4.6 Article

Impact of chronic liver disease in intensive care unit acquired pneumonia: a prospective study

期刊

INTENSIVE CARE MEDICINE
卷 39, 期 10, 页码 1776-1784

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00134-013-3025-6

关键词

Intensive care unit; Lung; Ventilator-acquired pneumonia; Liver cirrhosis; Nosocomial infection; Biomarkers

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To assess the impact of chronic liver disease (CLD) on ICU-acquired pneumonia. This was a prospective, observational study of the characteristics, microbiology, and outcomes of 343 consecutive patients with ICU-acquired pneumonia clustered according to the presence of CLD. Sixty-seven (20 %) patients had CLD (67 % had liver cirrhosis, LC), MELD score 26 +/- A 9, 20 % Child-Pugh class C). They presented higher severity scores than patients without CLD both on admission to the ICU (APACHE II, LC 19 +/- A 6 vs. other CLD 18 +/- A 6 vs. no CLD 16 +/- A 6; p < 0.001; SOFA, 10 +/- A 3 vs. 8 +/- A 4 vs. 7 +/- A 3; p < 0.001) and at onset of pneumonia (APACHE II, 19 +/- A 6 vs. 17 +/- A 6 vs. 16 +/- A 5; p = 0.001; SOFA, 11 +/- A 4 vs. 9 +/- A 4 vs. 7 +/- A 3; p < 0.001). Levels of CRP were lower in patients with LC than in the other two groups (day 1, 6.5 [2.5-11.5] vs. 13 [6-23] vs. 15.5 [8-24], p < 0.001, day 3, 6 [3-12] vs. 16 [9-21] vs. 11 [5-20], p = 0.001); all the other biomarkers were higher in LC and other CLD patients. LC patients had higher 28- and 90-day mortality (63 vs. 28 %, p < 0.001; 72 vs. 38 %, p < 0.001, respectively) than non-CLD patients. Presence of LC was independently associated with decreased 28- and 90-day survival (95 % confidence interval [CI], 1.982-17.250; p = 0.001; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 2.915-20.699, p = 0.001, respectively). In critically ill patients with ICU-acquired pneumonia, CLD is associated with a more severe clinical presentation and poor clinical outcomes. Moreover, LC is independently associated with 28- and 90-day mortality. The results of this study are important for future trials focused on mortality.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据