Scoring systems for predicting mortality for severe patients with COVID-19
Scoring systems for predicting mortality for severe patients with COVID-19
复制标题
DOI:
10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100426
复制
发表时间:
2020-07-01
影响因子:
15.1
通讯作者:
Zhou, Fuling
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
Shang, Yufeng;Liu, Tao;Zhou, Fuling
Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been widely spread and caused tens of thousands of deaths, especially in patients with severe COVID-19. This analysis aimed to explore risk factors for mortality of severe COVID-19, and establish a scoring system to predict in-hospital deaths.Methods: Patients with COVID-19 were retrospectively analyzed and clinical characteristics were compared. LASSO regression as well as multivariable analysis were used to screen variables and establish prediction model.Findings: A total of 2529 patients with COVID-19 was retrospectively analyzed, and 452 eligible severe COVID-19 were used for finally analysis. In training cohort, the median age was 66.0 years while it was 73.0 years in non-survivors. Patients aged 60-75 years accounted for the largest proportion of infected populations and mortality toll. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were monitored up to 54 days, and IgG levels reached the highest during 20-30 days. No differences were observed of antibody levels between severe and non-severe patients. About 60.2% of severe patients had complications. Among acute myocardial injury (AMI), acute kidney injury (AKI) and acute liver injury (ALI), the heart was the earliest injured organ, whereas the time from AKI to death was the shortest. Age, diabetes, coronary heart disease (CHD), percentage of lymphocytes (LYM%), procalcitonin (PCT), serum urea, C reactive protein and D-dimer (DD), were identified associated with mortality by LASSO binary logistic regression. Then multivariable analysis was performed to conclude that old age, CHD, LYM%, PCT and DD remained independent risk factors for mortality. Based on the above variables, a scoring system of COVID-19 (CSS) was established to divide patients into low-risk and high-risk groups. This model displayed good discrimination (AUC=0.919) and calibration (P=0.264). Complications in low-risk and high-risk groups were significantly different (P