4.6 Article

Mortality and the nature of metabolic acidosis in children with shock

期刊

INTENSIVE CARE MEDICINE
卷 29, 期 2, 页码 286-291

出版社

SPRINGER-VERLAG
DOI: 10.1007/s00134-002-1585-y

关键词

mortality; metabolic acidosis; shock; child; lactate; strong ion; unmeasured anions

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hypothesis: Mortality in children with shock is more closely related to the nature, rather than the magnitude (base deficit/excess), of a metabolic acidosis. Objective: To examine the relationship between base excess (BE), hyperiactataemia, hyperchloraemia, 'unmeasured' strong anions, and mortality. Design: Prospective observational study set in a multi-disciplinary Paediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU). Patients: Forty-six children, median age 6 months (1.5-14.4), median weight 5 kg (3.2-8.8), admitted to PICU with shock. Interventions: Predicted mortality was calculated from the paediatric index of mortality (PIM) score. The pH, base excess, serum lactate, corrected chloride, and 'unmeasured' strong anions (Strong Ion Gap) were measured or calculated at admission and 24 h. Measurements and results: Observed mortality (n=16) was 35%, with a standardised mortality ratio (SMR) of 1.03 (95% CI 0.71-1.35). There was no significant difference in ad-mission pH or BE between survivors and nonsurvivors. There was no association between elevation of 'unmeasured' anions and mortality, although there was a trend towards hyperchloraemia in survivors (P=0.08). Admission lactate was higher in nonsurvivors (median 11.6 vs 3.3 mmol/l; P=0.0003). Area under the mortality receiver operating characteristic curve for lactate was 0.83 (955 CI 0.70-0.95), compared to 0.71 (95% CI 0.53-0.88) for the PIM score. Admission lactate level >5 mmol/l had maximum diagnostic efficiency for mortality, with a likelihood ratio of 2.0. Conclusion: There is no association between the magnitude of metabolic acidosis, quantified by the base excess, and mortality in children with shock. Hyperlactataemia, but not elevation of 'unmeasured' anions, is predictive of a poor outcome.

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