Characteristics and Clinical Prognosis of Septic Patients With Persistent Lymphopenia

Juanjuan Jing,Yushan Wei,Xue Dong,Dandan Li,Chenyang Zhang,Zhiyao Fang,Jia Wang,Xianyao Wan
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/08850666241226877
2024-01-17
Journal of Intensive Care Medicine
Abstract:Journal of Intensive Care Medicine, Ahead of Print. Background: Septic patients with persistent lymphopenia may be in an immunosuppressed state. Therefore, we evaluated and compared the clinical characteristics and outcomes of septic patients with persistent lymphopenia (≥2d) and those with nonpersistent lymphopenia. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was designed. A total of 1306 patients with sepsis who were attended to the First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University from March 2016 to August 2022 were included. The primary clinical outcome was 90d mortality. The secondary clinical outcomes were the length of stay, hospital mortality, 28d mortality, the incidence of secondary infection, and differences in clinical characteristics. Results: Among 1306 patients with sepsis, 913 (69.9%) patients developed persistent lymphopenia. Compared with patients with nonpersistent lymphopenia, patients with persistent lymphocytopenia were admitted to intensive care unit (75.7% vs 52.7%, P < .05), treated with mechanical ventilation (67.6% vs 39.2%, P < .05), positive rate of microbial culture pathogens (86.7% vs 71.2%, P < .05), SOFA [8.0 (6.0-10.0) vs 6.0 (4.0-8.0), P < .05], length of stay [17.0d (12.0-27.0) vs 13.0d (10.0-21.0), P < .05], hospital mortality (37.7% vs 24.2%, P < .05), 28d mortality (38.0% vs 22.9%, P < .05), and 90d mortality (51.2% vs 31.3%, P < .05) were higher. As the duration of lymphocytopenia increased, so did the mortality rate in hospital. In addition, the onset time of persistent lymphopenia was not associated with SOFA. But we found that the frequency of persistent lymphopenia during hospitalization was positively associated with SOFA. Conclusion: Septic patients with persistent lymphopenia have higher mortality, worse conditions, increased risk of secondary infection, and poor prognosis regardless of shock.
critical care medicine
What problem does this paper attempt to address?