Cargando…
A comparison of prognostic significance of strong ion gap (SIG) with other acid-base markers in the critically ill: a cohort study
BACKGROUND: This cohort study compared the prognostic significance of strong ion gap (SIG) with other acid-base markers in the critically ill. METHODS: The relationships between SIG, lactate, anion gap (AG), anion gap albumin-corrected (AG-corrected), base excess or strong ion difference-effective (...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4928272/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27366324 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40560-016-0166-z |
_version_ | 1782440406489759744 |
---|---|
author | Ho, Kwok M. Lan, Norris S. H. Williams, Teresa A. Harahsheh, Yusra Chapman, Andrew R. Dobb, Geoffrey J. Magder, Sheldon |
author_facet | Ho, Kwok M. Lan, Norris S. H. Williams, Teresa A. Harahsheh, Yusra Chapman, Andrew R. Dobb, Geoffrey J. Magder, Sheldon |
author_sort | Ho, Kwok M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: This cohort study compared the prognostic significance of strong ion gap (SIG) with other acid-base markers in the critically ill. METHODS: The relationships between SIG, lactate, anion gap (AG), anion gap albumin-corrected (AG-corrected), base excess or strong ion difference-effective (SIDe), all obtained within the first hour of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and the hospital mortality of 6878 patients were analysed. The prognostic significance of each acid-base marker, both alone and in combination with the Admission Mortality Prediction Model (MPM(0) III) predicted mortality, were assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). RESULTS: Of the 6878 patients included in the study, 924 patients (13.4 %) died after ICU admission. Except for plasma chloride concentrations, all acid-base markers were significantly different between the survivors and non-survivors. SIG (with lactate: AUROC 0.631, confidence interval [CI] 0.611–0.652; without lactate: AUROC 0.521, 95 % CI 0.500–0.542) only had a modest ability to predict hospital mortality, and this was no better than using lactate concentration alone (AUROC 0.701, 95 % 0.682–0.721). Adding AG-corrected or SIG to a combination of lactate and MPM(0) III predicted risks also did not substantially improve the latter’s ability to differentiate between survivors and non-survivors. Arterial lactate concentrations explained about 11 % of the variability in the observed mortality, and it was more important than SIG (0.6 %) and SIDe (0.9 %) in predicting hospital mortality after adjusting for MPM(0) III predicted risks. Lactate remained as the strongest predictor for mortality in a sensitivity multivariate analysis, allowing for non-linearity of all acid-base markers. CONCLUSIONS: The prognostic significance of SIG was modest and inferior to arterial lactate concentration for the critically ill. Lactate concentration should always be considered regardless whether physiological, base excess or physical-chemical approach is used to interpret acid-base disturbances in critically ill patients. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4928272 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-49282722016-07-01 A comparison of prognostic significance of strong ion gap (SIG) with other acid-base markers in the critically ill: a cohort study Ho, Kwok M. Lan, Norris S. H. Williams, Teresa A. Harahsheh, Yusra Chapman, Andrew R. Dobb, Geoffrey J. Magder, Sheldon J Intensive Care Research BACKGROUND: This cohort study compared the prognostic significance of strong ion gap (SIG) with other acid-base markers in the critically ill. METHODS: The relationships between SIG, lactate, anion gap (AG), anion gap albumin-corrected (AG-corrected), base excess or strong ion difference-effective (SIDe), all obtained within the first hour of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and the hospital mortality of 6878 patients were analysed. The prognostic significance of each acid-base marker, both alone and in combination with the Admission Mortality Prediction Model (MPM(0) III) predicted mortality, were assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). RESULTS: Of the 6878 patients included in the study, 924 patients (13.4 %) died after ICU admission. Except for plasma chloride concentrations, all acid-base markers were significantly different between the survivors and non-survivors. SIG (with lactate: AUROC 0.631, confidence interval [CI] 0.611–0.652; without lactate: AUROC 0.521, 95 % CI 0.500–0.542) only had a modest ability to predict hospital mortality, and this was no better than using lactate concentration alone (AUROC 0.701, 95 % 0.682–0.721). Adding AG-corrected or SIG to a combination of lactate and MPM(0) III predicted risks also did not substantially improve the latter’s ability to differentiate between survivors and non-survivors. Arterial lactate concentrations explained about 11 % of the variability in the observed mortality, and it was more important than SIG (0.6 %) and SIDe (0.9 %) in predicting hospital mortality after adjusting for MPM(0) III predicted risks. Lactate remained as the strongest predictor for mortality in a sensitivity multivariate analysis, allowing for non-linearity of all acid-base markers. CONCLUSIONS: The prognostic significance of SIG was modest and inferior to arterial lactate concentration for the critically ill. Lactate concentration should always be considered regardless whether physiological, base excess or physical-chemical approach is used to interpret acid-base disturbances in critically ill patients. BioMed Central 2016-06-29 /pmc/articles/PMC4928272/ /pubmed/27366324 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40560-016-0166-z Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Ho, Kwok M. Lan, Norris S. H. Williams, Teresa A. Harahsheh, Yusra Chapman, Andrew R. Dobb, Geoffrey J. Magder, Sheldon A comparison of prognostic significance of strong ion gap (SIG) with other acid-base markers in the critically ill: a cohort study |
title | A comparison of prognostic significance of strong ion gap (SIG) with other acid-base markers in the critically ill: a cohort study |
title_full | A comparison of prognostic significance of strong ion gap (SIG) with other acid-base markers in the critically ill: a cohort study |
title_fullStr | A comparison of prognostic significance of strong ion gap (SIG) with other acid-base markers in the critically ill: a cohort study |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparison of prognostic significance of strong ion gap (SIG) with other acid-base markers in the critically ill: a cohort study |
title_short | A comparison of prognostic significance of strong ion gap (SIG) with other acid-base markers in the critically ill: a cohort study |
title_sort | comparison of prognostic significance of strong ion gap (sig) with other acid-base markers in the critically ill: a cohort study |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4928272/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27366324 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40560-016-0166-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hokwokm acomparisonofprognosticsignificanceofstrongiongapsigwithotheracidbasemarkersinthecriticallyillacohortstudy AT lannorrissh acomparisonofprognosticsignificanceofstrongiongapsigwithotheracidbasemarkersinthecriticallyillacohortstudy AT williamsteresaa acomparisonofprognosticsignificanceofstrongiongapsigwithotheracidbasemarkersinthecriticallyillacohortstudy AT harahshehyusra acomparisonofprognosticsignificanceofstrongiongapsigwithotheracidbasemarkersinthecriticallyillacohortstudy AT chapmanandrewr acomparisonofprognosticsignificanceofstrongiongapsigwithotheracidbasemarkersinthecriticallyillacohortstudy AT dobbgeoffreyj acomparisonofprognosticsignificanceofstrongiongapsigwithotheracidbasemarkersinthecriticallyillacohortstudy AT magdersheldon acomparisonofprognosticsignificanceofstrongiongapsigwithotheracidbasemarkersinthecriticallyillacohortstudy AT hokwokm comparisonofprognosticsignificanceofstrongiongapsigwithotheracidbasemarkersinthecriticallyillacohortstudy AT lannorrissh comparisonofprognosticsignificanceofstrongiongapsigwithotheracidbasemarkersinthecriticallyillacohortstudy AT williamsteresaa comparisonofprognosticsignificanceofstrongiongapsigwithotheracidbasemarkersinthecriticallyillacohortstudy AT harahshehyusra comparisonofprognosticsignificanceofstrongiongapsigwithotheracidbasemarkersinthecriticallyillacohortstudy AT chapmanandrewr comparisonofprognosticsignificanceofstrongiongapsigwithotheracidbasemarkersinthecriticallyillacohortstudy AT dobbgeoffreyj comparisonofprognosticsignificanceofstrongiongapsigwithotheracidbasemarkersinthecriticallyillacohortstudy AT magdersheldon comparisonofprognosticsignificanceofstrongiongapsigwithotheracidbasemarkersinthecriticallyillacohortstudy |