期刊文献+

老年多器官功能不全综合征预后评估五种评分系统比较 被引量:4

Application of five scoring systems to prognostic evaluation in multiple organ dysfunction syndrome in the elderly
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的比较五种评分系统对评估老年多器官功能不全综合征(multiple organ dysfunction syndrome in the elderly,MODSE)患者预后的价值。方法共纳入465例MODSE患者并录入相应的各项临床指标,计算急性生理及慢性健康状况评分Ⅱ/Ⅲ(APACHEⅡ/Ⅲ)、简化急性生理评分Ⅱ(SAPSⅡ)、序贯脏器衰竭评估评分(SOFA)、老年多器官功能不全评分(MODSES)五种评分。利用受试者工作曲线(ROC)分析得出评估预后的最佳评分系统。结果 APACHEⅡ、APACHEⅢ、SAPSⅡ、SOFA和MODSES的ROC曲线下面积分别为:0.768(95%CI,0.725-0.811)、0.796(95%CI,0.755-0.837)、0.789(95%CI,0.748-0.830)、0.746(95%CI,0.701-0.791)和0.783(95%CI,0.740-0.825);五种评分系统中APACHEⅢ评分的灵敏度最高(0.780)和Youden指数(0.461)最大。APACHEⅡ评价预后的特异度最高(0.835)。结论五种评分系统均能较好地评估MODSE患者的预后,诊断效能前3位的评分依次为APACHEⅢ、SAPSⅡ和MODSES。 Objective To compare the prognostic value of five scoring systems in patients with multiple organ dysfunction syndrome in the elderly( MODSE). Methods In this study,we collected the clinical data of 465 patients with MODSE. Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation Ⅱ( APACHE Ⅱ) score,Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation Ⅲ( APACHE Ⅲ) score,Simplified Acute Physiology Score Ⅱ( SAPS Ⅱ),Sequential Organ Failure Assessment( SOFA) score and Multiple Organ Dysfunction Syndrome in the Elderly Score( MODSES) were all calculated. The prognostic values of five scoring systems were evaluated by receiver operator characteristic( ROC) curve. Results In receiver operating characteristic curve analysis,the area under the curve was0. 768( 95% CI,0. 725-0. 811) for APACHE Ⅱ,0. 796( 95% CI,0. 755-0. 837) for APACHE Ⅲ,0. 789( 95% CI,0. 748-0. 830)for SAPS Ⅱ,0. 746( 95% CI,0. 701-0. 791) for SOFA and 0. 783( 95% CI,0. 740-0. 825) for MODSES,APACHE Ⅲ had the highest sensitivity of 0. 780,and APACHE Ⅱ had the highest specificity of 0. 835. Conclusions The five scoring systems showed satisfactory forecasting ability in prognostic prediction of patients with MODSE. The scoring systems with high prognostic values are APACHE Ⅲ,SAPS Ⅱ and MODSES.
出处 《武警医学》 CAS 2014年第12期1195-1198,共4页 Medical Journal of the Chinese People's Armed Police Force
基金 国家自然科学基金(81170008)
关键词 老年多器官功能不全综合征 预后评估 multiple organ dysfunction syndrome in the elderly effectiveness evaluation
  • 相关文献

参考文献15

  • 1钱小顺,侯允天,薛桥,韩亚玲,刘雪红,刘建立,王士雯.1605例老年多器官功能衰竭的临床分析[J].中华老年多器官疾病杂志,2002,1(1):7-10. 被引量:128
  • 2王士雯,王今达,陈可冀,王一镗,王新德,牟善初.老年多器官功能不全综合征(MODSE)诊断标准(试行草案,2003)[J].中国危重病急救医学,2004,16(1):1-1. 被引量:227
  • 3Sternbach G L. The Glasgow coma scale [ J ]. J Emerg Med,2000, 19(1) : 67-71.
  • 4Knaus W A, Draper E A, Wagner D P, et al. APACHE Ⅱ : a severity of disease classification system [ J ]. Crit Care Med, 1985,13 ( 10 ) : 818-829.
  • 5KnansW A, Wagner D P, DmperE A, et al. The A-PACHE Ⅱ prognostic system. Risk prediction of hospi- tal mortality forcritically ill hospitalized adults [ J ]. Chest, 1991,100(6) : 1619-1636.
  • 6Le Gall J R, Lemeshow S, Sanlnier F. A new simplified acute physiology score (SAPS Ⅱ ) based on a Europe- an/North American muhicenter study [ J ]. JAMA, 1993,270 (24) :2957-2963.
  • 7Antonelli M, Moreno R, Vincent J L, et al. Application of SOFA score to trauma patients. Sequential Organ Failure Assessment [ J]. Intensive Care Med, 1999,25 (4) :389-394.
  • 8郭超,解立新,冯丹.老年多脏器功能不全综合征数据库及评分标准的建立[C]//中华医学会第五次全国重症医学大会论文汇编.广州:中华医学会第五次全国重症医学大会,2011:188.
  • 9Barie P S, Hydo L J, Pieracci F M, et al. Multiple or- gan dysfunction syndrome in critical surgical illness [J]. Surg Infect, 2009,10(5):369-377.
  • 10齐海宇,阴赪宏,王超,苏强,张淑文,王宝恩.老年多器官功能障碍综合征的死亡因素分析[J].中国急救医学,2007,27(11):967-970. 被引量:13

二级参考文献49

共引文献375

同被引文献54

引证文献4

二级引证文献70

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