Comparison of biomarkers adiponectin, leptin, C-reactive protein, S100A12, and the Acute Patient Physiologic and Laboratory Evaluation (APPLE) score as mortality predictors in critically ill dogs.

Liza S Köster, Geoffrey T Fosgate, Jan Suchodolski, Jonathan Lidbury, Jörg M Steiner
{"title":"Comparison of biomarkers adiponectin, leptin, C-reactive protein, S100A12, and the Acute Patient Physiologic and Laboratory Evaluation (APPLE) score as mortality predictors in critically ill dogs.","authors":"Liza S Köster,&nbsp;Geoffrey T Fosgate,&nbsp;Jan Suchodolski,&nbsp;Jonathan Lidbury,&nbsp;Jörg M Steiner","doi":"10.1111/vec.12823","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To determine if selected serum biomarkers are superior to the acute patient physiologic and laboratory evaluation (APPLE) complete score in predicting 30-day mortality in a non-homogeneous disease population of critically ill dogs.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Prospective cohort study comparing the serum biomarkers adiponectin, leptin, C-reactive protein, and S100A12 concentrations between surviving and nonsurviving critically ill dogs.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>University small animal teaching hospital.</p><p><strong>Animals: </strong>Seventy critically ill dogs were prospectively recruited, and an APPLE complete score was calculated within 24 hours of being admitted to the intensive care unit. Logistic regression models were fit to estimate the association between biomarkers and 30-day survival. Results were interpreted at the 5% level of significance.</p><p><strong>Measurements and main results: </strong>Leptin was the only biomarker that was significantly correlated with the APPLE complete score (P < 0.001). Only the APPLE complete score (P = 0.003) and illness duration of < 1 day (P = 0.043) were significantly associated with outcome.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Based on the results of this study, there appears to be no benefit in using biomarkers over the APPLE score for disease severity stratification. Serum leptin concentration was significantly correlated with disease severity as determined by APPLE scoring. Longer duration of illness prior to admission was associated with a higher risk of death. APPLE scores were highest in dogs with infectious and immune-mediated diseases and bite wounds.</p>","PeriodicalId":74015,"journal":{"name":"Journal of veterinary emergency and critical care (San Antonio, Tex. : 2001)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/vec.12823","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of veterinary emergency and critical care (San Antonio, Tex. : 2001)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/vec.12823","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/3/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To determine if selected serum biomarkers are superior to the acute patient physiologic and laboratory evaluation (APPLE) complete score in predicting 30-day mortality in a non-homogeneous disease population of critically ill dogs.

Design: Prospective cohort study comparing the serum biomarkers adiponectin, leptin, C-reactive protein, and S100A12 concentrations between surviving and nonsurviving critically ill dogs.

Setting: University small animal teaching hospital.

Animals: Seventy critically ill dogs were prospectively recruited, and an APPLE complete score was calculated within 24 hours of being admitted to the intensive care unit. Logistic regression models were fit to estimate the association between biomarkers and 30-day survival. Results were interpreted at the 5% level of significance.

Measurements and main results: Leptin was the only biomarker that was significantly correlated with the APPLE complete score (P < 0.001). Only the APPLE complete score (P = 0.003) and illness duration of < 1 day (P = 0.043) were significantly associated with outcome.

Conclusion: Based on the results of this study, there appears to be no benefit in using biomarkers over the APPLE score for disease severity stratification. Serum leptin concentration was significantly correlated with disease severity as determined by APPLE scoring. Longer duration of illness prior to admission was associated with a higher risk of death. APPLE scores were highest in dogs with infectious and immune-mediated diseases and bite wounds.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
脂联素、瘦素、c反应蛋白、S100A12和急性患者生理和实验室评估(APPLE)评分作为危重犬死亡率预测因子的比较
目的:确定选定的血清生物标志物是否优于急性患者生理和实验室评估(APPLE)完全评分,以预测非同质疾病危重犬的30天死亡率。设计:前瞻性队列研究,比较存活和非存活危重犬血清生物标志物脂联素、瘦素、c反应蛋白和S100A12浓度。单位:大学小动物教学医院。动物:前瞻性地招募了70只危重犬,并在入住重症监护室后24小时内计算APPLE完整评分。拟合Logistic回归模型来估计生物标志物与30天生存率之间的关系。结果以5%的显著性水平进行解释。测量结果和主要结果:瘦素是唯一与APPLE评分显著相关的生物标志物(P < 0.001)。只有APPLE评分(P = 0.003)和病程< 1天(P = 0.043)与预后显著相关。结论:基于本研究的结果,在疾病严重程度分层中使用生物标志物似乎没有益处。通过APPLE评分,血清瘦素浓度与疾病严重程度显著相关。入院前患病时间越长,死亡风险越高。患有传染性和免疫介导性疾病和咬伤的狗的APPLE评分最高。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Owner experiences with and perceptions of owner-witnessed CPR in veterinary medicine. Development and implementation of a hemovigilance program at a university veterinary teaching hospital. 2022 Update of the Consensus on the Rational Use of Antithrombotics and Thrombolytics in Veterinary Critical Care (CURATIVE) Domain 1- Defining populations at risk. Abstracts from the International Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care Symposium, and the European Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care Annual Congress 2021. Abstracts from the International Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care Symposium, and the European Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care Annual Congress 2020.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1