RESUMO
Objective To study the predictive value of acute gastrointestinal injury (AGI) grading system introduced into Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score in patients with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) in order to provide a reliable clinical tool for the evaluation of prognosis of SAP.Methods Patients with acute pancreatitis admitted to ICU from July 2012 to July 2014 were enrolled for study.The criteria of exclusion were the age below 18 years old,pregnancy,or patients without consent to the treatment.A total of 63 patients with 37 males and 26 females aged (47 ± 15.3) years were included.The data of their acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) Ⅱ score,the highest SOFA score and AGI grade within the first week,and the 28-day mortality rate were collected.Patients without AGI were defined as zero point,and AGI grade Ⅰ-Ⅳ were defined as 1-4 points.The receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) was used to evaluate the value of APACHE Ⅱ score,SOFA score,and SOFA + AGI score in predicting the prognosis of SAP.The areas under ROC curve (AUC) of the APACHE Ⅱ score,SOFA score,and SOFA + AGI score were compared with MedCalc software,and P value less than 0.01 was considered to be statistical significance.Results (1) The 28-day mortality of the 63 patients with SAP was 20.6％ (13/63),in which 50 patients in the survival group,13 patients in the death group.The APACHEⅡ scores of two groups were (15.62 ± 4.33 vs.12.10 ± 3.74,P=0.0048),the SOFA scores were (14.77 ± 3.09 vs.9.24 ± 2.88,P ＜0.01),and the SOFA + AGI scores were (18.77 ±3.09 vs.10.74 ± 3.17,P＜0.01).(2) The AUC of APACHEⅡ score was0.748 ± 0.084 (95％ CI:0.622-0.849),the AUC of SOFA score was 0.902 ± 0.059 (95％ CI:0.801-0.962),and the AUC of SOFA +AGI score was 0.963 ± 0.037 (95％ CI,0.882-0.994);There was no significant difference in AUC between APACHE Ⅱ score and SOFA score (P =0.10),and there was statistical significance between the AUC of APACHE Ⅱ score and that of SOFA + AGI score (P =0.013),and the difference in AUC between SOFA score and SOFA + AGI score was statistically significant (P =0.008).The Youden index and the positive likelihood ratio of SOFA + AGI score system were the greatest to be 0.863 and 15.38,respectively.Conclusions SOFA scoring system has better predictive value in patients with SAP when AGI grading system was introduced into it.
RESUMO
Objective To compare two asal-jejunal tube placement methods in critically ill patients with different acute gastrointestinal injury (AGI) grades, so as to discuss the value of AGI grading in selection of asal-jejunal tube placement. Methods A total of 156 patients with acute gastrointestinal injury in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) were observed prospectively; they included 30 cases of grade III, 48 cases of grade IV, 50 cases of grade I and 28 cases of grade II according to the AGI grading system. And then the patients were randomly divided into treatment group and control group. The treatment group was given bedside ultrasound-guided nasal-jejunal tube placement, and the control group underwent bedside blind nasal jejunal tube placement. The success rate and average time of placement were observed in the two groups with different AGI grades, and then the correlation among AGI grading system, success rate and average time of placement were also analyzed in the two groups. Results The success rate of placement was high in AGI grade I patients of the two groups, and there was no significant difference between the two groups(93.8% vs 92.9%). The success rates for AGI grade II and grade III patients of the treatment group were significantly higher than those of the control group(P<0.05). The successful placement rates were lower in AGI grade IV patients of the two groups and there was no significant difference between them. The average time of successful placement in AGI gradesI,II, and III patients of the treatment group were significantly shorter than that of the control group (P<0.05); but there was no significant difference in AGI grade IV patients between the two groups. There was no significant correlation between AGI grade and successful placement rate. There was a positive correlation between AGI grade and the average placement time in the treatment group (P<0.05), but not in the control group. Conclusion Ultrasound-guided nasal-jejunal tube placement is obviously better than the blind method for AGI grade I, II, III patients. The average time of ultrasound-guided nasal-jejunal tube placement is positively correlated with AGI grade, suggesting AGI grading system can help to choose naso-jejunal tube placement method.