Cargando…

Association between PT, PT-INR, and in-hospital mortality in critically ill patients with tumors: A retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES: Prothrombin time (PT) and PT-INR are independent predictors of mortality in patients with cancer. The PT and PT-INR of cancer patients are independent predictive variables of mortality. However, whether the PT or PT-INR is related to in-hospital mortality in severely ill patients with tu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liang, Jia-Dong, Qin, Zuo-An, Yang, Jin-Hao, Zhao, Chao-Fen, He, Qian-Yong, Shang, Kai, Li, Yu-Xin, Xu, Xin-Yu, Wang, Yan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10070679/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37026132
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1036463
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVES: Prothrombin time (PT) and PT-INR are independent predictors of mortality in patients with cancer. The PT and PT-INR of cancer patients are independent predictive variables of mortality. However, whether the PT or PT-INR is related to in-hospital mortality in severely ill patients with tumors remains unknown. DESIGN: This was a case–control study based on a multicenter public database. SETTINGS: This study is a secondary analysis of data extracted from 2014 to 2015 from the Electronic Intensive Care Unit Collaborative Research Database. PARTICIPANTS: The data relevant to seriously ill patients with tumors were obtained from 208 hospitals spread throughout the USA. This research included a total of 200,859 participants. After the samples were screened for patients with combination malignancies and prolonged PT-INR or PT, the remaining 1745 and 1764 participants, respectively, were included in the final data analysis. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The key evaluation methodology was the PT count and PT-INR, and the main outcome was the in-hospital mortality rate. RESULTS: After controlling for confounding variables, we found a curvilinear connection between PT-INR and in-hospital mortality (p < 0.001), and the inflection point was 2.5. When PT-INR was less than 2.5, an increase in PT-INR was positively associated with in-hospital mortality (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.24 to 2.13), whereas when PT-INR was greater than 2.5, in-hospital mortality was relatively stable and higher than the baseline before the inflection point. Similarly, our study indicated that the PT exhibited a curvilinear connection with in-hospital mortality. On the left side of the inflection point (PT <22), a rise in the PT was positively linked with in-hospital mortality (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.13, p < 0.001). On the right side of the inflection point, the baseline PT was above 22, and the in-hospital mortality was stable and higher than the PT count in the prior range (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.04, 0.7056). CONCLUSION: Our findings revealed that there is a curved rather than a linear link between the PT or PT-INR and in-hospital mortality in critically ill cancer patients. When these two laboratory results are below the inflection point, comprehensive therapy should be employed to reduce the count; when these two laboratory results are above the inflection point, every effort should be made to reduce the numerical value to a value below the inflection point.