Survival analysis of famotidine administration routes in non-traumatic intracerebral hemorrhage patients: based on the MIMIC-IV database.

IF 1.8 4区医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research Pub Date : 2024-08-30 DOI:10.1080/14737167.2024.2394113

Ling Chen, Yan Wang

{"title":"Survival analysis of famotidine administration routes in non-traumatic intracerebral hemorrhage patients: based on the MIMIC-IV database.","authors":"Ling Chen, Yan Wang","doi":"10.1080/14737167.2024.2394113","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: This study compared the survival outcomes of non-traumatic intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) patients with different famotidine administration routes and explored related risk factors.Methods: Data from ICH patients between 2008-2019 were extracted from the MIMIC-IV database. Survival differences between patients with intravenous (IV) and non-intravenous (Non-IV) famotidine administration were analyzed using Cox analysis and Kaplan-Meier survival curves.Results: The study included 351 patients, with 109 in the IV group and 84 in the Non-IV group after PSM. Cox analysis revealed that survival was significantly associated with age (HR = 1.031, 95%CI:1.011-1.050, p = 0.002), chloride ions (HR = 1.061, 95%CI:1.027-1.096, p < 0.001), BUN (HR = 1.034, 95%CI:1.007-1.062, p = 0.012), ICP (HR = 1.059, 95%CI:1.027-1.092, p < 0.001), RDW (HR = 1.156, 95%CI:1.030-1.299, p = 0.014), mechanical ventilation (HR = 2.526, 95%CI:1.341-4.760, p = 0.004), antibiotic use (HR = 0.331, 95%CI:0.144-0.759, p = 0.009), and Non-IV route (HR = 0.518, 95%CI:0.283-0.948, p = 0.033). Kaplan-Meier curves showed a significantly higher 30-day survival rate in the Non-IV group (p = 0.011), particularly in patients with normal ICP (HR = 0.518, 95%CI:0.283-0.948, p = 0.033).Conclusion: Non-IV famotidine administration significantly improves 30-day survival of ICH patients, especially for those with normal ICP, compared to IV administration.","PeriodicalId":12244,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2024.2394113","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This study compared the survival outcomes of non-traumatic intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) patients with different famotidine administration routes and explored related risk factors.

Methods: Data from ICH patients between 2008-2019 were extracted from the MIMIC-IV database. Survival differences between patients with intravenous (IV) and non-intravenous (Non-IV) famotidine administration were analyzed using Cox analysis and Kaplan-Meier survival curves.

Results: The study included 351 patients, with 109 in the IV group and 84 in the Non-IV group after PSM. Cox analysis revealed that survival was significantly associated with age (HR = 1.031, 95%CI:1.011-1.050, p = 0.002), chloride ions (HR = 1.061, 95%CI:1.027-1.096, p < 0.001), BUN (HR = 1.034, 95%CI:1.007-1.062, p = 0.012), ICP (HR = 1.059, 95%CI:1.027-1.092, p < 0.001), RDW (HR = 1.156, 95%CI:1.030-1.299, p = 0.014), mechanical ventilation (HR = 2.526, 95%CI:1.341-4.760, p = 0.004), antibiotic use (HR = 0.331, 95%CI:0.144-0.759, p = 0.009), and Non-IV route (HR = 0.518, 95%CI:0.283-0.948, p = 0.033). Kaplan-Meier curves showed a significantly higher 30-day survival rate in the Non-IV group (p = 0.011), particularly in patients with normal ICP (HR = 0.518, 95%CI:0.283-0.948, p = 0.033).

Conclusion: Non-IV famotidine administration significantly improves 30-day survival of ICH patients, especially for those with normal ICP, compared to IV administration.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

非创伤性脑出血患者法莫替丁给药途径的生存率分析：基于 MIMIC-IV 数据库。

目的：本项目旨在比较不同法莫替丁给药途径下非创伤性脑出血（ICH）患者的生存结果，并探讨影响患者临床结局的风险因素：本项目旨在比较不同法莫替丁给药途径下非外伤性脑内出血（ICH）患者的生存预后，并探讨影响患者临床预后的风险因素：从重症监护医学信息市场IV（MIMIC-IV）数据库中收集2008年至2019年入住ICU并接受法莫替丁治疗的患者数据。将入院时间大于1天且接受法莫替丁治疗的患者分为静脉给药组和非静脉给药组。采用 Cox 分析和双侧逐步回归法确定影响患者存活率的独立预后因素。使用卡普兰-迈尔（K-M）生存曲线比较了倾向得分匹配（PSM）前后不同给药途径患者的生存率：本次调查共纳入 351 名患者。按 1:2 的比例进行倾向得分匹配后，109 名患者被归入静脉注射组，84 名患者被归入非静脉注射组。Cox 多变量结果显示，接受法莫替丁治疗的 ICH 患者的生存预后与年龄（HR = 1.031，95%CI:1.011-1.050，P = 0.002）、氯离子水平（HR = 1.061，95%CI:1.027-1.096，P = 0.012）、颅内压（ICP）（HR = 1.059，95%CI:1.027-1.092，P = 0.014）、机械通气（HR = 2.526，95%CI:1.341-4.760，P = 0.004）、抗生素使用（HR = 0.331，95%CI:0.144-0.759，P = 0.009）和非静脉途径（HR = 0.518，95%CI:0.283-0.948，P = 0.033）。K-M 曲线结果显示，非静脉注射组 ICH 患者的 30 天存活率大大高于静脉注射组患者（PSM 前，p = 0.036；PSM 后，p = 0.011）。在年龄、ICP、机械通气和抗生素使用的亚组分析中，法莫替丁的使用与 30 天死亡率之间存在很大的异质性交互作用（交互作用的 P = 0.033）：结论：在接受法莫替丁治疗的 ICH 患者中，与接受静脉注射的患者相比，通过非静脉注射接受法莫替丁治疗的患者的 30 天存活率更高，尤其是在 ICP 正常（7-15 mmHg）的患者中。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY

CiteScore

4.00

自引率

4.30%

发文量

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research (ISSN 1473-7167) provides expert reviews on cost-benefit and pharmacoeconomic issues relating to the clinical use of drugs and therapeutic approaches. Coverage includes pharmacoeconomics and quality-of-life research, therapeutic outcomes, evidence-based medicine and cost-benefit research. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review. The journal adopts the unique Expert Review article format, offering a complete overview of current thinking in a key technology area, research or clinical practice, augmented by the following sections: Expert Opinion – a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.