ArticleCureus2024
Prognostic Scores for Mortality in Invasive Mechanically Ventilated Burn Patients.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Ten-Year Retrospective Analysis of Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy in Burn Patients: Impact on Survival and Timing of Initiation.Annals of transplantation · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionManaging burn patients is a challenge requiring a multidisciplinary team with the ability to predict complications and act early to avoid them. There are few studies characterizing the population of critically ill burn patients in need of ventilatory support. This study aimed to describe the population of burn patients in need of invasive mechanical ventilation support and assess in-hospital mortality and the factors associated with it. MATERIAL AND
methodsA longitudinal retrospective study was conducted, including burn patients admitted to a tertiary hospital burn unit over five consecutive years, who required invasive mechanical ventilation support during their hospitalization. Demographic data, comorbidities, characteristics of the injury scene, etiology, and characteristics of the burn were collected. Length of mechanical ventilation and hospitalization as well as mortality rate were evaluated. The determination of mortality predictors and the prognostic performance of mortality prediction scores were analyzed. A one-year follow-up was performed to evaluate the survival of discharged patients.
resultsA total of 141 patients were included in this study; 68.1% patients were male with a median age of 58 years. The mean percentage of total body surface area (TBSA) burned was 24.5%. Home incidents were the most frequent, and fire was the most common cause of burns (80.9% of patients). The mean Abbreviated Burn Severity Index Score (ABSI) was 7.83, with an area under the curve in receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) analysis (AUC_ROC) of 0.725; the mean Belgium Outcome of Burn Injury (BOBI) score was 3.45, with AUC_ROC of 0.740 and mean R-Baux of 89.1 and AUC_ROC of 0.834. The mean duration of invasive mechanical ventilation was 16.9±19.3 days. Age (p<0.001), length of mechanical ventilation (p<0.001), length of hospitalization (p<0.001), higher degree of burn (p=0.001), TBSA (p=0.040), and the presence of buttock burn (0.006) were associated with mortality in this sample. In-hospital mortality was 29.8%. The survival group had a 12% death rate at one-year follow-up, mostly in the first three months after discharge.
conclusionAge, duration of mechanical ventilation, length of hospitalization, higher degree of burn, TBSA, and the presence of buttock burn were associated with mortality in this sample. R-Baux score was the most accurate test score to predict mortality in this challenging group of patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.