许楠欣 周敏
[摘要] 目的 探討肺损伤预测评分(lung injury prediction score,LIPS)联合急性生理学和慢性健康状况评价Ⅱ(acute physiology and chronic health evaluationⅡ,APACHEⅡ)评分对重症创伤性脑损伤(severe traumatic brain injury,sTBI)患者合并急性肺损伤(acute lung injury,ALI)的预测价值。方法 回顾性选取2019年1月至2021年12月安徽医科大学附属省立医院收治的75例sTBI患者,根据是否合并ALI,将其分为ALI组(n=24)和非ALI组(n=51)。收集患者入院时的基本资料、实验室指标、APACHEⅡ评分、LIPS评分、格拉斯哥昏迷量表(Glasgow coma scale,GCS)评分;采用Logistic回归分析sTBI患者合并ALI的危险因素,绘制受试者操作特征曲线(receiver operating characteristic curve,ROC曲线)评价指标对sTBI合并ALI的预测价值。结果 ALI组患者的APACHEⅡ评分、LIPS评分均显著高于非ALI组,GCS评分、红细胞体积分布宽度显著低于非ALI组(P<0.05)。Logistic回归分析显示,APACHEⅡ评分和LIPS评分升高及GCS评分降低均是sTBI合并ALI的独立危险因素(P<0.05)。ROC曲线分析显示,LIPS评分、APACHEⅡ评分诊断sTBI合并ALI的曲线下面积(area under the curve,AUC)分别为0.869和0.754;二者联合检测的AUC为0.916(95%CI:0.855~0.976),敏感度和特异性分别为83.4%和84.3%。结论 LIPS评分联合APACHEⅡ评分可有效预测sTBI合并ALI的风险。
[关键词] 创伤性脑损伤;急性肺损伤;肺损伤预测评分;急性生理学和慢性健康状况评价Ⅱ;危险因素
[中图分类号] R651.15;R655.3 [文献标识码] A [DOI] 10.3969/j.issn.1673-9701.2024.13.009
Predictive value of combined LIPS and APACHEⅡ scores in patients with severe traumatic brain injury complicated with acute lung injury
XU Nanxin1, ZHOU Min2
1.Department of Respiratory Medicine, Provincial Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei 230031, Anhui, China; 2. Department of Critical Care Medicine, Provincial Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei 230031, Anhui, China
[Abstract] Objective To investigate predictive value of combined lung injury prediction score (LIPS) and acute physiology and chronic health evaluationⅡ (APACHEⅡ) scores in patients with severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI) complicated with acute lung injury (ALI). Methods Seventy-five sTBI patients admitted to Provincial Hospital of Anhui Medical University from January 2019 to December 2021 were retrospectively selected and divided into ALI group (n=24) and non-ALI group (n=51) according to whether they were complicated with ALI. Basic data, laboratory indicators, APACHEⅡ score, LIPS score and Glasgow coma scale (GCS) score were collected. Logistic regression was used to analyze the risk factors of patients with sTBI complicated with ALI, and predictive value of the evaluation index of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for sTBI complicated with ALI was drawn. Results APACHEⅡ score and LIPS score in ALI group were significantly higher than those in non-ALI group, GCS score and red cell volume distribution width were significantly lower than those in non-ALI group (P<0.05). Logistic regression analysis showed that APACHEⅡ score, LIPS score and GCS score were independent risk factors for sTBI complicated with ALI (P<0.05). ROC curve analysis showed that area under the curve (AUC) of LIPS score and APACHEⅡ score in the diagnosis of sTBI complicated with ALI were 0.869 and 0.754, respectively. The AUC was 0.916 (95%CI: 0.855-0.976), and the sensitivity and specificity were 83.4% and 84.3%, respectively. Conclusion LIPS score combined with APACHEⅡ score can effectively predict the risk of sTBI complicated with ALI.
[Key words] Traumatic brain injury; Acute lung injury; Lung injury prediction score; Acute physiology and chronic health evaluationⅡ; Risk factor
创伤性脑损伤(traumatic brain injury,TBI)是40岁以下人群常见的死亡原因之一[1]。其中急性肺损伤(acute lung injury,ALI)是TBI患者常见且严重的并发症,发病率高达20%~31%,而合并ALI的TBI患者死亡率增加1.5~2.0倍,达30%~80%[2-3]。ALI是重症创伤性脑损伤(severe traumatic brain injury,sTBI)后脑缺氧的独立危险因素,可引起继发性损伤,严重影响患者的预后[4]。目前,对TBI合并ALI的预测分析相对较少。因此,本研究拟通过筛选sTBI患者发生ALI的危险因素,构建ALI风险预测模型并分析其预测价值,为预测sTBI患者合并ALI的发生提供参考依据。
1 资料与方法
1.1 一般资料
回顾性选取2019年1月至2021年12月安徽医科大学附属省立医院收治的75例sTBI患者。纳入标准:①受伤时间≤48h,经头颅CT证实为TBI;②格拉斯哥昏迷量表(Glasgow coma scale,GCS)评分≤8分;③年龄18~80岁。排除标准:①既往有脑外伤、脑卒中病史;②既往有基础肺部疾病和糖尿病;③有心、肝、肾等器官重大疾病史;④临床资料不完整。ALI诊断标准:①有发病的高危因素(如严重误吸、不恰当机械通气等);②急性起病,呼吸频速和(或)呼吸窘迫;③胸部X线提示双肺散在斑片状浸润阴影;④肺毛细血管楔压≤18mmHg(1mmHg=0.133kPa)或临床上能排除心源性肺水肿;⑤血氧分压/吸氧浓度比值≤300mmHg[5]。根据是否合并ALI,将纳入患者分为ALI组(n=24)和非ALI组(n=51)。本研究经安徽医科大学附属省立医院医学伦理委员会批准(伦理审批号:2023-RE-257),所有患者或家属均签署知情同意书。
1.2 观察指标
抽取患者入院后24h内静脉血,1500转/min离心20min后收集血浆,储存于–20℃冰箱备检。采用酶联免疫吸附测定法分别测定降钙素原、C反应蛋白,试剂盒由上海门捷生物技术公司提供;采用Dx H800全自动血液分析仪检测血常规。评估入院24h内的体温、呼吸、心率、血压等基本生命体征及GCS评分等,计算入院24h内的急性生理学和慢性健康状况评价Ⅱ(acute physiology and chronic health evaluationⅡ,APACHEⅡ)评分。此外,从患者易感因素、高危手术、创伤及风险修正等方面完成肺损伤预测评分(lung injury prediction score,LIPS)。
1.3 统计学方法
采用SPSS 26.0统计软件分析处理数据。正态分布的计量资料以均数±标准差()表示,組间比较采用独立样本t检验;非正态分布的计量资料以中位数(四分位数间距)[M(Q1,Q3)]表示,组间比较采用Mann-Whitney U检验。计数资料采用例数(百分率)[n(%)]表示,比较采用χ2检验或Fisher确切概率法检验。采用Logistic回归分析sTBI患者合并ALI的危险因素,绘制受试者操作特征曲线(receiver operating characteristic curve,ROC曲线)评价指标对sTBI合并ALI的预测价值。P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。
2 结果
2.1 两组患者的临床资料比较
ALI组患者的APACHEⅡ评分、LIPS评分均显著高于非ALI组,GCS评分、红细胞体积分布宽度(red cell volume distribution width,RDW)显著低于非ALI组(P<0.05),见表1。
2.2 sTBI合并ALI的多因素分析
Logistic回归分析显示,APACHEⅡ评分和LIPS评分升高及GCS评分降低均是sTBI合并ALI的独立危险因素(P<0.05),见表2。
2.3 sTBI合并ALI的ROC曲线分析
入院24h内LIPS评分、APACHEⅡ评分诊断sTBI合并ALI的曲线下面积(area under the curve,AUC)分别为0.869和0.754,敏感度分别为87.5%和62.5%,特异性分别为68.6%和74.5%。二者联合诊断的AUC为0.916(95%CI:0.855~0.976),敏感度和特异性分别为83.4%和84.3%,见图1。
3 讨论
TBI因其高死亡率和致残率一直是全球健康的主要问题之一。除中樞性功能损害外,颅外器官功能障碍在sTBI患者中同样常见,尤其是肺脏,可导致继发性脑损伤及不良临床结局。sTBI合并ALI的发生机制复杂且多样,可能存在独特的发病机制,但具体尚不清楚,当前研究显示主要与交感神经兴奋、炎症介质增加、高迁移率族蛋白B1-晚期糖基化终末产物受体轴激活、细胞间黏附分子活化及神经递质释放增加有关,但最重要的机制可能倾向于TBI后全身过度炎症反应和免疫抑制状态[6-8]。sTBI通过激活下丘脑-垂体-肾上腺轴和交感神经系统产生儿茶酚胺风暴,大量细胞因子过度释放导致过度全身炎症反应,进一步损害肺泡上皮细胞和毛细血管内皮细胞,最终导致肺血管静水压及肺毛细血管通透性增加[1,9]。
本研究中ALI的发生率为32%,这与既往文献报道的发生率相符合[10]。ALI可进展为急性呼吸窘迫综合征(acute respiratory distress syndrome,ARDS)或呼吸衰竭,导致患者病情迅速恶化甚至死亡。目前,ALI主要依据临床表现和影像学检查诊断,尚缺乏准确且易获取的指标或模型预测其发生。因此,研究者们对寻找可行、可靠及有效的生物标志物越来越感兴趣,希望达到监测疾病进展和预测临床结局的目的,这些标志物涉及ALI、ARDS复杂的发病机制,包括白细胞介素-6、白细胞介素-8、血管生成素-2、表面活性蛋白-D、晚期糖基化终末产物受体、可溶性细胞间黏附分子-1、纤溶酶原激活物抑制剂-1和血管内皮生长因子等[11]。但上述指标临床检验存在困难,在一定程度上限制其发挥预测ALI、ARDS的价值。本研究旨在通过临床常用指标及易获取的量表评分预测sTBI合并ALI的发生,为提高sTBI的救治提供参考价值。
及时评估疾病的严重程度对TBI患者的预后及并发症防控至关重要,可提高患者生存率。本研究发现,GCS评分、LIPS评分、APACHEⅡ评分、RDW与sTBI合并ALI密切相关。其中,RDW是反映患者外周静脉血中红细胞形态异质性的指标,其高低与炎症反应水平呈正相关。冯帆等[12]研究显示RDW>15.50%是脓毒症所致ARDS患者死亡的独立危险因素。但本研究多因素分析显示RDW并非sTBI合并ALI的独立危险因素,可能与混杂因素的影响且样本量较小有关。此外,文献报道TBI严重程度与ALI的发生、更长的住院时间和机械通气持续时间密切相关[2,13-14]。本研究发现GCS评分是sTBI合并ALI的独立预测因素之一也恰巧说明这一点。但Hoesch等[15]发现TBI的严重程度(如GCS评分)和神经学诊断与ALI发生无关,这可能与纳入人群的差异及TBI患者长期使用镇静镇痛药和机械通气导致GCS评分存在一定误差有关。
APACHEⅡ评分是目前应用最为广泛的判断危重症病情严重程度的系统,分值越高,疾病越重,其对疾病的预后有良好的预测价值[16]。既往研究表明,血浆血管生成素-2、LIPS评分和APACHEⅡ评分与ARDS发生密切相关[17-18]。本研究结果表明,单独APACHEⅡ评分预测sTBI合并ALI的AUC为0.754,敏感度、特异性分别为62.5%和74.5%,最佳截断值为23.5分,APACHEⅡ评分对预测sTBI合并ALI确实有一定的临床价值。
LIPS评分模型数据简单易获取,早期预测ALI/ARDS的AUC为0.80~0.84,其有效性和易用性已在多项研究中被证实[19-20]。研究显示LIPS评分与ARDS发展密切相关,LIPS>6分预测ARDS的敏感度为84.8%,特异性为67.2%,AUC为0.82[21]。本研究中LIPS评分预测sTBI合并ALI的AUC为0.869,最佳截断值为6分,敏感度为87.5%,特异性为68.6%,与既往报道相似,且两种指标联合的预测价值更高。
综上,入院24h内联合LIPS评分和APACHEⅡ评分可早期预测sTBI合并ALI的发生。然而,本研究样本量较小,且为单中心回顾性研究,导致数据可能产生偏倚,尚需要大规模、多中心前瞻性研究进一步验证。
利益冲突:所有作者均声明不存在利益冲突。
[参考文献]
[1] FAN T H, HUANG M, GEDANSKY A, et al. Prevalence and outcome of acute respiratory distress syndrome in traumatic brain injury: A systematic review and Meta-analysis[J]. Lung, 2021, 199(6): 603–610.
[2] BRATTON S L, DAVIS R L. Acute lung injury in isolated traumatic brain injury[J]. Neurosurgery, 1997, 40(4): 707–712.
[3] HOLLAND M C, MACKERSIE R C, MORABITO D, et al. The development of acute lung injury is associated with worse neurologic outcome in patients with severe traumatic brain injury[J]. J Trauma, 2003, 55(1): 106–111.
[4] ODDO M, NDUOM E, FRANGOS S, et al. Acute lung injury is an independent risk factor for brain hypoxia after severe traumatic brain injury[J]. Neurosurgery, 2010, 67(2): 338–344.
[5] 中华医学会重症医学分会. 急性肺损伤/急性呼吸窘迫综合征诊断与治疗指南(2006)[J]. 中华内科杂志, 2007, 46(5): 430–435.
[6] ZIAKA M, EXADAKTYLOS A. Brain-lung interactions and mechanical ventilation in patients with isolated brain injury[J]. Crit Care, 2021, 25(1): 358.
[7] DAS M, MOHAPATRA S, MOHAPATRA S S. New perspectives on central and peripheral immune responses to acute traumatic brain injury[J]. J Neuroinflammation, 2012, 9: 236.
[8] SCHWULST S J, TRAHANAS D M, SABER R, et al. Traumatic brain injury-induced alterations in peripheral immunity[J]. J Trauma Acute Care Surg, 2013, 75(5): 780–788.
[9] MASCIA L. Acute lung injury in patients with severe brain injury: A double hit model[J]. Neurocrit Care, 2009, 11(3): 417–426.
[10] 杨松斌, 吕庆伟, 周晶, 等. 血浆Clara细胞蛋白浓度与重型颅脑创伤并发急性肺损伤的相关分析[J]. 中华神经外科杂志, 2014, 30(3): 248–251.
[11] WARE L B, KOYAMA T, BILLHEIMER D D, et al. Prognostic and pathogenetic value of combining clinical and biochemical indices in patients with acute lung injury[J]. Chest, 2010, 137(2): 288–296.
[12] 馮帆, 冀志红, 孟庆庆, 等. 肺损伤预测评分联合红细胞分布宽度预测急性呼吸窘迫综合征预后[J]. 中国临床研究, 2023, 36(4): 553–557.
[13] 刘源. 重症监护室严重创伤性颅脑损伤患者发生急性呼吸窘迫综合征的危险因素分析[J]. 中外医学研究, 2022, 20(23): 117–120.
[14] TREGGIARI M M, HUDSON L D, MARTIN D P, et al. Effect of acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome on outcome in critically ill trauma patients[J]. Crit Care Med, 2004, 32(2): 327–331.
[15] HOESCH R E, LIN E, YOUNG M, et al. Acute lung injury in critical neurological illness[J]. Crit Care Med, 2012, 40(2): 587–593.
[16] ZHOU T, ZHENG N, LI X, et al. Prognostic value of neutrophil-lymphocyte count ratio (NLCR) among adult ICU patients in comparison to APACHEⅡ score and conventional inflammatory markers: A multi center retrospective cohort study[J]. BMC Emerg Med, 2021, 21(1): 24.
[17] XU Z, WU G M, LI Q, et al. Predictive value of combined LIPS and ANG-2 level in critically ill patients with ARDS risk factors[J]. Mediators Inflamm, 2018, 2018: 1739615.
[18] 趙峰, 沈子渊, 杨翠, 等. LIPS评分联合APACHEⅡ评分和氧合指数预测ARDS发生模型的建立和验证[J]. 中华危重病急救医学, 2022, 34(10): 1048–1054.
[19] GAJIC O, DABBAGH O, PARK P K, et al. Early identification of patients at risk of acute lung injury: Evaluation of lung injury prediction score in a multicenter cohort study[J]. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2011, 183(4): 462–470.
[20] SOTO G J, KOR D J, PARK P K, et al. Lung injury prediction score in hospitalized patients at risk of acute respiratory distress syndrome[J]. Crit Care Med, 2016, 44(12): 2182–2191.
[21] KIM B K, KIM S, KIM C Y, et al. Predictive role of lung injury prediction score in the development of acute respiratory distress syndrome in Korea[J]. Yonsei Med J, 2021, 62(5): 417–423.
(收稿日期:2023–07–10)
(修回日期:2024–04–11)