论著

CURB-65、PSI、SMART-COP及APACHEⅡ评分在重症社区获得性肺炎患者早期诊断价值的比较

Comparison of value of CURB-65、PSI、SMART-COP and APACHEⅡfor early diagnosis in patients with severe community-acquired pneumonia

:9-12
 
目的 探讨及比较CURB-65、PSI、SMART-COP及APACHEⅡ 4种临床评分对重症社区获得性肺炎(SCAP)患者的早期诊断价值。方法 采用前瞻性研究方法,收集2011年10月—2014年2月广州市第一人民医院呼吸内科收治的67例SCAP及同期33例普通CAP患者的临床资料,记录入组后24小时内CURB-65、PSI、SMART-COP及APACHEⅡ评分的最差值,比较4种临床评分系统对SCAP的早期诊断价值。结果 SCAP组CURB-65、PSI、SMART-COP及APACHEⅡ评分均高于普通CAP组患者[CURB-65(分):3.06±1.10 比0.85±0.79,P<0.001;PSI(分):144.93±36.48比73.94±27.17,P<0.001; SMART-COP(分):6.54±1.41比 1.67±1.02,P<0.001; APACHEⅡ(分):20.79±5.69比7.94±3.87,P<0.001]。CURB-65≥3分、PSI≥130分、SMART-COP≥3分及APACHEⅡ≥15分诊断SCAP的受试者工作特征曲线(ROC)下面积(AUC)分别为0.940[95% CI:0.89~0.98, P<0.001],0.933[95%CI:0.88~0.97,P<0.001],0.999[95%CI:0.99~1.0,P<0.001],0.976[95%CI:0.95~0.99,P<0.001],敏感度分别为65.6%、71.6%、100%、88.1%,特异度分别为100%、100%、78.7%、93.9%。结论 CURB-65及PSI评分特异度好,但敏感度低,易漏诊,SMART-COP和APACHE Ⅱ评分诊断效能更佳。
Objective To evaluate and compare the early diagnosis value of CURB-65,PSI,SMART-COP and APACHEⅡin patients with severe community-acquired pneumonia. Methods This was a prospective study conducted in department of respiratory in Guangzhou First People's Hospital. We included 67 SCAP patients and 33 CAP patients between October of 2011and February of 2014. The lowest scores within 24 hours of CURB-65 score,PSI score,SMART-COP score,APACHE Ⅱ score,respectively,for each patients were recorded. Prediction of SCAP as made in four scoring systems was compared. Results CURB-65 score,PSI score,SMART-COP score,APACHE Ⅱ score were higher in SCAP as compared with that of CAP(CURB-65:3.0±1.1 vs 0.9±0.8,P<0.001;PSI:144.6±36.4 vs 73.9±27.1,P<0.001; SMART-COP:6.5±1.4 vs 1.6±1.0,P<0.001; APACHEⅡ:20.6±5.6 vs 7.9±3.8,P<0.001). ROC curve for CURB-65 score≥ 3 scores,PSI score≥ 130 scores,SMART-COP score≥3 scores and APACHE Ⅱ score ≥ 15 scores in the early diagnosis SCAP were 0.940[95%CI:0.89~0.98,P<0.001],0.933[95%CI:0.88~0.97,P<0.001],0.999[95%CI:0.99~1.0,P<0.001],0.976[95%CI:0.95~0.99,P<0.001]. Sensitivity of four kinds of scoring system was 65.6%,71.6%,100%,88.1%, with specificity of 100%,100%,78.7%,93.9% respectively. Conclusion The specificity of diagnosis was better in the CURB-65 and PSI score,but the sensitivity was low and easy to miss diagnosis. SMART-COP and APACHEⅡscore systems had a better diagnostic value on SCAP.
出版者信息








《广州医药》公众号