory response INFECTION endovascular repair PROCALCITONIN aortic dissection inflammatory response infection endovascular repair procalcitonin
  • 相关文献

参考文献4

二级参考文献34

  • 1明广华,张宇辉,吴海英,祖菲雅,张连娟,郑德裕,刘国仗,孙立忠,惠汝太.179例主动脉夹层患者的临床资料分析[J].中国循环杂志,2004,19(5):363-366. 被引量:58
  • 2FUWei-guo DONGZhi-hui WANGYu-qi GUODa-qiao XUXin CHENBin JIANGJun-hao YANGJue SHIZheng-yu.Strategies for managing the insufficiency of the proximal landing zone during endovascular thoracic aortic repair[J].Chinese Medical Journal,2005(13):1066-1071. 被引量:20
  • 3薛凌,罗建方,麦劲壮,刘小清.广州市主动脉夹层临床特征变化趋势十年回顾性分析[J].中华心血管病杂志,2007,35(1):47-50. 被引量:61
  • 4Schermerhom ML, O'Malley AJ, Jhaveri A, CotteriU P, Pomposelli E Landon BE. Endovascular vs. open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms in the Medicare population. N Engl J Med 2008; 358: 464-474.
  • 5Raval MV, Eskandari MK. Outcomes of elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair among the elderly: endovascular versus open repair. Surgery 2011; Epub ahead of print.
  • 6Morasch MD, Kibbe MR, Evans ME, Meadows WS, Eskandari MK, Matsumura JS, et al. Percutaneous repair of abdominal aortic aneurvsm. J Vasc Surg 2004: 40: 12-16.
  • 7Stelter W, Umscheid T, Ziegler R Three-year experience with modular stent-graft devices for endovascular AAA treatment. J Endovasc Surg 1997; 4: 362-369.
  • 8Hinchliffe RJ, Ivancev K. Endovascular aneurysm repair: current and future status. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2008; 31: 451-459.
  • 9Brewster DC, Geller SC, Kaufman JA, Cambria RP, Gertler JP, LaMuraglia GM, et al. Initial experience with endovascular aneurysm repair: comparison of early results with outcome of conventional open repair. J Vase S ttrg 1998; 27: 992-1003.
  • 10Haas PC, Krajcer Z, Diethrich EB. Closure of large percutaneous access sites using the Prostar XL Percutaneous Vascular Surgery device. J Endovasc Surg 1999; 6: 168-170.

共引文献82

同被引文献41

引证文献8

二级引证文献45

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部