4.6 Article

Growth Differentiation Factor-15 Correlates with Mortality and Severity in Severe Burns

Journal

SHOCK
Volume 57, Issue 6, Pages 211-217

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/SHK.0000000000001925

Keywords

Burn; GDF-15; SOFA score

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found that in the acute phase of severe burns, GDF-15 levels were associated with mortality and SOFA scores, making it a potential marker for assessing severity and prognosis.
Background: Growth differentiation factor-15 (GDF-15) is expressed in almost all tissues of the body and is necessary for the body's defense response to stress such as inflammation. It has been reported to be associated with incidence and mortality in many diseases, including systemic inflammatory response syndromes. There are no reports on GDF-15 in burns. The purpose of this study was to investigate the trend of GDF-15 in blood in patients with severe burns and to determine its relationship with severity and mortality. Methods: This was a retrospective, observational, single-center study. The level of GDF-15 in the blood was measured and compared with clinical parameters, including prognosis. Time points for sample collection were the day of injury, 4 days after injury, and 1 week after injury. Results: Eighty-three patients were enrolled in the study. At all time points, GDF-15 levels in the nonsurvivor group were significantly higher than those in the survivor group. In the analysis using the ROC curve for 28-day survival, the AUC of the GDF-15 value on the day of injury was 0.798, which was higher than those of % total body surface area, burn index, and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score. GDF-15 levels correlated positively with SOFA score, and the relationship became stronger along with the time course of severe burn. Conclusions: In the acute phase of severe burn, GDF-15 levels were associated with mortality and SOFA scores.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available