| Literature DB >> 35974801 |
Xiaoman Hu1, Xincheng Li1, Huifen Xu1, Weili Zheng1, Jian Wang1, Wenyu Wang1, Senxu Li1, Ning Zhang1, Yunpeng Wang1, Kaiyu Han1.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aims to establish a risk prediction model for muscular calf vein thrombosis (MCVT) in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD).Entities:
Keywords: acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; model; muscular calf vein thrombosis; nomogram; risk factors
Year: 2022 PMID: 35974801 PMCID: PMC9375990 DOI: 10.2147/IJGM.S374777
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Gen Med ISSN: 1178-7074
Figure 1Flow chart describing the research method.
Baseline Characteristics
| Characteristics | AECOPD-MCVT (n=81) | AECOPD-nMCVT (n=159) | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (year) | 69.85±9.80 | 68.09±9.27 | 0.173 |
| Gender | 0.187 | ||
| Man (case,%) | 36(44.4) | 85(53.5) | |
| Women (case,%) | 45(55.6) | 74(46.5) | |
| Smoking history (case,%) | 39(48.1) | 85(53.5) | 0.436 |
| Comorbidity (case,%) | |||
| Hypertension | 35(43.2) | 40(25.2) | |
| Diabetes | 13(16.0) | 18(11.3) | 0.302 |
| Cardiovascular disease | 36(44.4) | 59(39.7) | 0.272 |
| Cerebrovascular disease | 15(18.5) | 31(19.5) | 0.856 |
| History of VTE (cases, %) | 6(7.4) | 3(1.9) | |
| Symptom (case,%) | |||
| Swelling of lower limbs | 39(48.1) | 46(28.9) | |
| Fever time ≥ 3 days | 4(4.9) | 18(11.3) | 0.105 |
| Bed rest ≥3 days | 35(43.5) | 22(13.8) | |
| Complication (cases, %) | |||
| Hypoxemia | 16(19.8) | 50(31.4) | 0.055 |
| Respiratory failure | 44(54.3) | 71(44.7) | 0.156 |
| Ion disorder | 33(40.7) | 66(41.5) | 0.909 |
| Cor pulmonale | 20(8.30) | 52(32.7) | 0.074 |
| Severity grading (cases, %) | 0.666 | ||
| Grade I | 26(32.1) | 56(35.2) | |
| Grade II | 20(24.7) | 51(32.1) | |
| Grade III | 25(30.9) | 46(28.9) | |
| FEV% pred (case,%) | 0.285 | ||
| ≥80 | 3(3.7) | 5(3.1) | |
| 50–79 | 15(18.5) | 28(17.6) | |
| 30–49 | 12(14.8) | 44(27.7) | |
| <30 | 9(11.1) | 36(22.6) |
Note: Bold numbers in table indicates that there is statistical differences between the groups.
Abbreviations: VTE, venous thromboembolism; FEV% pred, FEV1 in percent of the predicted value.
Laboratory Parameters
| Parameters | AECOPD-MCVT (n=81) | AECOPD-nMCVT (n=159) | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| WBC(×109/L) | 7.90(6.00,9.00) | 7.40(5.90,9.10) | 0.207 |
| HGB(g/L) | 137.86±23.88 | 139.30±23.16 | 0.653 |
| HCT (%) | 41.40(37.30,46.85) | 41.80(38.30,46.00) | 0.643 |
| MCV(fl) | 94.50(89.70,98.05) | 93.30(90.20,96.60) | 0.379 |
| RDW-CV (%) | 14.10(13.10,15.05) | 13.70(13.00,14.90) | 0.110 |
| RDW-SD (fl) | 49.57±9.52 | 47.76±5.67 | 0.052 |
| PLT(×1012/L) | 198.00(138.00,255.00) | 224.00(173.00,282.00) | |
| MPV (fl) | 10.92±1.14 | 10.52±1.11 | |
| PDW (fl) | 12.60(11.40,15.10) | 12.40(11.00,14.20) | 0.171 |
| ALB(g/L) | 35.68±4.90 | 38.28±5.87 | |
| FIB(g/L) | 3.59±1.08 | 3.53±1.09 | 0.682 |
| D-dimer(ng/mL) | 470.00(213.50,777.50) | 171.00(102.75,294.00) | |
| PaO2(mmHg) | 71.14±27.82 | 70.03±22.41 | 0.799 |
| PaCO2(mmHg) | 48.00(39.00,68.00) | 48.00(42.75,66.00) | 0.336 |
Note: Bold numbers in table indicates that there is statistical differences between the groups.
Abbreviations: WBC, white blood cell; HGB, hemoglobin; HCT, hematocrit; MCV, mean corpuscular volume; RDW-CV, red blood cell distribution width coefficient of variation; RDW-SD, red blood cell distribution width standard deviation; PLT, platelet; MPV,mean platelet volume; PDW, platelet distribution width; ALB, albumin; FIB, fibrinogen; PaO2, partial pressure of oxygen; PaCO2, partial pressure of carbon dioxide.
Figure 2Laboratory examination results of the modeling group. The variables of (A) and (B) were presented as Log transformed values. The variables of (C) and (D) were presented as regime values.
Figure 3Univariate analysis and multi-factor analysis shows the risk factors of MCVT in AECOPD patients.
Figure 4Risk nomogram model for predicting the occurrence of MCVT in AECOPD patients. The value of each of variable was given a score on the point scale axis. A total score could be easily calculated by adding each single score and, by projecting the total score to the lower total point scale, we were able to estimate the probability of MCVT.
Figure 5The ROC of the prediction model and simplified Wells score.
Figure 6The calibration curves for the nomogram. The x-axis represents the nomogram-predicted probability and y-axis represents the actual probability of MCVT. Perfect prediction would correspond to the ideal line. The apparent line represents the entire cohort (n¼ 236), and the solid line is bias-corrected by bootstrapping (B¼1000 repetitions), indicating observed nomogram performance.
Figure 7The decision curve analysis (DCA) of the prediction model. DCA was used to evaluate the availability and benefits of the prediction model.The abscissa represents the threshold probability and ordinate represents the net benefit (NB).