Dataset Information

Epidemiology of mechanically ventilated patients treated in ICU and non-ICU settings in Japan: a retrospective database study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In most countries, patients receiving mechanical ventilation (MV) are treated in intensive care units (ICUs). However, in some countries, including Japan, many patients on MV are not treated in ICUs. There are insufficient epidemiological data on these patients. Here, we sought to describe the epidemiology of patients on MV in Japan by comparing and contrasting patients on MV treated in ICUs and in non-ICU settings. A preliminary comparison of patient outcomes between ICU and non-ICU patients was a secondary objective.

Methods

Data on adult patients receiving MV for at least 3 days in ICUs or non-ICU settings from April 2010 through March 2012 were obtained from the Quality Indicator/Improvement Project, a voluntary data-administration project covering more than 400 acute-care hospitals in Japan. We excluded patients with cancer-related diagnoses. Patient demographic data and the critical care provided were compared between groups.

Results

Over the study period, 17,775 patients on MV were treated only in non-ICU settings, whereas 20,516 patients were treated at least once in ICUs (46.4% vs. 53.6%). Average age was higher in non-ICU patients than in ICU patients (72.8 vs. 70.2, P?ConclusionsA large proportion of Japanese patients on MV were treated in non-ICU settings. Analysis of administrative data indicated preliminarily that hospital mortality rates in these patients were higher in non-ICU settings than in ICUs. Prospective analyses comparing non-ICU and ICU patients on MV by severity scoring are needed.

SUBMITTER: Iwashita Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6280379 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMechanical ventilation (MV) is vital for critically ill ICU patients but carries significant mortality risks. This study aims to develop a predictive model to estimate hospital mortality among MV patients, utilizing comprehensive health data to assist ICU physicians with early-stage alerts.MethodsWe developed a Machine Learning (ML) framework to predict hospital mortality in ICU patients receiving MV. Using the MIMIC-III database, we identified 25,202 eligible patients through ICD-9 codes. We employed backward elimination and the Lasso method, selecting 32 features based on clinical insights and literature. Data preprocessing included eliminating columns with over 90% missing data and using mean imputation for the remaining missing values. To address class imbalance, we used the Synthetic Minority Over-sampling Technique (SMOTE). We evaluated several ML models, including CatBoost, XGBoost, Decision Tree, Random Forest, Support Vector Machine (SVM), K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN), and Logistic Regression, using a 70/30 train-test split. The CatBoost model was chosen for its superior performance in terms of accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, AUROC metrics, and calibration plots.ResultsThe study involved a cohort of 25,202 patients on MV. The CatBoost model attained an AUROC of 0.862, an increase from an initial AUROC of 0.821, which was the best reported in the literature. It also demonstrated an accuracy of 0.789, an F1-score of 0.747, and better calibration, outperforming other models. These improvements are due to systematic feature selection and the robust gradient boosting architecture of CatBoost.ConclusionThe preprocessing methodology significantly reduced the number of relevant features, simplifying computational processes, and identified critical features previously overlooked. Integrating these features and tuning the parameters, our model demonstrated strong generalization to unseen data. This highlights the potential of ML as a crucial tool in ICUs, enhancing resource allocation and providing more personalized interventions for MV patients.

Project description:BackgroundBiomarkers can be used to detect the presence of endothelial and/or alveolar epithelial injuries in case of ARDS. Angiopoietin-2 (Ang-2), soluble intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1), vascular cell adhesion protein-1 (VCAM-1), P-selectin and E-selectin are biomarkers of endothelial injury, whereas the receptor for advanced glycation end-products (RAGE) reflects alveolar epithelial injury. The aims of this study were to evaluate whether the plasma concentration of the above-mentioned biomarkers was different 1) in survivors and non-survivors of COVID-19-related ARDS and 2) in COVID-19-related and classical ARDS.MethodsThis prospective study was performed in two COVID-19-dedicated Intensive Care Units (ICU) and one non-COVID-19 ICU at Ferrara University Hospital. A cohort of 31 mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 ARDS and a cohort of 11 patients with classical ARDS were enrolled. Ang-2, ICAM-1, VCAM-1, P-selectin, E-selectin and RAGE were determined with a bead-based multiplex immunoassay at three time points: inclusion in the study (T1), after 7 ± 2 days (T2) and 14 ± 2 days (T3). The primary outcome was to evaluate the plasma trend of the biomarker levels in survivors and non-survivors. The secondary outcome was to evaluate the differences in respiratory mechanics variables and gas exchanges between survivors and non-survivors. Furthermore, we compared the plasma levels of the biomarkers at T1 in patients with COVID-19-related ARDS and classical ARDS.ResultsIn COVID-19-related ARDS, the plasma levels of Ang-2 and ICAM-1 at T1 were statistically higher in non-survivors than survivors, (p = 0.04 and p = 0.03, respectively), whereas those of P-selectin, E-selectin and RAGE did not differ. Ang-2 and ICAM-1 at T1 were predictors of mortality (AUROC 0.650 and 0.717, respectively). At T1, RAGE and P-selectin levels were higher in classical ARDS than in COVID-19-related ARDS. Ang-2, ICAM-1 and E-selectin were lower in classical ARDS than in COVID-19-related ARDS (all p < 0.001).ConclusionsCOVID-19 ARDS is characterized by an early pulmonary endothelial injury, as detected by Ang-2 and ICAM-1. COVID-19 ARDS and classical ARDS exhibited a different expression of biomarkers, suggesting different pathological pathways. Trial registration NCT04343053 , Date of registration: April 13, 2020.