Articles Vol. 67 No. CĐ2-NCKH 05/03/2026

REVIEW SOME CLINICAL AND PARACLINICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SEPTIC SHOCK PATIENTS AT NGHE AN FRIENDSHIP GENERAL HOSPITAL IN THE PERIOD 2023-2024

Dau Giang Son1,2,3,4, Nguyen Kim Thu2,4,5,6, Que Anh Tram2,4,5,6
1 Intensive Care Unit, Nghe An Friendship General Hospital
2 Hanoi Medical University
3 Khoa Hồi sức tích cực, Bệnh viện Hữu nghị Đa khoa Nghệ An
4 Bộ môn Truyền nhiễm, Trường Đại học Y Hà Nội
5 National Hospital for Tropical Diseases
6 Bệnh viện Bệnh nhiệt đới Trung ương
DOI: 10.52163/yhc.v67iCD2.4470
24 Views
11 Downloads
Keywords
Septic shock, sepsis, SOFA score.
Abstract

Objective: To evaluate some clinical and paraclinical characteristics of septic shock patients at Nghe An Friendship General Hospital in the period of 2023-2024.

Method: A cross-sectional description study, data was collected on 103 patients diagnosed with septic shock at the Intensive Care Unit, Nghe An General Hospital from January 2023 to June 2024.

Results: Of the 103 patients, men accounted for the majority (64.1%), the average age was 69.36 ± 12.54, the common age was over 60 years old with 78.6%; the common underlying diseases were hypertension (35%), diabetes (19.4%). The most common primary infection was respiratory with 47.6%, common symptoms were fever (93.2%), impaired consciousness (71%), leukocytosis (63.1%), increased hs-CRP with average concentration 146.2 ± 58.3 and pro-calcitonin 37.38 ± 45.4. Patients were in relatively severe condition with an average SOFA score of 8.78 ± 3.7.

Conclusion: Patients with septic shock were hospitalized in relatively severe condition with a relatively high average SOFA score and were often found in elderly men with underlying diseases such as diabetes, cardiovascular disease with the common primary infection being respiratory; common symptoms were fever, leukocytosis and increased inflammatory markers.

References
[1]
Sakr Y, Jaschinski U et al. Sepsis in intensive care unit patients: worldwide data from the Intensive Care over Nations audit. Intensive Care Med, 2015, 41 (2): 254-70. doi:10.1007/s00134-014-3717-8. Google Scholar
[2]
Singer M, Deutschman C.S et al. The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA, 2016, 315 (8): 801-10. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.0287. Google Scholar
[3]
Bùi Thị Hương Giang, Đoàn Duy Thành, Nguyễn Tú Anh. Một số yếu tố tiên lượng tử vong tại ngày thứ 28 trên bệnh nhân sốc nhiễm khuẩn. Tạp chí Y học Việt Nam, 2024, 535 (1): 99-103. doi: 10.51298/vmj.v535i1.8356. Google Scholar
[4]
Artero A, Zaragoza R et al. Epidemiology of severe sepsis and septic shock: a multicenter prospective observational study in Spain. Ann Intensive Care, 2016, 6 (1): 51. doi: 10.1186/s13613-016-0153-5. Google Scholar
[5]
Đào Xuân Phương, Bùi Thị Hương Giang. Đánh giá kết quả áp dụng gói điều trị nhiễm khuẩn và sốc nhiễm khuẩn trong giờ đầu tại Khoa Hồi sức tích cực, Bệnh viện Bạch Mai. Tạp chí Y học Việt Nam, 2021, 509 (1): 335-339. doi: 10.51298/vmj.v509i1.1767. Google Scholar
[6]
Vincent J.L, Sakr Y et al. Prevalence and outcomes of infection among patients in intensive care units in 2017. JAMA, 2020, 323 (15): 1478-87. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.2717. Google Scholar
[7]
Bhatti J.M, Raza S.A et al. Antibiotic choices among healthcare professionals for enterococcal bacteremia with patterns of resistance and risk factors of mortality, in settings of poor antibiotic stewardship program - a five-year retrospective cohort study. BMC Infect Dis., 2023, 23 (1): 514. doi: 10.1186/s12879-023-08498-0. Google Scholar
[8]
Vũ Đình Phú, Thân Mạnh Hùng. Đặc điểm lâm sàng, cận lâm sàng và căn nguyên gây sốc nhiễm khuẩn tại Bệnh viện Bệnh nhiệt đới Trung ương. Tạp chí Y học Việt Nam, 2024, 535 (1): 96-99. doi: 10.51298/vmj.v535i1.8355. Google Scholar
[9]
Rhodes A, Evans L.E et al. Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock: 2016. Intensive Care Med, 2017, 43 (3): 304-77. doi: 10.1007/s00134-017-4683-6. Google Scholar
[10]
Filho R.R et al. Blood lactate levels cutoff and mortality prediction in sepsis-time for a reappraisal? A retrospective cohort study. Shock, 2016, 46 (5): 480-485. doi: 10.1097/SHK.0000000000000667. Google Scholar
[11]
Koozi H, Lengquist M, Frigyesi A. C-reactive protein as a prognostic factor in intensive care admissions for sepsis: a Swedish multicenter study. J Crit Care, 2020, 56: 73-79. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2019.12.009. Google Scholar
[12]
Phạm Thị Ngọc Thảo. Nghiên cứu lâm sàng, cận lâm sàng và giá trị tiên lượng của một số cytokine trên bệnh nhân nhiễm khuẩn huyết nặng. Luận án tiến sĩ y học, Đại học Y Dược thành phố Hồ Chí Minh, 2013 Google Scholar