4.5 Article

Prognosis of patients with extreme acidosis on admission to the emergency department: A retrospective cohort study

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE
卷 76, 期 -, 页码 36-40

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2023.10.054

关键词

Acidosis; Acidemia; Acid-base

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to test the prognosis of patients with a pH lower than 6.9 on emergency department admission. The findings showed that a small but significant portion of these patients survived at least 24 hours and until hospital discharge.
Aim of the study: The development of acidosis in critically ill patients is considered to be a negative prognostic factor, and when extreme, even incompatible with life. We aimed to test the prognosis of patients with a pH lower than 6.9 on emergency department admission.Methods: A retrospective cohort study in adult patients admitted to two emergency departments with a pH < 6.9 during the first 12 h of admission. Primary outcome was mortality within 24 h from emergency department ad-mission. We performed a regression analysis of clinical and laboratory data in order to identify factors associated with mortality in this population.Results: We analyzed data of 206 admissions to the emergency departments between 2008 and 2018 with extreme acidosis. pH Values ranged from 6.898 to 6.35 (mean 6.8 and median 6.83). 60 (29%) of the patients survived the first 24 h. 35 patients (58%) of those also survived to hospital discharge, and of them 80% have returned to their previous functional status. Patient's age, type of acidosis, cardio-pulmonary resuscitation on arrival, and diagnosis on admission were correlated with survival.Conclusions: A small but significant portion of patients with extreme acidosis on emergency department admission survive at least to 24 h and until hospital discharge. The clinical decision making should be based on other prognostic factors rather than pH value by itself.(c) 2023 Elsevier Inc. 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

4.5
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