4.7 Article

Diagnostic performance of initial blood urea nitrogen combined with D-dimer levels for predicting in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020.106110

关键词

COVID-19; Blood urea nitrogen; D-dimer; Viral pneumonia

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of P.R. China [81800609]
  2. HUST COVID-19 Rapid Response Call [2020kfyXGYJ015]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The crude mortality rate in critical pneumonia cases with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) reaches 49%. This study aimed to test whether levels of blood urea nitrogen (BUN) in combination with D-dimer were predictors of in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients. The clinical characteristics of 305 COVID19 patients were analysed and were compared between the survivor and non-survivor groups. Of the 305 patients, 85 (27.9%) died and 220 (72.1%) were discharged from hospital. Compared with discharged cases, non-survivor cases were older and their BUN and D-dimer levels were significantly higher ( P < 0.0 0 01). Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) and multivariable Cox regression analyses identified BUN and D-dimer levels as independent risk factors for poor prognosis. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that elevated levels of BUN and D-dimer were associated with increased mortality (logrank, P 0.0 0 01). The area under the curve for BUN combined with D-dimer was 0.94 (95% CI 0.90-0.97), with a sensitivity of 85% and specificity of 91%. Based on BUN and D-dimer levels on admission, a nomogram model was developed that showed good discrimination, with a concordance index of 0.94. Together, initial BUN and D-dimer levels were associated with mortality in COVID-19 patients. The combination of BUN 4.6 mmol/L and D-dimer > 0.845 mu g/mL appears to identify patients at high risk of in-hospital mortality, therefore it may prove to be a powerful risk assessment tool for severe COVID-19 patients. (c) 2020 Elsevier B.V. and International Society of Chemotherapy. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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