Advances in Clinical Medicine
Vol. 13  No. 09 ( 2023 ), Article ID: 72717 , 9 pages
10.12677/ACM.2023.1392074

耐碳氢酶烯肺炎克雷伯杆菌肺部感染后进展为急性呼吸窘迫综合症的临床特征及Nomogram预测模型构建

随秀华1,2,赵晶晶1,2*,姚莉1,2,王菁1

1安徽医科大学附属合肥医院(合肥市第二人民医院)重症医学科,安徽 合肥

2安徽医科大学第五临床医学院,安徽 合肥

收稿日期:2023年8月19日;录用日期:2023年9月14日;发布日期:2023年9月20日

摘要

目的:分析耐碳青霉烯类肺炎克雷伯杆菌(Carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae, CRKP)肺部感染后进展为急性呼吸窘迫综合症(Acute respiratory distress syndrome, ARDS)的临床特征以及构建Nomogram模型。方法:回顾性收集合肥市第二人民医院2019年01月~2022年12月所有肺部感染后肺泡灌洗液分离出CRKP的患者共162例,其中有71例患者CRKP肺部感染后进展为ARDS,此为ARDS组;91例患者CRKP肺部感染后未进展为ARDS,此为非ARDS组。使用SPASS 26.0软件对于收集的患者的临床资料进行单因素以及Logistic多因素分析,受试者工作特征(receiver operator characteristic, ROC)曲线分析各指标诊断耐CRKP肺部感染后进展为ARDS的危险因素最佳截断值以及曲线下面积(area under the ROC curve, AUC)。并以此为基础应用R软件“rms”包构建其Nomogram模型,校正曲线对Nomogram模型进行内部验证,应用R软件“rmda”包构建决策曲线,并评估Nomogram模型的预测效能。P < 0.05为差异有统计学意义。结果:单因素分析提示,与非ARDS组相比,ARDS组患者的年龄、高血压病史、吸烟史、慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)病史、查尔森共病指数评分(Charlson comorbidity index, CCI)、序贯器官衰竭评分(Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, SOFA)、肺炎严重程度评分(Pneumonia Severity Index, PSI)、入院第3天CRP计数、CRP/白蛋白比值(第3天)等10项指标差异均有统计学意义(P < 0.05);多因素Logistic回归分析显示,与非ARDS组相比,ARDS组患者的年龄[OR = 1.307, 95% CI (1.005~1.069)]、SOFA评分[OR = 1.376, 95% CI (1.176~1.610)]、CCI评分[OR = 1.268, 95% CI (1.067~1.507)]具有统计学差异(P < 0.05),是CRKP肺部感染后进展为ARDS的独立危险因素;将两组中有统计学意义的连续变量进行ROC曲线分析可知,患者年龄、SOFA评分、CCI评分的AUC分别为0.641、0.710、0.669;最佳截断值分别为67.5岁、1.5分、3.5分。Nomogram模型校正曲线及临床净收益分析:内部验证结果显示预测肺部感染CRKP后进展为ARDS的风险C-index为0.728 (95% CI: 0.656~0.801),校正C-index为0.717。校准曲线显示观测值与预测值之间一致性较好。决策曲线结果显示,当风险阈值波动在0.367~0.567时,Nomogram模型提供临床净收益;此外,Nomogram模型临床净收益均高于年龄、SOFA评分、CCI评分。结论:年龄(>67.5岁)、SOFA (>1.5分)、CCI (>3.5分)是CRKP肺部感染后发生ARDS的独立危险因素(P < 0.05)。本研究基于此构建的Nomogram模型对于肺部感染肺炎克雷伯杆菌后进展为ARDS的早期诊断、早期干预提供了重要的指导意义。

关键词

耐碳青霉烯类肺炎克雷伯杆菌,ARDS,临床特征,Nomogram模型

Clinical Features and Nomogram Prediction Model Construction for Progression to Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome after Carbapenem-Resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (CRKP) Lung Infection

Xiuhua Sui1,2, Jingjing Zhao1,2*, Li Yao1,2, Jing Wang1

1ICU, Hefei Hospital Affiliated to Anhui Medical University (Hefei Second People’s Hospital), Hefei Anhui

2The Fifth Clinical Medical College, Anhui Medical University, Hefei Anhui

Received: Aug. 19th, 2023; accepted: Sep. 14th, 2023; published: Sep. 20th, 2023

ABSTRACT

Objective: To analyze the clinical features of progression to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) after Carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (CRKP) lung infection and Nomogram model was constructed. Methods: A total of 162 patients with CRKP isolated from alveolar lavage fluid after all lung infections were retrospectively collected in the Second People’s Hospital of Hefei City from January 2019 to December 2022, of which 71 patients progressed to ARDS after CRKP lung infection, which is the ARDS group, and 91 patients did not progress to ARDS after CRKP lung infection, which is the non-ARDS group. Using SPASS 26.0 software, the clinical data collected from the patients were analyzed by single-factor and logistic multifactorial analysis, and the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were analyzed to determine the optimal cut-off value of the risk factors for progression to ARDS after diagnosis of CRKP-resistant lung infections as well as the area under the ROC curve (AUC). The Nomogram model was constructed using the R software “rms” package, the calibration curves were used for internal validation of the Nomogram model, and the decision curve was constructed using the R software “rmda” package, and the predictive efficiency of the Nomogram model was evaluated. And if P < 0.05, the difference between the Nomogram models was considered to be statistically significant. Results: Univariate analysis suggested that compared with the non-ARDS group, patients in the ARDS group differed in 10 indices, including age, history of hypertension, smoking history, history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI), CRP count on day 3 of admission, CRP/albumin ratio (day 3) and other indicators, were statistically significant (P < 0.05); multifactorial logistic regression analysis showed that, compared with the non-ARDS group, the age [OR = 1.307, 95% CI (1.005~1.069)], SOFA score [OR = 1.376, 95% CI (1.176~1.610)], and CCI score [OR = 1.268, 95% CI (1.067~1.507)] of the patients in the ARDS group showed statistically significant differences (P < 0.05), and were independent risk factor for progression to ARDS after CRKP lung infection; ROC curve analysis of continuous variables with statistical significance in the two groups showed that the AUCs of patient age, SOFA score, and CCI score were 0.641, 0.710, and 0.669, respectively; and the optimal cutoff values were 67.5 years old, 1.5 points, and 3.5 points, respectively. Nomogram modeling Calibration curve and net clinical benefit analysis: internal validation results showed a predicted risk C-index of 0.728 (95% CI: 0.656~0.801) and a calibrated C-index of 0.717 for progression to ARDS after CRKP of pulmonary infection. The calibration curves showed good agreement between observed and predicted values. Decision curve results showed that the Nomogram model provided a net clinical benefit when the risk threshold fluctuated from 0.367~0.567; in addition, the Nomogram model net clinical benefit was higher than age, SOFA score, and CCI score. Conclusion: Age (>67.5 years), SOFA (>1.5 points), and CCI (>3.5 points) were independent risk factors (P < 0.05) for the development of ARDS after CRKP lung infection. The Nomogram model constructed in this study based on this provides an important guideline for early diagnosis and early intervention for progression to ARDS after pulmonary infection with Klebsiella pneumoniae.

Keywords:Carbapenem-Resistant Klebsiella pneumonia, ARDS, Clinical Features, Nomogram Model

Copyright © 2023 by author(s) and Hans Publishers Inc.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY 4.0).

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

1. 引言

肺炎克雷伯杆菌(Klebsiella pneumonia, KPN))感染部位可累及呼吸道、泌尿系统以及消化系统等,以呼吸道感染最为常见 ‎[1] 。近年来,院内耐碳青霉烯类肺炎克雷伯杆菌的检出率逐渐增加,2021年全国细菌耐药监测(CHINET)报告显示,肺炎克雷伯杆菌分离率达14.12%,成为国内医院感染的第二大病原菌 ‎[2] ,重症监护病房内CRKP检出率为40%左右 ‎[3] ,但医生仅会根据患者的症状及经验判断是否为定植,是否需要针对性及如何治疗,部分肺部感染CRKP患者预后较佳;而部分患者病情进展迅速,很快进展为急性呼吸窘迫综合征,治疗效果差,死亡率极高 ‎[4] ‎[5] ,由于临床上针对肺炎同时培养出CRKP患者的治疗时机没有统一的标准,早期识别高危、快速进展为ARDS患者的早期临床特征,对早期诊疗是有重要价值,因此,本研究旨在分析CRKP肺部感染患者快速进展为ARDS的临床特征,同时构建Nomogram模型以期指导临床。

2. 资料与方法

2.1. 一般资料

回顾性收集本院2019年1月~2022年12月肺泡灌洗液分离出CRKP的患者共162例,其中71例耐碳青霉烯类肺部感染肺炎克雷伯杆菌病程中进展为ARDS患者作为ARDS组,并收集同期91例耐碳青霉烯类肺部感染肺炎克雷伯杆菌未进展为ARDS患者作为非ARDS组。纳入标准:1) 影像学提示患者存在肺部感染的征象;2) 入科后患者氧和指数(PaO2/FiO2)大于300 mmHg;3) 肺泡灌洗液微生物学培养出耐碳青霉烯肺炎克雷伯杆菌;排除标准:1) 存在急性心功能衰竭及心源性休克导致低氧血症;2) 肺泡灌洗液同时培养出其他细菌、真菌等病原体,且考虑为其责任病原体;3) 肺泡灌洗液培养出CRKP,但根据临床分析,考虑为定植;4) 肺部存在恶性肿瘤,重度肺部间质性疾病等疾病的患者;5) 休克、应激、输血等其他肺外因素引起的ARDS;6) 入院时患者即诊断为ARDS的患者。

2.2. 方法

收集两组患者临床资料,包括年龄、性别等基础资料、CCI评分、SOFA评分、急性生理与慢性健康评分(Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation, APACHE II)等评分指标、N端脑钠肽前体(NT-proBNP/BNP)、活化部分凝血活酶时间(APTT)、D-二聚体、降钙素原(PCT)等实验室检查指标。

2.3. 统计学分析

应用SPASS 26.0以及R软件对所收集数据进行统计分析。单因素分析时,计量资料若符合正态分布则以X ± S表示,采用t检验,否则以中位数以及四分位数间距M(Q25, Q75)表示,采用非参数秩和检验(Mann-Whitney U检验),计数资料以%表示,采用x2检验,多因素分析采用SPASS应用二元Logistic回归分析其独立危险因素,受试者工作特征(receiver operator characteristic, ROC)曲线分析各指标诊断耐CRKP肺部感染后进展为ARDS的危险因素最佳截断值以及曲线下面积(area under the ROC curve, AUC)。应用R软件“rms”包构建其Nomogram模型,校正曲线对Nomogram模型进行内部验证,应用R软件“rmda”包构建决策曲线,并评估Nomogram模型的预测效能。P < 0.05为差异有统计学意义。

3. 结果

3.1. 单因素分析

两组患者一般资料比较显示,与非ARDS组相比,ARDS组患者的年龄、高血压病史、吸烟史、COPD病史、CCI评分、SOFA评分、PSI评分、入院第3天CRP计数、CRP/白蛋白比值(第3天)等10项指标差异均有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。详见表1

Table 1. Comparison of clinical data between the two groups

表1. 两组患者临床资料对比

注:APACHE II评分:急性生理与慢性健康评分;APTT:活化部分凝血活酶时间;PCT:降钙素原;PLT:血小板。

3.2. 多因素Logistic回归分析

将单因素分析中有差异的指标纳入Logistic二元回归模型中,结果显示:与非ARDS组相比,ARDS组患者的年龄、SOFA评分、CCI评分共三项指标具有统计学差异(P < 0.05),是CRKP肺部感染后进展为ARDS的独立危险因素。详见表2

Table 2. Multivariate Logistic analysis of progression to ARDS after CRKP lung infection

表2. CRKP肺部感染后进展为ARDS多因素Logistic分析

3.3. ROC曲线分析

将两组中有统计学意义的连续变量进行ROC曲线分析。结果显示,年龄、SOFA评分、CCI评分的AUC分别为0.641、0.710、0.669;最佳截断值分别为67.5岁、1.5分、3.5分。详见表3

Table 3. Results of ROC curve analysis for related variables

表3. 相关变量ROC曲线分析结果

3.4. 耐碳青霉烯肺炎克雷伯杆菌肺部感染后进展为急性呼吸窘迫综合症的临床特征及 Nomogram预测模型构建

将年龄、SOFA评分、CCI评分三项指标作为构建Nomogram模型的预测因子,Nomogram模型,详见图1

Figure 1. The Nomogram model

图1. Nomogram模型

3.5. Nomogram模型校正曲线及临床净收益分析

内部验证结果显示,Nomogram模型预测肺部感染CRKP后进展为ARDS的风险C-index为0.728 (95% CI: 0.656~0.801),校正C-index为0.717。校准曲线显示观测值与预测值之间一致性较好,详见图2。决策曲线结果显示,当风险阈值波动在0.367~0.567时,Nomogram模型提供临床净收益;此外,Nomogram模型临床净收益均高于年龄、SOFA评分、CCI评分。详见图3

Figure 2. Nomogram model correction curve

图2. Nomogram模型校正曲线

Figure 3. Clinical net benefit

图3. 临床净收益分析

4. 讨论

CRKP是院内获得性感染、尤其是医院获得性肺炎常见的病原菌之一,Li ‎[6] 等研究得出,91例CRKP患者中,81.32%阳性标本来源于肺泡灌洗液。多项研究指出,肺炎克雷白杆菌肺部感染的患病率达23.1% ‎[7] 。临床工作中发现,部分肺部感染肺泡灌洗液培养出CRKP的患者,在加强气道护理,雾化等常规治疗后病情很快得到控制,不需要联合使用特殊级别抗生素等治疗,而部分患者病情发展迅速,快速进展为ARDS,死亡率高,留给临床医生的时间较短 ‎[8] ‎[9] 。如何区分两类患者,早期识别高危患者以及时制定抗感染方案:如替加环素加量使用,多粘菌素等药物联合使用等,对于临床提高此类患者生存率有重要的价值。

本研究结果显示,患者的年龄(>67.5岁)、SOFA评分(>1.5分)、CCI评分(>3.5分),是肺部感染耐碳青霉烯类肺炎克雷伯杆菌后进展为ARDS的独立危险因素。据研究表明,CRKP感染主要见于老年患者 ‎[10] ‎[11] ,Jiao. Y ‎[12] 等研究者认为,年龄 ≥ 65岁是肺部感染CRKP的独立危险因素,这与本研究结果相似。一方面随着患者年龄增加,机体多器官系统会出现退行性改变,机体抵抗病原的能力下降,老年患者更易受到CRKP的侵袭;另一方面,老年患者呼吸道黏膜表面免疫球蛋白A分泌减少、巨噬细胞吞噬功能、数量以及纤毛摆动能力下降,患者咳嗽、排痰能力下降,因此呼吸道病原体清除能力下降,发生肺部感染后进展为ARDS及死亡的风险更大 ‎[13] ‎[14] 。因此,对于老年患者,尤其是免疫功能低下的老年患者,临床上应该予以更多的关注。

SOFA评分是肺部感染CRKP后进展为ARDS的另一个独立危险因素,这与薛洪刚 ‎[15] 等学者的研究结果一致。SOFA评分在临床上主要用于评估感染或疑似感染患者是否有器官衰竭,并且日本呼吸学会肺炎预后指南 ‎[16] 中也建议使用SOFA和qSOFA评分评估肺部感染患者的病情严重程度,SOFA评分升高则提示患者肺部感染加重,发生多器官功能障碍综合征的可能性增大。此外本研究结果发现,CCI评分(>3.5分)也是肺部感染CRKP后进展为ARDS的独立危险因素。CCI评分能较好地评价基础病对患者预后的影响,研究指出,CCI评分是肺炎患者死亡的独立危险因子 ‎[17] 。当SOFA评分及CCI评分较高时,患者肺部CRKP重度感染几率就会增加,最终在多重因素综合作用下,机体会发生急性炎症反应从而引起血管内皮细胞以及肺泡上皮细胞的通透性增加,进展为ARDS可能性大大增加,患者的临床治疗难度也会随之增加,导致病死率升高 ‎[18] ‎[19] 。因此临床上应该动态评估患者的SOFA评分,临床上应多加关注患者CCI评分,积极予以早期干预治疗,早期防控院内感染的发生,改善患者预后。

CRP是一种关于炎症反应的急性时相反应蛋白,是临床上用来判断机体是否感染的指标之一 ‎[20] 。研究表明,CRP的水平高低直接反映机体炎症的程度,且与ARDS患者预后相关 ‎[21] 。PCT是由机体甲状腺C细胞分泌的一种降钙素前体蛋白,与机体炎症反应程度呈正相关 ‎[22] ‎[23] 。当机体促炎–与抗炎平衡被打破时,机体炎症瀑布反应会引起肺内炎症细胞如中性粒细胞聚集、活化,导致CRP、PCT在机体内的表达升高,肺泡内皮细胞以及上皮细胞的完整性也会随之破坏,肺部组织细胞通透性和间质肺水肿程度增加,患者肺脏氧合功能障碍 ‎[24] ‎[25] ‎[26] 。然而,对于CRKP肺部感染患者,尤其针对于临床抗感染治疗后的耐碳青霉烯类肺炎克雷伯杆菌肺部感染患者来说,本研究统计学分析结果尚未发现C-反应蛋白、降钙素原与CRKP肺部感染后进展为ARDS呈明显的相关关系。一方面考虑与不同研究者使用的不同统计学分析方法相关,另一方面考虑与本研究样本量较小,样本量偏倚有关。因此此结论仍尚需一定的数据支持。

本研究对以上所得独立危险因素(年龄 > 67.5岁、SOFA > 1.5分、CCI > 3.5分)进行整合构建了CRKP肺部感染后进展为ARDS的Nomogram模型,并通过验证证明了该模型在预测操作系统中具有良好的区分度。与简单的危险因素量化相比,Nomogram图可将Logistic回归数据转化为可视化图形,依照线段将每项危险因素的评分求和得出总分以此预测CRKP肺部感染后进展为ARDS的发生率,更加便于医务人员理解与观察。

综上所述,年龄 > 67.5岁、SOFA > 1.5分、CCI > 3.5分是CRKP肺部感染后进展为ARDS的独立危险因素;Nomogram图决策曲线结果显示:当风险阈值波动在0.367~0.567时,Nomogram模型提供临床净收益并且Nomogram模型临床净收益均高于年龄、SOFA评分、CCI评分。因此本研究的Nomogram预测模型的建立有利于临床工作人员筛查和管理相关危险因素,以便早期采取干预措施,从而最大限度地降低CRKP肺部感染后进展为ARDS的发生率。然而本研究存在单中心、样本量较小、研究数据存在不可避免的选择性偏倚、其他指标因素并未收集及研究等不足,仍需要进一步探索和完善,优化预测模型。

文章引用

随秀华,赵晶晶,姚 莉,王 菁. 耐碳氢酶烯肺炎克雷伯杆菌肺部感染后进展为急性呼吸窘迫综合症的临床特征及Nomogram预测模型构建
Clinical Features and Nomogram Prediction Model Construction for Progression to Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome after Carbapenem-Resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (CRKP) Lung Infection[J]. 临床医学进展, 2023, 13(09): 14824-14832. https://doi.org/10.12677/ACM.2023.1392074

参考文献

  1. 1. 张溥, 李登科, 孙文兵, 等. 高毒力肺炎克雷伯菌性肝脓肿的研究现状与进展[J]. 中华肝胆外科杂志, 2020, 26(12): 949-953.

  2. 2. CHINET. 143,051株临床分离菌株主要菌种分布(CHINET 2021) [EB/OL]. http://www.chinets.com/Data/AntibioticDrugFast

  3. 3. Xu, L., Sun, X. and Ma, X. (2017) Systematic Review and Me-ta-Analysis of Mortality of Patients Infected with Carbapenem-Resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae. Annals of Clinical Mi-crobiology and Antimicrobials, 16, 18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12941-017-0191-3

  4. 4. Wang, L., Yuan, X.D., Pang, T., et al. (2022) The Risk Factors of Carbapenem-Resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae Infection: A Single-Center Chinese Retrospective Study. Infection and Drug Resistance, 15, 1477-1485. https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S352070

  5. 5. Pei, N., Sun, W., He, J., et al. (2022) Genome-Wide Association Study of Klebsiella pneumoniae Identifies Variations Linked to Carbapenems Resistance. Frontiers in Microbiology, 13, Article ID: 997769. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2022.997769

  6. 6. 贺宇, 姚卫, 卿克勤, 李红霞. 耐碳青霉烯类肺炎克雷伯菌的分布特征及耐药性分析[J]. 基因组学与应用生物学, 2021, 40(9): 3296-3301.

  7. 7. 齐激扬. 肺炎克雷伯杆菌肺部感染的临床特点[C]//浙江省医学会. 浙江省医学会呼吸系病分会成立三十周年庆典活动暨2008年呼吸病学学术年会论文汇编. 2008: 6.

  8. 8. 张红才. 急性呼吸窘迫综合征的ICU临床治疗疗效观察[J]. 世界最新医学信息文摘, 2019, 19(23): 40-41.

  9. 9. 江淑芳, 狄佳, 王玉月, 张丽伟, 李雪梅, 刘惕, 冯诚怿, 王伟伟, 朱丽丽, 朱文广. ICU下呼吸道CRKP医院感染风险预测模型及其价值[J]. 中华医院感染学杂志, 2022, 32(6): 930-935.

  10. 10. Cho, S.J. and Stout-Delgado, H.W. (2020) Aging and Lung Disease. Annual Review of Physiology, 82, 433-459. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-physiol-021119-034610

  11. 11. 顾辨辨, 何媛媛, 李静, 等. 炎性指标对高龄脑卒中患者肺部感染的早期预测价值[J]. 中国临床保健杂志, 2020, 23(6): 766-769.

  12. 12. Jiao, Y., Qin, Y., Liu, J., et al. (2015) Risk Factors for Carbapenem-Resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae Infection/Colonization and Predictors of Mortality: A Retrospective Study. Pathogens and Global Health, 109, 68-74. https://doi.org/10.1179/2047773215Y.0000000004

  13. 13. 李艳华, 李凤英, 孙静, 等. 急诊ICU肺部感染患者的临床特点及预防分析[J]. 中华医院感染学杂志, 2017, 27(10): 2206-2209.

  14. 14. 郑吉, 万玉麟, 谭九根, 等. ICU脑外伤及脑血管病患者肺部感染的病原学特点及影响因素分析[J]. 中华医院感染学杂志, 2019, 29(2): 84-87.

  15. 15. 薛洪刚. 脓毒症患者并发呼吸窘迫综合征的危险因素及预后分析[J]. 中国药物与临床, 2020, 20(20): 3383-3385.

  16. 16. Asai, N., Watanabe, H., Shiota, A., et al. (2019) Efficacy and Accuracy of qSOFA and SOFA Scores as Prognostic Tools for Community-Acquired and Healthcare-Associated Pneumonia. International Journal of Infectious Diseases, 84, 89-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2019.04.020

  17. 17. 崔云亮, 张树柳, 田昭涛, 等. 两种基础疾病评分预测肺炎患者预后的比较[J]. 中华急诊医学杂志, 2016, 25(10): 1278-1283.

  18. 18. Kallet, R.H. (2021) Meas-ured versus Estimated Dead-Space Ventilation in ARDS: Does It Matter? Perhaps. Respiratory Care, 66, 703-704. https://doi.org/10.4187/respcare.08947

  19. 19. 钟丽花, 王亚洲, 李欣. 海南省新生儿呼吸窘迫综合征流行病学调查分析[J]. 临床肺科杂志, 2019, 24(1): 10-13.

  20. 20. 郭淼生, 黄燕琴. 血清超敏C反应蛋白联合心肌肌钙蛋白I检查在急性心肌梗死中的诊断价值[J]. 临床合理用药杂志, 2020, 13(18): 180-181.

  21. 21. Liu, Z., Jin, K., Guo, M., et al. (2017) Prognostic Value of the CRP/Alb Ratio, a Novel Inflammation-Based Score in Pancreatic Cancer. Annals of Surgical Oncology, 24, 561-568. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5579-3

  22. 22. Eschborn, S. and Weitkamp, J.H. (2019) Procalcitonin versus C-Reactive Protein: Review of Kinetics and Performance for Diagnosis of Neonatal Sepsis. Journal of Perinatology, 39, 893-903. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41372-019-0363-4

  23. 23. Li, Z.H., Li, F.H., Han, B., et al. (2020) Expression and Clinical Significance of CRP, PCT, and TLR4 in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmo-nary Disease Combined with Pulmonary Infection. Hainan Medical Journal, 31, 1655-1658.

  24. 24. 李妍, 国虹, 孙成栋. 白血病感染患者血清hs-CRP、PCT水平与血小板参数的变化及其相关性研究[J]. 临床和实验医学杂志, 2020, 19(8): 882-885.

  25. 25. Hoffmeister, B. and Aguilar Valdez, A.D. (2022) Elevated Admission C-Reactive Protein to Al-bumin Ratios Are Associated with Disease Severity and Respiratory Complications in Adults with Imported Falciparum Malaria. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 116, 492-500. https://doi.org/10.1093/trstmh/trab167

  26. 26. Zhou, L. and Jiang, P.P. (2019) Clinical Value of Peripheral Blood Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio in Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome. Chinese Journal of Immunology, 35, 223-226, 229.

  27. NOTES

    *通讯作者。

期刊菜单