Zhang Y, Ma Z Z, Wu B W, Dou Y, Zhang Q, Yang L Y, Chen E Z
Department of Burns and Plastic Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medcine, Shanghai 200025, China.
School of Nursing, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200020, China.
Zhonghua Shao Shang Za Zhi. 2021 Jun 20;37(6):530-537. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501120-20210114-00021.
To establish an early prediction model for bloodstream infection in patients with extremely severe burns based on the screened independent risk factors of the infection, and to analyze its predictive value. A retrospective case-control study was conducted. From January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2019, 307 patients with extremely severe burns were admitted to the Department of Burns and Plastic Surgery of Ruijin Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medcine, including 251 males and 56 females, aged from 33 to 55 years. According to the occurrence of bloodstream infection, the patients were divided into non-bloodstream infection group (221 cases) and bloodstream infection group (86 cases). The gender, age, body mass index, outcome, length of hospital stay of patients were compared between the two groups, and the detection of bacteria in blood microbial culture of patients was analyzed in bloodstream infection group. The included 307 patients were divided into modeling group (219 cases) and validation group (88 cases) according to the random number table with a ratio of about 7∶3. The gender, age, body mass index, total burn area, full-thickness burn area, combination of inhalation injury, implementation of mechanical ventilation, days of mechanical ventilation, days of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, outcome, length of hospital stay, complication of bloodstream infection of patients were compared between the two groups. According to the occurrence of bloodstream infection, the patients in modeling group were divided into bloodstream infection subgroup (154 cases) and non-bloodstream infection subgroup (165 cases). The total burn area, full-thickness burn area, combination of inhalation injury, implementation of mechanical ventilation, days of mechanical ventilation, and days of ICU stay of patients were compared between the two subgroups. The above-mentioned data between two groups were statistically analyzed with one-way analysis of independent sample test, chi-square test, and Mann-Whitney test to screen out the factors with statistically significant differences in the subgroup univariate analysis of modeling group. The factors were used as variables, and binary multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to screen out the independent risk factors of bloodstream infection in patients with extremely severe burns, based on which the prediction model for bloodstream infection in patients with extremely severe burns of modeling group was established. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of the prediction model predicting the risk of bloodstream infection of patients in modeling group was drawn, and the area under the ROC curve was calculated. The sensitivity, specificity, and the best prediction probability were calculated according to the Youden index. According to the occurrence of bloodstream infection, the patients in validation group were divided into bloodstream infection subgroup (21 cases) and non-bloodstream infection subgroup (67 cases). The prediction probability >the best prediction probability of model was used as the judgment standard of bloodstream infection. The prediction model was used to predict the occurrence of bloodstream infection of patients in the two subgroups of validation group, and the incidence, specificity, and sensitivity for predicting bloodstream infection were calculated. In addition, the ROC curve of the prediction model predicting the risk of bloodstream infection of patients in validation group was drawn, and the area under the ROC curve was calculated. Compared with those of non-bloodstream infection group, the mortality of patients in bloodstream infection group was significantly higher (=8.485, <0.01), the length of hospital stay was significantly increased (=-3.003, <0.01), but there was no significant change in gender, age, or body mass index (>0.05). In patients of bloodstream infection group, 110 strains of bacteria were detected in blood microbial culture, among which , and were the top three bacteria, accounting for 35.45% (39/110), 26.36% (29/110), and 13.64% (15/110), respectively. Gender, age, body mass index, total burn area, full-thickness burn area, proportion of combination of inhalation injury, proportion of implementation of mechanical ventilation, days of mechanical ventilation, days of ICU stay, outcome, length of hospital stay, and proportion of complication of bloodstream infection of patients were similar between modeling group and validation group (>0.05). Compared with those of non-bloodstream infection subgroup in modeling group, the total burn area, full-thickness burn area, proportion of combination of inhalation injury, proportion of implementation of mechanical ventilation, days of mechanical ventilation, and days of ICU stay of patients in bloodstream infection subgroup were significantly increased (=-4.429, =-4.045, =7.845, 8.845, =-3.904, -4.134, <0.01). Binary multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that total burn area, days of ICU stay, and combination of inhalation injury were the independent risk factors for bloodstream infection of patients in modeling group (odds ratio=1.031, 1.018, 2.871, 95% confidence interval=1.004-1.059, 1.006-1.030, 1.345-6.128, <0.05 or <0.01). In modeling group, the area under the ROC curve was 0.773 (95% confidence interval=0.708-0.838); the sensitivity was 64.6%, the specificity was 77.9%, and the best prediction probability was 0.335 when the Youden index was 0.425. The bloodstream infection incidence of patients predicted by the prediction model in validation group was 27.27% (24/88), with specificity of 82.09% (55/67) and sensitivity of 57.14% (12/21). The area under the ROC curve in validation group was 0.759 (95% confidence interval=0.637-0.882). The total burn area, days of ICU stay, and combination of inhalation injury are the risk factors of bloodstream infection in patients with extremely severe burns. The early prediction model for bloodstream infection risk in patients with extremely severe burns based on these factors has certain predictive value for burn centers with relatively stable treatment methods and bacterial epidemiology.
基于筛选出的感染独立危险因素,建立极重度烧伤患者血流感染的早期预测模型,并分析其预测价值。进行回顾性病例对照研究。2010年1月1日至2019年12月31日,上海交通大学医学院附属瑞金医院烧伤整形科收治307例极重度烧伤患者,其中男性251例,女性56例,年龄33至55岁。根据血流感染的发生情况,将患者分为非血流感染组(221例)和血流感染组(86例)。比较两组患者的性别、年龄、体重指数、转归、住院时间,并对血流感染组患者血液微生物培养中的细菌检测情况进行分析。将纳入的307例患者按随机数字表法分为建模组(219例)和验证组(88例),比例约为7∶3。比较两组患者的性别、年龄、体重指数、烧伤总面积、Ⅲ度烧伤面积、合并吸入性损伤情况、机械通气实施情况、机械通气天数、重症监护病房(ICU)住院天数、转归、住院时间、血流感染并发症情况。根据血流感染的发生情况,将建模组患者分为血流感染亚组(154例)和非血流感染亚组(165例)。比较两个亚组患者的烧伤总面积、Ⅲ度烧伤面积、合并吸入性损伤情况、机械通气实施情况、机械通气天数、ICU住院天数。对两组间上述数据采用独立样本t检验、χ²检验和Mann-Whitney检验进行统计学分析,筛选出建模组亚组单因素分析中有统计学差异的因素。将这些因素作为变量,进行二元多因素logistic回归分析,筛选出极重度烧伤患者血流感染的独立危险因素,据此建立建模组极重度烧伤患者血流感染的预测模型。绘制预测模型预测建模组患者血流感染风险的受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线,并计算ROC曲线下面积。根据约登指数计算敏感度、特异度和最佳预测概率。根据血流感染的发生情况,将验证组患者分为血流感染亚组(21例)和非血流感染亚组(67例)。以预测概率>模型最佳预测概率作为血流感染的判断标准。用预测模型对验证组两个亚组患者的血流感染发生情况进行预测,并计算预测血流感染的发生率、特异度和敏感度。此外,绘制预测模型预测验证组患者血流感染风险的ROC曲线,并计算ROC曲线下面积。与非血流感染组相比,血流感染组患者的死亡率显著升高(χ² =8.485,P<0.01),住院时间显著延长(t=-3.003,P<0.01),但性别、年龄、体重指数无显著变化(P>0.05)。血流感染组患者血液微生物培养共检出110株细菌,其中 、 和 为前三位细菌,分别占35.45%(39/110)、26.36%(29/110)和13.64%(15/110)。建模组和验证组患者的性别、年龄、体重指数、烧伤总面积、Ⅲ度烧伤面积、合并吸入性损伤比例、机械通气实施比例、机械通气天数、ICU住院天数、转归、住院时间、血流感染并发症比例相似(P>0.05)。与建模组非血流感染亚组相比,血流感染亚组患者的烧伤总面积、Ⅲ度烧伤面积、合并吸入性损伤比例、机械通气实施比例、机械通气天数、ICU住院天数显著增加(t=-4.429,t=-4.045,χ² =7.845,χ² =8.845,t=-3.904,t=-4.134,P<0.01)。二元多因素logistic回归分析显示,烧伤总面积、ICU住院天数、合并吸入性损伤是建模组患者血流感染的独立危险因素(比值比=1.031,1.018,2.871,95%置信区间=1.004 - 1.059,1.006 - 1.030,1.345 - 6.128,P<0.05或P<0.01)。建模组中,ROC曲线下面积为0.773(95%置信区间=0.708 - 0.838);约登指数为0.425时,敏感度为64.6%,特异度为77.9%,最佳预测概率为0.335。验证组中预测模型预测患者的血流感染发生率为27.27%(24/88),特异度为82.09%(55/67),敏感度为57.14%(12/21)。验证组ROC曲线下面积为0.759(95%置信区间=0.637 - 0.882)。烧伤总面积、ICU住院天数、合并吸入性损伤是极重度烧伤患者血流感染的危险因素。基于这些因素建立的极重度烧伤患者血流感染风险早期预测模型,对治疗方法和细菌流行病学相对稳定的烧伤中心具有一定的预测价值。