切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华脑血管病杂志(电子版) ›› 2023, Vol. 17 ›› Issue (05) : 440 -444. doi: 10.11817/j.issn.1673-9248.2023.05.003

论著

孤立性脑桥梗死合并吞咽障碍的临床影响因素分析
程培丽, 李霞(), 王亚丽   
  1. 215008 苏州,南京医科大学附属苏州市立医院神经内科
  • 收稿日期:2023-03-14 出版日期:2023-10-01
  • 通信作者: 李霞
  • 基金资助:
    2018年江苏省干部保健基金项目(BJ18011); 2020年苏州市姑苏卫生人才项目(GSWS2020076)

Analysis of clinical factors related to isolated pontine infarction patients with dysphagia

Peili Cheng, Xia Li(), Yali Wang   

  1. Department of Neurology,the Affiliated Suzhou Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Suzhou 215008, China
  • Received:2023-03-14 Published:2023-10-01
  • Corresponding author: Xia Li
引用本文:

程培丽, 李霞, 王亚丽. 孤立性脑桥梗死合并吞咽障碍的临床影响因素分析[J/OL]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 440-444.

Peili Cheng, Xia Li, Yali Wang. Analysis of clinical factors related to isolated pontine infarction patients with dysphagia[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Cerebrovascular Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2023, 17(05): 440-444.

目的

探讨孤立性脑桥梗死(IPI)合并吞咽障碍的影响因素和临床结局。

方法

回顾性分析2021年1月至2022年6月在苏州市立医院神经内科住院的IPI患者128例,所有患者入院后24 h内进行吞咽功能检查,并记录入院美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表(NIHSS)评分和出院改良Rankin量表(mRS)评分。将患者按是否有吞咽功能障碍分为吞咽障碍组与无吞咽障碍组,通过单因素分析(χ2检验、t检验和U检验)比较患者一般临床资料、IPI梗死侧别、临床结局的差异。通过多因素Logistic回归分析IPI患者吞咽障碍的影响因素。

结果

128例患者中吞咽障碍组患者42例(32.8%),无吞咽障碍组患者86例(67.2%)。吞咽障碍组与无吞咽障碍组的年龄[(72.95±9.91)岁vs(67.05±11.60)岁]、糖尿病比例(64.29% vs 39.53%)、基线NIHSS评分[8.0(4.0,12.0)分 vs 1.0(0.0,2.0)分]、双侧IPI比例(30.95% vs 2.32%)相比,差异均具有统计学意义(t=-2.832,P=0.005;χ2=5.671,P=0.023;Z=-6.150,P<0.001;χ2=22.178,P<0.001)。吞咽障碍组患者出院不良结局(mRS评分≥3分)比例较无吞咽障碍组高(80.95% vs 60.47%),差异具有统计学意义(χ2=5.373,P=0.015)。多因素Logistic回归分析显示,年龄(OR=1.059,95%CI:1.003~1.118,P=0.037)、基线高NIHSS评分(OR=1.487,95%CI:1.222~1.810,P<0.001)为吞咽障碍的独立危险因素。

结论

年龄、基线NIHSS评分高是IPI患者吞咽障碍的独立预测因子,吞咽障碍组患者出院不良结局比例高。

Objective

To study the clinical data and imaging characteristics of isolated pontine infarction (IPI) complicated with neurogenic dysphagia, analyze the influencing factors,and compare the clinical outcomes.

Methods

A total of 128 patients with IPI hospitalized in the Department of Neurology of Suzhou Municipal Hospital from January 2021 to June 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. All patients underwent clinical testing for dysphagia after IPI within 24 hours of admission.Their initial National Institutes of Health stroke scale (NIHSS) score at admission and modified Rankin scale (mRS) score at discharge were recorded. All patients were divided into two groups: dysphagia group and non-dysphagia group. The differences of general clinical data, bilateral IPI and clinical outcomes were compared by univariate analysis (chi-square test, t test and U test). The influencing factors of dysphagia in IPI patients were analyzed by multivariate Logistic regression.

Results

Among the 128 patients, 42 cases (32.8%) were in the dysphagia group and 86 cases (67.2%) were in the non-dysphagia group. Compared the two groups, there were statistically significant differences in age [(72.95±9.91) years vs (67.05±11.60) years; t=-2.832, P=0.005], diabetes rate (64.29% vs 39.53%; χ2=5.671, P=0.023), baseline NIHSS score [8.0(4.0, 12.0) score vs 1.0(0.0, 2.0) score; Z=-6.150, P<0.001] on admission, and proportion of bilateral IPI (30.95% vs 2.32%; χ2=22.178, P<0.001). The proportion of adverse outcomes (mRS score ≥3 points) in the dysphagia group was greater than that in the non-dysphagia group, and the difference was statistically significant (80.95% vs 60.47%,χ2=5.373, P=0.015). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that age (OR=1.059, 95%CI: 1.003-1.118, P=0.037) and baseline NIHSS score (OR=1.487, 95%CI: 1.222-1.810, P<0.001) were independent risk factors for dysphagia.

Conclusion

Age and high baseline NIHSS score were identified as predictors of dysphagia in patients with IPI. The dysphagia group had a higher proportion of adverse outcomes.

表1 2组孤立性脑桥梗死患者基线临床资料比较
表2 2组IPI患者双侧病变比例和临床转归比较[例(%)]
表3 影响IPI患者吞咽障碍的多因素Logistic回归分析
18
Yang C, Pan Y. Risk factors of dysphagia in patients with ischemic stroke: a meta-analysis and systematic review [J]. PLoS One, 2022, 17(6): e0270096.
19
Beharry A, Michel P, Faouzi M, et al. Predictive factors of swallowing disorders and bronchopneumonia in acute ischemic stroke [J]. Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis, 2019, 28(8): 2148-2154.
1
Chang MC, Kwak SG, Chun MH, et al. Dysphagia in patients with isolated pontine infarction [J]. Neural Regen Res, 2018, 13(12): 2156-2159.
2
Gökçal E, Niftaliyev E, Baran G, et al. Progressive deficit in isolated pontine infarction: the association with etiological subtype, lesion topography and outcome [J]. Acta Neurol Belg, 2017, 117(3): 649-654.
3
Palli C, Fandler S, Doppelhofer K, et al. Early dysphagia screening by trained nurses reduces pneumonia rate in stroke patients: a clinical intervention study [J]. Stroke, 2017, 48(9): 2583-2585.
4
Ha SH, Ryu JC, Bae JH, et al. Isolated pontine infarction versus pontine plus infarction: prevalence, pathogenic mechanism, and outcomes [J]. J Neurol, 2022, 269(8): 4375-4382.
5
Pan Y, Tsai YH, Lee JD, et al. Evaluation of clinical relevance and underlying pathology for hemodynamic compromise in acute small subcortical infarction using MRI-based neuroimaging markers [J]. Biomed J, 2022, 46(2): 100529.
6
Ye T, Huang S, Dong Y, et al. Comparison of two bedside evaluation methods of dysphagia in patients with acute stroke [J]. Stroke Vasc Neurol, 2018, 3(4): 237-244.
7
张蒙蒙, 孙洁, 陈伟, 等. 咽反射功能对洼田饮水试验评估吞咽障碍准确性的影响 [J]. 中国康复, 2020, 35(10): 529-531.
8
Flowers HL, AlHarbi MA, Mikulis D, et al. MRI-based neuroanatomical predictors of dysphagia,dysarthria, and aphasia in patients with first acute ischemic stroke [J]. Cerebrovasc Dis Extra, 2017, 7(1): 21-34.
9
Suntrup S, Kemmling A, Warnecke T, et al. The impact of lesion location on dysphagia incidence, pattern and complications in acute stroke. Part 1: dysphagia incidence, severity and aspiration [J]. Eur J Neurol, 2015, 22(5): 832-838.
10
Ha SH, Kim BJ, Ryu JH, et al. Basilar artery tortuosity may be associated with early neurological deterioration in patients with pontine infarction [J]. Cerebrovasc Dis, 2022, 51(5): 594-599.
11
Cristina A, Martini G, Oliveira R, et al. Dysphagia and associated pneumonia in stroke patients from Brazil: a systematic review [J]. Dysphagia, 2019, 34(4): 499-520.
12
Lee S, Moon HI, Shin JH. Post-stroke palatal tremor as a clinical predictor of dysphagia and its neuroanatomical correlates in patients with midbrain and pontine lesions [J]. J Neural Transm (Vienna), 2021, 128(12): 1863-1872.
13
鲍婕妤, 刘娜, 张静, 等. 急性孤立性桥脑梗死早期神经功能恶化的临床特征及预测因素 [J]. 中华医学杂志, 2023, 103(1): 32-37.
14
Lapa S, Luger S, Pfeilschifter W, et al. Predictors of dysphagia in acute pontine infarction [J]. Stroke, 2017, 48(5): 1397-1399.
15
彭继海, 张呜生, 李河, 等. 高龄吞咽障碍患者影像学特征及误吸的危险因素分析 [J]. 中华老年心脑血管病杂志, 2015, 17(1): 53-56.
16
Vaiman M, Eviatar E, Segal S, et al. Evaluation of normal deglutition with the help of rectified surface electromyography records [J]. Dysphagia, 2004, 19(2): 125-132.
17
Jeyaseelan RD, Vargo MM, Chae J, et al. National institutes of health stroke scale (NIHSS) as an early predictor of poststroke dysphagia [J]. PMR, 2015, 7(6): 593-598.
[1] 洪玮, 叶细容, 刘枝红, 杨银凤, 吕志红. 超声影像组学联合临床病理特征预测乳腺癌新辅助化疗完全病理缓解的价值[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(06): 571-579.
[2] 陈晓玲, 钟永洌, 刘巧梨, 李娜, 张志奇, 廖威明, 黄桂武. 超高龄髋膝关节术后谵妄及心血管并发症风险预测[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 575-584.
[3] 黄鸿初, 黄美容, 温丽红. 血液系统恶性肿瘤患者化疗后粒细胞缺乏感染的危险因素和风险预测模型[J/OL]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 285-292.
[4] 奚玲, 仝瀚文, 缪骥, 毛永欢, 沈晓菲, 杜峻峰, 刘晔. 基于肌少症构建的造口旁疝危险因素预测模型[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 48-51.
[5] 屈勤芳, 束方莲. 盆腔器官脱垂患者盆底重建手术后压力性尿失禁发生的影响因素及列线图预测模型构建[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 606-612.
[6] 张春玉, 陈海云, 肖忠萍, 罗琴, 潘运昌. 血清NT-proBNP 预测肺栓塞心脏功能障碍的临床分析[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(05): 805-808.
[7] 公宇, 廖媛, 尚梅. 肝细胞癌TACE术后复发影响因素及预测模型建立[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 818-824.
[8] 王贝贝, 崔振义, 王静, 王晗妍, 吕红芝, 李秀婷. 老年股骨粗隆间骨折患者术后贫血预测模型的构建与验证[J/OL]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2024, 10(06): 355-362.
[9] 孙晗, 于冰, 武侠, 周熙朗. 基于循环肿瘤DNA 甲基化的结直肠癌筛查预测模型的构建与验证[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(06): 500-506.
[10] 韦巧玲, 黄妍, 赵昌, 宋庆峰, 陈祖毅, 黄莹, 蒙嫦, 黄靖. 肝癌微波消融术后中重度疼痛风险预测列线图模型构建及验证[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(08): 715-721.
[11] 蔡晓雯, 李慧景, 丘婕, 杨翼帆, 吴素贤, 林玉彤, 何秋娜. 肝癌患者肝动脉化疗栓塞术后疼痛风险预测模型的构建及验证[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(08): 722-728.
[12] 王誉英, 刘世伟, 王睿, 曾娅玲, 涂禧慧, 张蒲蓉. 老年乳腺癌新辅助治疗病理完全缓解的预测因素分析[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(07): 641-646.
[13] 董晟, 郎胜坤, 葛新, 孙少君, 薛明宇. 反向休克指数乘以格拉斯哥昏迷评分对老年严重创伤患者发生急性创伤性凝血功能障碍的预测价值[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 541-547.
[14] 黄圣楷, 许斌, 苏健, 孙龙. 海南省2010~2020年乙型肝炎流行趋势的时间序列分析及预测[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 555-561.
[15] 孙志军, 梁立丰, 柳晓娜, 杨汪洋, 邸北冰, 张妮潇, 彭晖. 接受ICM 的不明原因晕厥患者需行起搏治疗的临床预测因素分析[J/OL]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 446-453.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?