急性缺血性脑卒中静脉溶栓后出血预测模型的构建与验证

doi:10.16460/j.issn1008-9969.2022.05.010

护理学报 ›› 2022, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (5): 10-14.doi: 10.16460/j.issn1008-9969.2022.05.010

急性缺血性脑卒中静脉溶栓后出血预测模型的构建与验证

杨洁^1,2, 谢小华^1,2, 连万成¹, 杨梅², 邓丽萍², 潘璐²

1.安徽医科大学深圳二院临床学院,广东深圳 518035;
2.深圳市第二人民医院深圳大学第一附属医院,广东深圳 518035

收稿日期:2021-11-20 出版日期:2022-03-10 发布日期:2022-04-11
通讯作者: 谢小华（1964-）,女,广西合浦人,硕士,主任护师,护理部主任,硕士研究生导师。E-mail：13560779836@163.com
作者简介:杨洁（1995-）,女,安徽宣城人,本科学历,硕士研究生在读。
基金资助:
广东省科技厅资助项目（2017A020215121）; 广东省深圳市科技创新委员会科技计划资助项目（JCYJ20190806162803481）; 广东省深圳市科技创新委员会科技计划资助项目（JCYJ20180228163026995）; 广东省深圳市第二人民医院临床研究项目（20203357004）

Construction and Verification of Predictive Model of Hemorrhage after Intravenous Thrombolysis in Acute Ischemic Stroke

YANG Jie^1,2, XIE Xiao-hua^1,2, LIAN Wan-cheng¹, YANG Mei², DENG Li-ping², PAN Lu²

1. Clinical College of Shenzhen Second Hospital, Anhui Medical University, Shenzhen 518035, China;
2. The Second People's Hospital of Shenzhen, the First Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University, Shenzhen 518035,China

Received:2021-11-20 Online:2022-03-10 Published:2022-04-11

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的探讨急性缺血性脑卒中患者接受静脉溶栓治疗后发生出血的危险因素,构建预测模型。方法纳入2014年1月—2020年12月于深圳市某三级甲等医院进行静脉溶栓治疗的急性缺血性脑卒中患者462例,将其分为出血组（n=264）和未出血组（n=198）。使用二分类Logistic回归模型分析相关危险因素,构建预测模型并进行验证。结果年龄、溶栓前美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表评分、发病至溶栓时间、高血压史、脑白质疏松是急性缺血性脑卒中患者静脉溶栓后出血的独立危险因素。预测模型AUC为0.786,特异度为81.82%,敏感度为62.36%。决策曲线分析结果显示在出血风险0.306~0.990区间实施决策干预可获得临床净效益,并经验证后显示该模型具有较好的区分度（AUC=0.743,95%CI:0.699~0.788）和校准度（Hosmer-Lemeshow检验：χ²=11.559,P=0.172）。结论本研究构建的列线图模型具有较佳的预测效能和临床应用价值,可重复性较强。

关键词: 急性缺血性脑卒中, 静脉溶栓, 出血, 危险因素, 预测模型, 列线图

Abstract: Objective To explore the risk factors of bleeding in patients with acute ischemic stroke after receiving intravenous thrombolysis, and construct a predictive model. Methods Totally 462 patients with acute ischemic stroke who underwent intravenous thrombolysis in a tertiary grade-A hospital in Shenzhen from January 2014 to December 2020 were divided into bleeding group (n=264) and non-bleeding group (n=198). The binary logistic regression model was used to analyze the risk factors, and the predictive model was constructed and verified. Results Age, the score of National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) before thrombolysis, time from onset to thrombolysis, history of hypertension, and leukoaraiosis were independent risk factors for hemorrhage after intravenous thrombolysis in patients with acute ischemic stroke. AUC of the predictive model was 0.786 and the specificity and sensitivity were 81.82% and 62.36% respectively. Decision curve analysis showed that implementing decision interventions in the bleeding risk range of 0.306 to 0.990 had net clinical benefit. And after verification, it had been shown that the model had good discrimination (AUC=0.743,95%CI:0.699~0.788) and Calibration degree (Hosmer-Lemeshow test:χ²=11.559,P=0.172). Conclusion The nomogram model constructed in this study has better predictive performance, clinical application value, and high repeatability.

Key words: acute ischemic stroke, intravenous thrombolysis, hemorrhage, risk factor, prediction model, nomogram

中图分类号:

R473.5

杨洁, 谢小华, 连万成, 杨梅, 邓丽萍, 潘璐. 急性缺血性脑卒中静脉溶栓后出血预测模型的构建与验证[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(5): 10-14.

YANG Jie, XIE Xiao-hua, LIAN Wan-cheng, YANG Mei, DENG Li-ping, PAN Lu. Construction and Verification of Predictive Model of Hemorrhage after Intravenous Thrombolysis in Acute Ischemic Stroke[J]. Journal of Nursing, 2022, 29(5): 10-14.

参考文献

[1] 周田田,黄萍,邹圣强. 急性缺血性脑卒中患者静脉溶栓后出血转化预测模型的研究进展[J].护理学报, 2021, 28(6): 17-21. DOI:10.16460/j.issn1008-9969.2021.06.017.
[2] Dzialowski I, Pexman JH, Barber PA, et al.Asymptomatic Hemorrhage after Thrombolysis May not be Benign: Prognosis by Hemorrhage Type in the Canadian Alteplase for Stroke Effectiveness Study Registry[J]. Stroke, 2007, 38(1): 75-79. DOI: 10.1161/01.STR.0000251644.76546.62.
[3] Lei C,Wu B,Liu M,et al.Asymptomatic Hemorrhagic Transformation after Acute Ischemic Stroke: Is It Clinically Innocuous?[J]. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis, 2014, 23(10):2767-2772. DOI:10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2014.06.024.
[4] 中华医学会神经病学分会, 中华医学会神经病学分会脑血管病学组.中国急性缺血性脑卒中诊治指南2018[J]. 中华神经科杂志, 2018, 51(9):666-682. DOI:10.3760/cma. j. issn. 1006-7876.2018.09.004.
[5] Hacke W, Kaste M, Fieschi C, et al.Randomised Double-Blind Placebo-controlled Trial of Thrombolytic Therapy with Intravenous Alteplase in Acute Ischaemic Stroke (Ecass Ii). Second European-australasian Acute Stroke Study Investigators[J]. Lancet, 1998,352(9136):1245-1251.DOI:10.1016/s0140-6736(98)08020-9.
[6] Wen L, Zhang S, Wan K, et al.Risk Factors of Haemorrhagic Transformation for Acute Ischaemic Stroke in Chinese Patients Receiving Intravenous Thrombolysis: A Meta-analysis[J]. Medicine (Baltimore), 2020, 99(7):e18995. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000018995.
[7] 常红,赵洁,王晓娟,等. 急性缺血性脑卒中患者静脉溶栓后出血预警模型的构建[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2019, 54(11): 1648-1652. DOI: 10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2019.11.010.
[8] Lyden P.Using the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale: A Cautionary Tale[J]. Stroke, 2017, 48(2):513-519. DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.116.015434.
[9] Wu Z, Zeng M, Li C, et al.Time-dependence of NIHSS in Predicting Functional Outcome of Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke Treated with Intravenous Thrombolysis[J]. Postgrad Med J, 2019, 95(1122):181-186.DOI:10.1136/postgradmedj-2019-136398.
[10] Powers WJ, Rabinstein AA, Ackerson T, et al.2018 Guidelines for the Early Management of Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Guideline for Healthcare Professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association[J]. Stroke, 2018,49(3):e46-e110.DOI:10.1161/STR.0000000000000158.
[11] Sandercock P, Wardlaw JM, Lindley R I, et al.The Benefits and Harms of Intravenous Thrombolysis with Recombinant Tissue Plasminogen Activator within 6 h of Acute Ischaemic Stroke (The Third International Stroke Trial [Ist-3]): A Randomised Controlled Trial[J]. Lancet, 2012, 379(9834):2352-2363. DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60768-5.
[12] Niesen WD, Schläger A, Reinhard M, et al.Transcranial Sonography to Differentiate Primary Intracerebral Hemorrhage from Cerebral Infarction with Hemorrhagic Transformation[J]. J Neuroimaging, 2018, 28(4):370-373. DOI:10.1111/jon.12510.
[13] 李莹. 不同严重程度及时间窗的急性缺血性脑卒中患者静脉溶栓的预后研究[D]. 天津:天津医科大学, 2019.
[14] Lei Z, Li S, Hu S, et al.Effects of Baseline Systolic Blood Pressure on Outcome in Ischemic Stroke Patients with Intravenous Thrombolysis Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis[J]. Neurologist, 2020,25(3):62-69. DOI:10.1097/NRL.0000000000000267.
[15] 王亚玲,王冰寒,张艳,等. 急性缺血性脑卒中患者溶栓术后预防出血转化的最佳证据总结[J]. 护理学报, 2021, 28(3):46-52. DOI:10.16460/j.issn1008-9969.2021.03.046.
[16] 潘静,陈晓霞,程洁,等. 血压及其变异性与脑白质疏松症的相关性研究进展[J]. 中国临床神经科学, 2017, 25(2): 241-245. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1008-0678.2017.02.018.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

急性缺血性脑卒中静脉溶栓后出血预测模型的构建与验证

Construction and Verification of Predictive Model of Hemorrhage after Intravenous Thrombolysis in Acute Ischemic Stroke

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 10

[1]	吴伟霞, 张一鸣, 何宗斌, 黄静文, 申海燕. 上尿路结石术后患者留置双J管出院风险预测模型的构建研究[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(4): 64-68.
[2]	焦子珊, 张新月, 沙凯辉. 决策树C5.0与Logistic回归对产后压力性尿失禁预测性能的比较[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(3): 12-18.
[3]	向御婷, 褚婕, 严敏, 乐曲, 余嘉欣. 孕产妇孕产期静脉血栓栓塞风险评估的最佳证据总结[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(3): 46-51.
[4]	赵晓蕊, 龙云, 陈思齐, 白洁, 肖霄, 朱社宁. 妇科恶性肿瘤患者术后胃肠功能紊乱风险预测模型的构建及验证[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(3): 72-78.
[5]	刘娅林, 杨花蓉, 刘娇, 鲁婷. 基于目标管理的应急团队在急性缺血性脑卒中患者静脉溶栓中的应用[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(2): 20-24.
[6]	卜娜分, 蔡海云, 黄涛, 薛道金, 赵昌勇. 46例脑出血患者神经内镜下颅内血肿清除术的并发症观察及护理[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(2): 71-72.
[7]	郭盛丽, 袁薇, 朱婷, 林威娜, 陈晓容, 夏美燕. 患者结肠镜检查前肠道准备失败风险预测模型的系统评价[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(1): 35-40.
[8]	严露培, 姚丽丽, 李跃荣, 陈豪, 刘文文, 赵庆华, 肖明朝. 手术患者非计划性术中低体温风险预测模型研究进展[J]. 护理学报, 2021, 28(6): 13-16.
[9]	周田田, 黄萍, 邹圣强. 急性缺血性脑卒中患者静脉溶栓后出血转化预测模型的研究进展[J]. 护理学报, 2021, 28(6): 17-21.
[10]	张恒, 杨苗俊, 刘亚平, 贺书霞, 罗园园, 胡光珍. 颈部多功能止血压迫沙袋装置的研制及应用[J]. 护理学报, 2021, 28(6): 76-78.
[11]	陈俊杉, 范杰梅, 余金甜, 张爱琴. 神经外科ICU患者谵妄风险预测模型的构建与验证[J]. 护理学报, 2021, 28(4): 1-8.
[12]	王亚玲, 王冰寒, 张艳, 尹雪, 蒋辛, 熊晓明, 黎华丽. 急性缺血性脑卒中患者溶栓术后预防出血转化的最佳证据总结[J]. 护理学报, 2021, 28(3): 46-52.
[13]	蓝爱春, 包锦莹, 郑永克, 魏素妮, 潘静. 960名中老年人的颈围、小腿围对其血压、血脂、血糖的影响[J]. 护理学报, 2021, 28(3): 53-57.
[14]	陆静钰, 杨连招, 陈玲, 杨永. 社区老年高血压患者轻度认知功能障碍风险预测模型的构建与验证[J]. 护理学报, 2021, 28(24): 42-50.
[15]	张锐, 叶向红, 赵泽华, 韩珍, 谢文慧, 吴翠丽. 腹部创伤患者肠内营养喂养不耐受预警评估指标体系的构建[J]. 护理学报, 2021, 28(23): 1-5.