Open Access

Serum anion gap on admission predicts intensive care unit mortality in patients with aortic aneurysm

  • Authors:
    • Qinchang Chen
    • Qingui Chen
    • Lingling Li
    • Xixia Lin
    • Shih‑I Chang
    • Yonghui Li
    • Zhenluan Tian
    • Wei Liu
    • Kai Huang
  • View Affiliations

  • Published online on: July 2, 2018     https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2018.6391
  • Pages: 1766-1777
  • Copyright: © Chen et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )


Abstract

It has been widely reported that the serum anion gap is significantly associated with mortality in intensive care unit (ICU); however, it remains unknown whether the association is present in aortic aneurysm (AA) patients. The present study aimed to investigate the association between the admission serum anion gap and ICU mortality in AA patients. Data extracted from a publicly accessible clinical database using a modifiable data mining technique were analyzed retrospectively, mainly by employing multivariable logistic regression analysis. The primary study outcome was ICU mortality. A total of 273 patient records were analyzed. The ICU mortality was 8.79% (24/273). The median serum anion gap was significantly higher in non‑survivors [17.50 mEq/l, interquartile range (IQR) 15.75‑22.50 mEq/l] compared with survivors [13.00 mEq/l, IQR 11.00‑15.00 mEq/l, P<0.001]. Multivariate analysis resulted in identification of a clear association between admission serum anion gap and ICU mortality in AA patients [odds ratio (OR) 1.38 per 1 mEq/l increase, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08‑1.76]. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve showed an outstanding discrimination ability in predicting ICU mortality (area under curve 0.8513, 95% CI 0.7698‑0.9328). In conclusion, admission serum anion gap may serve as a strong predictor of ICU mortality for AA patients.

Introduction

Aortic aneurysm (AA), defined as an enlargement of the aorta to greater than 1.5 times normal size (1) is usually asymptotic, but when rupture occurs, this may lead to internal bleeding, shock and mortality, unless treated immediately (2). Although AA is rather rare with an incidence of approximately 10 per 100,000 for thoracic aortic aneurysm (ΤΑΑ) (3) and 55–298 per 100,000 for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) (4), the burden of the disease is heavy and may be underestimated (57). Given the high total mortality estimated at 80–100% for ruptured AA (8,9), the best way to reduce the overall mortality of the disease may be to detect and treat it prior to rupture. In fact, many predictors or predictive models of mortality risk in AA patients have been reported (1014), but further validation is required. Herein, we focused on AA patients in intensive care unit (ICU) and investigated the predictive value of serum anion gap on ICU mortality, a routine clinical indicator which has been reported to be associated with mortality of several diseases (1518). Although a few studies have reported the association between anion gap with ICU mortality (19,20), to the best of our knowledge, no research to date has specially investigated the association in AA patients admitted to ICU. Considering the extremely low incidence of AA, we performed a retrospective analysis on a large publicly accessible clinical database, hoping to clarify the association between anion gap and ICU mortality.

Patients and methods

Database introduction

The retrospective analysis was conducted using data from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care III (MIMIC-III) database (version 1.4) (21), a large and freely-available database comprising deidentified health-related data of patients admitted to ICU of the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center between 2001 and 2012. The database contains information including demographics, laboratory test results, and clinical outcomes. The access of the database was approved by the institutional review boards of both Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Massachusetts Institute of Technology Affiliates.

Study design

Adult patients (age ≥18 years old) with first hospital admission and first ICU admission were considered for inclusion. AA patients were selected according to their primary diagnoses based on ICD-9 codes (4412–4415, and 4419), and patients with a length of ICU stay less than 24 h or a missing value of admission serum anion gap were excluded.

We used the codes from the MIMIC Code Repository (https://github.com/MIT-LCP/mimic-code) (22) to extract data from the database. Variables were extracted or calculated including admission serum anion gap (item ID=50868 in the database, detected within 24 h after ICU admission), severity scores including SOFA (23) and APACHE III (24), sepsis defined by ICD-9 codes (99592 and 78552), sepsis defined by Angus criteria (25) and comorbidities (26) based on ICD-9 codes. For patients >89 years old, date of birth had been shifted to exactly 300 years before by the database to obscure age, therefore this was corrected (age-300+89) prior to analysis. No informed consent was required as the data were anonymized.

Outcomes

ICU mortality was chosen as the primary study outcome before analysis. Hospital mortality, length of ICU stay, and length of hospital stay were also calculated. Although only patients of first hospital admission were included, it is possible for a patient to be transferred from one type of ICU to another. In this case, the primary outcome ICU mortality and length of ICU stay were determined only by the first ICU stay. Apart from statistical description, only the primary outcome was analyzed further.

Statistical analysis

Data are presented as median and interquartile range (IQR) for continuous variables and numbers and percentages for categorical variables. Kruskal Wallis and Chi-square (or Fisher's exact) tests were used to analyze continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Relationship between admission serum anion gap and ICU mortality was explored using the smoothing plot with an adjustment for potential confounders (age, sex, and SOFA were selected before analysis). A two-piecewise linear regression model was applied to examine the threshold effect of admission serum anion gap on ICU mortality according to the smoothing plot. Factors associated with ICU mortality were evaluated by univariate logistic analysis and variables that showed statistically significant association with ICU mortality in the univariate analysis (P<0.05) were included in the multivariable logistic regression model, but variables with missing values >10% were excluded. Considering that there was a certain overlap in the two severity scores and sepsis based on different criteria, we only selected SOFA and sepsis based on ICD-9 codes to be enrolled in the multivariable analysis if the variables were statistically significant in the univariate analysis. If a nonlinear relationship and a threshold effect were found in the previous analysis, then the subjects were stratified according to the threshold level and the logistic analysis was repeated. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed and the area under the ROC curve (AUC) was calculated to evaluate the predictions. Consistency of the results in several subgroups was also explored using logistic regression models. To maximize statistical power and minimize potential bias that may have occurred if variables with missing values >10% were excluded from analyses, missing values of continuous and categorical covariates in outcome analysis were handled using multiple imputation with 5 imputed data sets, and results were pooled according to Rubin's rules (27). A multivariable analysis was also performed after excluding patients with ruptured AA. A P-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Empower(R) (www.empowerstats.com; X&Y solutions, Inc., Boston, MA, USA) and R software, version 3.4.3 (http://www.r-project.org) were used for all statistical analyses.

Results

Population and baseline characteristics

A total of 273 patients were included and analyzed (Fig. 1). The number of missing values for all variables are presented in Table I. As shown in Table II, The median age of the study subjects was 73.16 years (IQR 65.14–80.06 years) and 154 of the 273 cases (56.41%) were male. The median admission serum anion gap was 13.00 mEq/l (IQR 11.00–15.00 mEq/l) with a median SOFA score of 5 (IQR 4–8). Among them, 8 (2.93%) patients were diagnosed as sepsis based on ICD-9 codes and 227 (83.15%) patients required ventilation. The five most common comorbidities were chronic pulmonary disease (28.94%), fluid and electrolyte disorders (27.84%), peripheral vascular disorder (26.01%), coagulopathy (17.22%), and uncomplicated diabetes (15.02%).

Table I.

Numbers of subjects with missing values.

Table I.

Numbers of subjects with missing values.

VariablesNumbers of subjects with specific missing value
Hemoglobin1
Lactate61
Platelet1
PTT11
INR12
PT12
WBC2
Urine output in first day4
Heartrate2
Systolic pressure3
Diastolic pressure3
Respiratory rate2
Temperature23
SpO22

[i] PTT, partial thromboplastin time; INR, international normalised ratio; PT, prothrombin time; WBC, white blood cell.

Table II.

Clinical characteristics of study subjects.

Table II.

Clinical characteristics of study subjects.

ParameterAll (n=273)Survivors (n=249)Non-survivors (n=24)P-value
Age (years)73.16 (65.14–80.06)72.58 (64.59–79.76)77.74 (72.11–82.80)0.009
Sex (male), n (%)154 (56.41%)143 (57.43%)11 (45.83%)0.274
Type of aortic aneurysm 0.002
  Thoracic aneurysm without mention of rupture109 (39.93%)104 (41.77%)5 (20.83%)
  Abdominal aneurysm (ruptured)48 (17.58%)37 (14.86%)11 (45.83%)
  Abdominal aneurysm without mention of rupture116 (42.49%)108 (43.37%)8 (33.33%)
Anion gap (mEq/l)13.00 (11.00–15.00)13.00 (11.00–15.00)17.50 (15.75–22.50)<0.001
ICU mortality24 (8.79%)
Hospital mortality27 (9.89%)3 (1.20%)24 (100.00%)<0.001
ICU length of stay (days)3.23 (1.90–9.22)3.16 (1.81–8.99)10.88 (2.58–15.06)0.008
Hospital length of stay (days)9.32 (6.25–16.92)9.30 (6.39–17.04)10.84 (4.62–16.38)0.317
Severity score
  SOFA5.00 (4.00–8.00)5.00 (3.00–7.00)9.00 (8.00–11.25)<0.001
  APACHE III39.00 (29.00–54.00)38.00 (28.00–50.00)70.00 (52.00–85.75)<0.001
Vital signs
  Heartrate (bpm)80.60 (73.07–88.98)79.86 (72.69–87.77)88.60 (83.54–95.75)0.002
  Systolic pressure (mmHg)113.98 (106.58–124.29)114.80 (106.79–124.01)109.67 (104.60–124.98)0.273
  Diastolic pressure (mmHg)57.68 (52.97–62.38)57.32 (52.60–61.97)59.78 (57.10–65.19)0.036
  Respiratory rate (bpm)17.26 (14.96–19.27)17.02 (14.94–19.21)18.69 (16.13–21.00)0.040
  Temperature (°C)37.64 (37.10–38.10)37.67 (37.18–38.10)37.25 (36.72–37.82)0.041
  SpO2 (%)93.00 (91.00–95.00)93.00 (91.00–95.00)92.00 (86.75–94.00)0.023
Urine output in first day (ml)1,670.00 (981.00–2,580.00)1,730.00 (1,071.50–2,602.50)450.00 (246.25–1,342.00)<0.001
RTT in first day5 (1.83%)2 (0.80%)3 (12.50%)0.005
Ventilation in first day227 (83.15%)205 (82.33%)22 (91.67%)0.390
Sepsis (based on ICD-9 codes)8 (2.93%)4 (1.61%)4 (16.67%)0.003
Sepsis (based on Angus criteria)78 (28.57%)63 (25.30%)15 (62.50%)<0.001
Lab examination
  WBC (K/ul)12.50 (9.70–15.80)12.10 (9.60–15.65)14.75 (12.90–16.92)0.025
  Platelet (K/ul)147.50 (111.88–190.12)151.00 (112.38–192.75)132.00 (106.00–149.88)0.027
  Hemoglobin (g/dl)9.00 (7.80–10.30)9.25 (7.90–10.33)8.20 (6.97–8.80)0.002
  Creatinine (mg/dl)1.10 (0.80–1.60)1.00 (0.80–1.50)1.95 (1.45–2.20)<0.001
  BUN (mg/dl)19.00 (15.00–26.00)18.00 (15.00–25.00)27.50 (21.75–35.75)<0.001
  Glucose (mg/dl)172.00 (140.00–204.00)171.00 (138.00–200.00)215.00 (155.75–316.25)0.005
  Lactate (mmol/l)3.15 (1.98–5.30)2.80 (1.90–4.60)7.00 (5.20–10.80)<0.001
  PTT (sec)35.57 (30.54–42.75)34.80 (30.16–42.21)42.72 (36.30–65.26)0.002
  INR1.30 (1.20–1.50)1.30 (1.16–1.45)1.45 (1.20–1.77)0.064
  PT (sec)14.45 (13.40–15.85)14.40 (13.35–15.64)15.85 (13.45–17.35)0.082
Comorbidities
  Congestive heart failure11 (4.03%)10 (4.02%)1 (4.17%)1.000
  Cardiac arrhythmias12 (4.40%)11 (4.42%)1 (4.17%)1.000
  Valvular disease3 (1.10%)2 (0.80%)1 (4.17%)0.242
  Pulmonary circulation disorder2 (0.73%)2 (0.80%)0 (0.00%)1.000
  Peripheral vascular disorder71 (26.01%)64 (25.70%)7 (29.17%)0.808
  Hypertension23 (8.42%)19 (7.63%)4 (16.67%)0.130
  Paralysis7 (2.56%)6 (2.41%)1 (4.17%)0.479
  Other neurological disease4 (1.47%)2 (0.80%)2 (8.33%)0.040
  Chronic pulmonary disease79 (28.94%)72 (28.92%)7 (29.17%)1.000
  Uncomplicated diabetes41 (15.02%)39 (15.66%)2 (8.33%)0.549
  Complicated diabetes4 (1.47%)4 (1.61%)0 (0.00%)1.000
  Hypothyroidism26 (9.52%)23 (9.24%)3 (12.50%)0.487
  Renal failure31 (11.36%)26 (10.44%)5 (20.83%)0.167
  Liver disease8 (2.93%)6 (2.41%)2 (8.33%)0.150
  Lymphoma3 (1.10%)3 (1.20%)0 (0.00%)1.000
  Metastatic cancer2 (0.73%)2 (0.80%)0 (0.00%)1.000
  Solid tumor4 (1.47%)4 (1.61%)0 (0.00%)1.000
  Rheumatoid arthritis8 (2.93%)7 (2.81%)1 (4.17%)0.526
  Coagulopathy47 (17.22%)39 (15.66%)8 (33.33%)0.043
  Obesity21 (7.69%)21 (8.43%)0 (0.00%)0.233
  Weight loss7 (2.56%)7 (2.81%)0 (0.00%)1.000
  Fluid and electrolyte disorders76 (27.84%)67 (26.91%)9 (37.50%)0.339
  Blood loss anemia5 (1.83%)4 (1.61%)1 (4.17%)0.371
  Deficiency anemias35 (12.82%)34 (13.65%)1 (4.17%)0.333
  Alcohol abuse8 (2.93%)8 (3.21%)0 (0.00%)1.000
  Psychoses4 (1.47%)3 (1.20%)1 (4.17%)0.309
  Depression12 (4.40%)12 (4.82%)0 (0.00%)0.608

[i] Data are expressed as median (interquartile range) or n (%). Kruskal Wallis and Chi-square (or Fisher's exact) tests were used to compare continuous and categorical variables of the two groups, respectively. Statistical significance (P<0.05) is shown in bold. ICU, intensive care unit; SOFA, Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment; APACHE III, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III; RTT, renal replacement therapy; ICD-9, International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision; WBC, white blood cell; BUN, blood urea nitrogen; PTT, partial thromboplastin time; INR, international normalised ratio; PT, prothrombin time.

Survival status of the population

The ICU mortality was 8.79% with 24 non-survivors and 249 survivors and the hospital mortality was 9.89% (27/273). The median length of ICU stay and hospital stay was 3.23 (IQR 1.90–9.22) and 9.32 (IQR 6.25–16.92) days, respectively. As shown in Table II, non-survivors had significantly higher SOFA and APACHE (P<0.001). Furthermore, they were more likely to suffer from sepsis and require renal replacement therapy in first day. A significantly lower admission serum anion gap was observed in survivors (P<0.001).

Association between serum anion gap on admission and ICU mortality

Further analysis indicated that admission serum anion gap increased with increased ICU mortality when patients were stratified according to serum anion gap levels on admission (Table III), but no significant nonlinear relationship or threshold effect between them were observed (Fig. 2 and Table IV). After adjustment for potential confounders according to the univariate analysis (presented in Table V), admission serum anion gap was found to be significantly associated with ICU mortality [odds ratio (OR) 1.38 per 1 mEq/l increase, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.08–1.76; P=0.0088] (Table VI). As shown in Fig. 3, AUC of serum anion gap for discrimination of survivors and non-survivors was 0.8513 (95% CI, 0.7698–0.9328), which suggested its potentially efficient predictive role in ICU mortality for AA patients.

Table III.

Clinical characteristics of study subjects stratified by anion gap levels on ICU admission.

Table III.

Clinical characteristics of study subjects stratified by anion gap levels on ICU admission.

ParameterTertile 1 (n=81)Tertile 2 (n=61)Tertile 3 (n=131)P-value
Age (years)69.77 (60.37–79.58)69.67 (63.65–78.14)76.14 (70.24–82.05)<0.001
Sex (male), n(%)39 (48.15%)35 (57.38%)80 (61.07%)0.180
Type of aortic aneurysm <0.001
  Thoracic aneurysm without mention of rupture45 (55.56%)31 (50.82%)33 (25.19%)
  Abdominal aneurysm (ruptured)5 (6.17%)7 (11.48%)36 (27.48%)
  Abdominal aneurysm without mention of rupture31 (38.27%)23 (37.70%)62 (47.33%)
Anion Gap (mEq/l)10.00 (9.00–11.00)13.00 (12.00–13.00)16.00 (14.00–17.50)<0.001
ICU mortality1 (1.23%)2 (3.28%)21 (16.03%)<0.001
Hospital mortality2 (2.47%)3 (4.92%)22 (16.79%)<0.001
ICU length of stay (days)2.27 (1.33–4.10)3.11 (1.44–8.55)5.75 (2.20–12.60)<0.001
Hospital length of stay (days)7.84 (5.46–12.28)9.27 (6.26–14.63)12.22 (6.54–20.45)0.002
Severity score
  SOFA5.00 (3.00–6.00)4.00 (3.00–7.00)6.00 (4.50–9.00)<0.001
  APACHE III33.00 (24.00–44.00)36.00 (27.00–46.00)49.00 (36.00–64.00)<0.001
Vital signs
  Heartrate (bpm)79.79 (72.67–86.79)79.86 (73.07–87.19)81.90 (73.75–91.75)0.438
  Systolic pressure (mmHg)109.73 (105.03–118.55)117.89 (108.29–124.83)117.79 (107.62–128.83)0.002
  Diastolic pressure (mmHg)56.74 (52.82–61.74)57.59 (53.28–62.43)58.61 (53.25–63.48)0.508
  Respiratory rate (bpm)16.36 (14.63–18.54)17.31 (15.22–18.58)18.08 (15.21–19.91)0.029
  Temperature (°C)37.82 (37.40–38.18)37.60 (37.03–38.00)37.60 (37.03–38.06)0.115
  SpO2 (%)93.00 (91.00–95.00)93.00 (91.00–95.00)93.00 (91.00–95.00)0.357
Urine output in first day (ml)2,200.00 (1,605.00–2,730.00)1,670.00 (1,087.00–2,515.00)1,172.00 (650.00–2,229.50)<0.001
RTT in first day0 (0.00%)0 (0.00%)5 (3.82%)0.085
Ventilation in first day71 (87.65%)53 (86.89%)103 (78.63%)0.158
Sepsis (based on ICD-9 codes)2 (2.47%)0 (0.00%)6 (4.58%)0.257
Sepsis (based on Angus criteria)11 (13.58%)15 (24.59%)52 (39.69%)<0.001
Lab examination
  WBC (K/ul)13.00 (9.70–15.60)11.90 (10.10–13.83)12.10 (9.22–16.67)0.647
  Platelet (K/ul)153.50 (121.00–190.00)151.00 (108.00–184.00)137.50 (108.88–194.00)0.747
  Hemoglobin (g/dl)8.90 (7.90–10.00)9.30 (7.70–10.30)9.25 (7.82–10.28)0.612
  Creatinine (mg/dl)0.80 (0.70–1.10)1.00 (0.80–1.30)1.40 (1.00–1.95)<0.001
  BUN (mg/dl)16.00 (13.00–19.00)17.00 (15.00–21.00)24.00 (18.00–30.00)<0.001
  Glucose (mg/dl)160.00 (138.00–180.00)162.00 (139.00–191.00)185.00 (153.00–236.00)<0.001
  Lactate (mmol/l)2.50 (2.00–3.90)3.15 (2.03–4.85)3.60 (1.95–6.65)0.034
  PTT (sec)35.42 (31.22–41.99)34.55 (30.40–41.95)36.80 (30.57–44.38)0.702
  INR1.30 (1.20–1.45)1.30 (1.15–1.40)1.30 (1.20–1.60)0.371
  PT (sec)14.50 (13.62–15.53)14.35 (13.20–15.22)14.55 (13.26–16.04)0.596

[i] Data are expressed as median (interquartile range) or n (%). Kruskal Wallis and Chi-square (or Fisher's exact) tests were used to analyze continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Statistical significance (P<0.05) is shown in bold. ICU, intensive care unit; SOFA, Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment; APACHE III, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III; RTT, renal replacement therapy; ICD-9, International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision; WBC, white blood cell; BUN, blood urea nitrogen; PTT, partial thromboplastin time; INR, international normalised ratio; PT, prothrombin time.

Table IV.

Threshold effect analysis of anion gap on ICU mortality using piecewise linear regression.

Table IV.

Threshold effect analysis of anion gap on ICU mortality using piecewise linear regression.

Inflection point of anion gap on ICU mortality (mEq/l)β (95% CI)∆β (95% CI)P-valueP for ∆β
<171.51 (1.12, 2.04) 0.0074
>171.14 (0.97, 1.34) 0.1148
0.76 (0.51–1.12) 0.1580

[i] Adjusted for age, SOFA, and sex. ICU, intensive care unit; CI, confidence interval; SOFA, Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment.

Table V.

Univariate analysis of intensive care unit mortality.

Table V.

Univariate analysis of intensive care unit mortality.

VariableOR (95% CI)P-value
Age1.07 (1.01, 1.12)0.0116
Sex
  Male1.0
  Female1.59 (0.69, 3.70)0.2772
Type of aortic aneurysm
  Thoracic aneurysm without mention of rupture1.0
  Abdominal aneurysm (ruptured)6.18 (2.01, 18.98)0.0015
  Abdominal aneurysm without mention of rupture1.54 (0.49, 4.86)0.4610
Anion Gap (mEq/l)1.36 (1.22, 1.52)<0.0001
Severity score
  SOFA1.46 (1.26, 1.69)<0.0001
  APSIII1.05 (1.03, 1.07)<0.0001
Vital signs
  Heartrate (bpm)1.07 (1.03, 1.10)0.0004
  Systolic pressure (mmHg)0.98 (0.95, 1.02)0.3266
  Diastolic pressure (mmHg)1.04 (0.99, 1.10)0.1182
  Respiratory rate (bpm)1.15 (1.02, 1.29)0.0183
  Temperature (°C)0.59 (0.32, 1.09)0.0909
  SpO2 (%)0.97 (0.93, 1.01)0.0993
Urine output in first day (ml)1.00 (1.00, 1.00)0.0014
RTT in first day
  No1.0
  Yes17.64 (2.79, 111.52)0.0023
Ventilation in first day
  No1.0
  Yes2.36 (0.54, 10.41)0.2564
Sepsis (based on ICD-9 codes)
  No1.0
  Yes12.25 (2.85, 52.69)0.0008
Sepsis (based on Angus criteria)
  No1.0
  Yes4.92 (2.05, 11.8)0.0004
Lab examination
  White blood cell (K/ul)1.05 (0.98, 1.13)0.1357

Table VI.

Multivariate logistic regression for effects of anion gap on intensive care unit mortality.

Table VI.

Multivariate logistic regression for effects of anion gap on intensive care unit mortality.

VariableOdds ratio95% confidence intervalP-value
Non-adjusted1.361.22–1.52<0.0001
Model I1.261.11–1.420.0003
Model II1.381.08–1.760.0088

[i] Model I, adjusted for age, sex, and SOFA. Model II, adjusted for type of aortic aneurysm, age, SOFA, blood urea nitrogen, heartrate, international normalised ratio, platelet, prothrombin time, PTT, respiratory rate, RTT in first day, urine output in first day, coagulopathy, hemoglobin, other neurological disease, glucose, sepsis (based on ICD-9 codes), and creatinine. Statistical significance (P<0.05) is shown in bold. SOFA, Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment; PTT, partial thromboplastin time; RTT, renal replacement therapy; ICD-9, International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision.

Subgroup analysis

The results of the stratified and interaction analyses of the association between admission serum anion gap and ICU mortality are presented in Fig. 4 and Table VII. The association appeared to be similar when compared with the results of the multivariable analysis shown in Table VI. A significant interaction (P<0.05) was found among subgroups of tertile of hemoglobin.

Table VII.

Subgroup analysis of associations between anion gap and intensive care unit mortality.

Table VII.

Subgroup analysis of associations between anion gap and intensive care unit mortality.

VariablenOR95% CI Low95% CI HighP-valueP-value (interaction)
Type of aortic aneurysm 0.1361
  Thoracic aneurysm without mention of rupture1091.220.981.530.0781
  Abdominal aneurysm (ruptured)481.251.001.570.0464
  Abdominal aneurysm without mention of rupture1162.021.193.420.0087
Sepsis (based on Angus criteria) 0.8300
  No1951.291.071.550.0069
  Yes781.251.031.520.0216
Coagulopathy 0.2672
  No2261.391.151.670.0006
  Yes471.190.981.440.0814
Hemoglobin 0.0134
  Low911.130.991.280.0727
  Middle861.941.203.130.0065
  High951.531.002.350.0522
Fluid and electrolyte disorders 0.9546
  No1971.271.091.490.0022
  Yes761.261.041.540.0197

[i] Adjusted for: Age, sex and SOFA. Statistical significance (P<0.05) is shown in bold. OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Sensitive analysis

The imputation of missing variables did not affect the results (Table VIII), which were virtually unchanged (<10%) after excluding ruptured AA patients (Table IX and X).

Table IX.

Univariate analysis of ICU mortality after excluding patients with ruptured aortic aneurysm.

Table IX.

Univariate analysis of ICU mortality after excluding patients with ruptured aortic aneurysm.

VariableOR (95% CI)P-value
Age1.07 (1.00, 1.14)0.0523
Sex
  Male1.0
  Female3.36 (1.00, 11.27)0.0494
Type of aortic aneurysm
  Thoracic aneurysm without mention of rupture1.0
  Abdominal aneurysm without mention of rupture1.54 (0.49, 4.86)0.4610
Anion gap (mEq/l)1.44 (1.19, 1.75)0.0002
Severity score
  SOFA1.38 (1.16, 1.65)0.0002
  APSIII1.05 (1.02, 1.08)0.0003
Vital signs
  Heartrate (bpm)1.06 (1.01, 1.10)0.0161
  Systolic pressure (mmHg)0.98 (0.94, 1.03)0.4983
  Diastolic pressure (mmHg)1.02 (0.95, 1.09)0.5753
  Respiratory rate (bpm)1.12 (0.96, 1.31)0.1427
  Temperature (°C)0.52 (0.23, 1.18)0.1193
  SpO2 (%)0.97 (0.93, 1.01)0.1316
Urine output in first day (ml)1.00 (1.00, 1.00)0.1029
RTT in first day
  No1.0
  Yes8.75 (0.74, 103.44)0.0852
Ventilation in first day
  No1.0
  Yes2.79 (0.35, 22.09)0.3309
Sepsis (based on ICD-9 codes)
  No1.0
  Yes23.11 (4.96, 107.61)0.0001
Sepsis (based on angus criteria)
  No1.0
  Yes5.62 (1.75, 17.98)0.0036
Lab examination
  WBC (K/ul)1.04 (0.94, 1.14)0.4594
  Platelet (K/ul)0.99 (0.98, 1.00)0.0758
  Hemoglobin (g/dl)0.70 (0.50, 0.98)0.0398
  Creatinine (mg/dl)1.66 (1.05, 2.64)0.0310
  BUN (mg/dl)1.06 (1.01, 1.10)0.0106
  Glucose (mg/dl)1.01 (1.00, 1.01)0.0585
  Lactate (mmol/l)1.53 (1.21, 1.93)0.0004
  PTT (sec)1.02 (0.99, 1.05)0.1386
  INR1.43 (0.26, 7.73)0.6795
  PT (sec)0.95 (0.72, 1.27)0.7441
Comorbidities
  Congestive heart failure
    No1.0
    Yes2.44 (0.28, 21.47)0.4213
  Cardiac arrhythmias
    No1.0
    Yes2.12 (0.25, 18.41)0.4938
  Valvular disease
    No1.0
    Yes8.75 (0.74, 103.44)0.0852
  Pulmonary circulation disorder
    No1.0
    Yes0.00 (0.00, Inf)0.9935
  Peripheral vascular disorder
    No1.0
    Yes1.92 (0.60, 6.14)0.2693
  Hypertension
    No1.0
    Yes3.67 (0.92, 14.71)0.0659
  Paralysis
    No1.0
    Yes0.00 (0.00, Inf)0.9908
  Other neurological disease
    No1.0
    Yes17.58 (1.04, 298.62)0.0473
  Chronic pulmonary disease
    No1.0
    Yes1.51 (0.48, 4.80)0.4832
  Uncomplicated diabetes
    No1.0
    Yes0.45 (0.06, 3.59)0.4529
  Complicated diabetes
    No1.0
    Yes0.00 (0.00, Inf)0.9908
  Hypothyroidism
    No1.0
    Yes1.85 (0.38, 8.95)0.4462
  Renal failure
    No1.0
    Yes2.59 (0.66, 10.13)0.1712
  Liver disease
    No1.0
    Yes3.45 (0.37, 31.91)0.2752
  Lymphoma
    No1.0
    Yes0.00 (0.00, Inf)0.9921
  Metastatic cancer
    No1.0
    Yes0.00 (0.00, Inf)0.9930
  Solid tumor
    No1.0
    Yes0.00 (0.00, Inf)0.9908
  Rheumatoid arthritis
    No1.0
    Yes2.44 (0.28, 21.47)0.4213
  Coagulopathy
    No1.0
    Yes2.80 (0.81, 9.7)0.1034
  Obesity
    No1.0
    Yes0.00 (0.00, Inf)0.9913
  Weight loss
    No1.0
    Yes0.00 (0.00, Inf)0.9921
  Fluid and electrolyte disorders
    No1.0
    Yes0.97 (0.26, 3.67)0.9666
  Blood loss anemia
    No1.0
    Yes0.00 (0.00, Inf)0.9921
  Deficiency anemias
    No1.0
    Yes0.00 (0.00, Inf)0.9895
  Alcohol abuse
    No1.0
    Yes0.00 (0.00, Inf)0.9916
  Psychoses
    No1.0
    Yes8.75 (0.74, 103.44)0.0852
  Depression
    No1.0
    Yes0.00 (0.00, Inf)0.9901

[i] Statistical significance (P<0.05) is shown in bold. ICU, intensive care unit; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; SOFA, Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment; APACHE III, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III; RTT, renal replacement therapy; ICD-9, International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision; WBC, white blood cell; BUN, blood urea nitrogen; PTT, partial thromboplastin time; INR, international normalised ratio; PT, prothrombin time.

Table X.

Multivariate logistic regression for effects of anion gap on ICU mortality after excluding patients with ruptured aortic aneurysm.

Table X.

Multivariate logistic regression for effects of anion gap on ICU mortality after excluding patients with ruptured aortic aneurysm.

VariableOR95% CIP-value
Non-adjusted1.441.19–1.750.0002
Model I1.331.08–1.620.0064
Model II1.461.09–1.970.0112

[i] Model I, adjusted for age, sex, and SOFA. Model II, adjusted for sex, SOFA, BUN, heartrate, hemoglobin, sepsis (based on ICD-9 codes), other neurological disease, and creatinine. Statistical significance (P<0.05) is shown in bold. ICU, intensive care unit; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Discussion

The present study examined for the first time the predictive value of serum anion gap on ICU mortality in AA patients, and the results suggested that the risk of ICU mortality may increase by 38% per 1 mEq/l increase in admission serum anion gap.

Many studies have explored the relationship between anion gap and clinical outcomes of critically ill patients. In fact, as early as 1987, Shackleton et al (14) noted that an elevation of the unmeasured anion gap was significantly and independently associated with mortality for ruptured AAA patients. Grist and Thomas (28) reported that anion gap is a risk factor in long-term extracorporeal support. Kim et al (19) found a similar association in a pediatric ICU. However, Rocktaeschel et al (29) concluded that unmeasured anions, irrespective of the calculated methods, were not practical predictors of hospital mortality in critically ill patients. In addition, the use of anion gap for risk stratification in critically ill patients is not supported for the significant statistical heterogeneity according to a recent systematic review and meta-analysis conducted by Glasmacher and Stones (20). Considering the urgent need for a practical and useful predictive model of AA (30), which is notorious for high mortality, it is essential to keep exploring predictors of clinical outcomes for AA patients. As anion gap is routinely determined in all patients admitted to ICU and there is no extra cost for this potential beneficial test, a study that specifically focused on AA patients was necessary, given the extremely low incidence of AA. The results of our study validated the association between serum anion gap and ICU mortality, which was in accordance with most previous studies (20), suggesting that serum anion gap may serve as a mortality predictor for AA patients in ICU. The AUC of anion gap was similar to the SOFA and APACHE III values in our study. As anion gap is a traditional tool used to assess acid-base status, most previous studies usually attribute the association to acid-base disorders, which contribute significantly to morbidity and mortality in critically ill patients (31). Taylor et al (32) reported that anion gap is independently associated with higher blood pressure, which is associated with negative outcomes for AA patients (33), thus the underlying mechanism requires further research.

Several limitations of our study should be noted. First, although hypoalbuminemia could affect its interpretation, anion gap was not corrected for serum albumin level in our study as most subjects analyzed lacked albumin records. Second, although attempts were taken to control bias and confounders, many other known or unknown factors may still exist and have contributed to bias. For example, although we took into consideration fluid and electrolyte disorders (identified by ICD-9 codes) as a potential confounder, the quantities and types of intravenous infusion fluids before ICU admission may have affected the value of serum anion gap on ICU admission. Other potential confounders including smoking status, diameters of the aorta, and surgical procedures were not considered in the study. In addition, given the observational nature of our study, it is not possible to conclude that the relationship between admission serum anion gap and ICU mortality reflects cause and effect.

In summary, the present retrospective observational study provided confirmation of the association between serum anion gap on admission and ICU mortality of AA patients. However, further prospective clinical studies are still required, particularly to explore the potential value of anion gap in improving various predictive models for ICU outcomes.

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding

This work was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province China (grant number 2015A030310346); the Special Funds for the Cultivation of Guangdong College Students' Scientific and Technological Innovation (‘Climbing Program’ Special Funds).

Availability of data and materials

The datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are available in the PhysioBank repository, https://mimic.physionet.org/.

Authors' contributions

KH, QCC, and QGC designed the study. QCC, QGC, LL, XL, and SIC performed data extraction and the data were analyzed by QCC, QGC, YL, ZT, and WL. The manuscript draft was prepared by LL and revised by KH, QCC and QGC. All authors approved the final manuscript.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The access of the database was approved by the institutional review boards of both Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Massachusetts Institute of Technology Affiliates. No informed consent was required because the data are anonymized.

Patient consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Glossary

Abbreviations

Abbreviations:

ICU

intensive care unit

AA

aortic aneurysm

IQR

interquartile range

OR

odds ratio

CI

confidence interval

TAA

thoracic aortic aneurysm

AAA

abdominal aortic aneurysm

MIMIC-III

Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care III

ROC

receiver operating characteristic

AUC

area under the ROC curve

SOFA

Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment

APACHE III

Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III

ICD-9

International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision

References

1 

Johnston KW, Rutherford RB, Tilson MD, Shah DM, Hollier L and Stanley JC: Suggested standards for reporting on arterial aneurysms. Subcommittee on reporting standards for arterial aneurysms, Ad Hoc Committee on Reporting Standards, Society for Vascular Surgery and North American Chapter, International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery. J Vasc Surg. 13:452–458. 1991. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

2 

Isselbacher EM: Thoracic and abdominal aortic aneurysms. Circulation. 111:816–828. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

3 

Elefteriades JA, Sang A, Kuzmik G and Hornick M: Guilt by association: Paradigm for detecting a silent killer (thoracic aortic aneurysm). Open Heart. 2:e0001692015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

4 

Howard DP, Banerjee A, Fairhead JF, Handa A, Silver LE and Rothwell PM: Oxford Vascular Study: Age-specific incidence, risk factors and outcome of acute abdominal aortic aneurysms in a defined population. Br J Surg. 102:907–915. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

5 

Stuntz M: Modeling the burden of abdominal aortic aneurysm in the USA in 2013. Cardiology. 135:127–131. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

6 

Nair N, Shaw C, Sarfati D and Stanley J: Abdominal aortic aneurysm disease in New Zealand: Epidemiology and burden between 2002 and 2006. N Z Med J. 125:10–20. 2012.PubMed/NCBI

7 

Robertson EN and Jeremy RW: Abstract 10144: Uncovering the burden of familial thoracic aortic aneurysm disease. Circulation. 128:A101442013.

8 

Johansson G, Markström U and Swedenborg J: Ruptured thoracic aortic aneurysms: A study of incidence and mortality rates. J Vasc Surg. 21:985–988. 1995. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

9 

Soden PA and Schermerhorn ML: The epidemiology of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA)Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: The definitive manual. Starnes BW, Mehta M and Veith FJ: Cham: Springer International Publishing; pp. 15–48. 2017, View Article : Google Scholar

10 

Polzer S and Gasser TC: Biomechanical rupture risk assessment of abdominal aortic aneurysms based on a novel probabilistic rupture risk index. J R Soc Interface. 12:201508522015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

11 

Tambyraja A, Murie J and Chalmers R: Predictors of outcome after abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture: Edinburgh ruptured aneurysm score. World J Surg. 31:2243–2247. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

12 

Marković M, Davidović L, Maksimović Z, Kostić D, Cinara I, Cvetković S, Sindjelic R, Seferović PM and Ristić AD: Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. Predictors of survival in 229 consecutive surgical patients. Herz. 29:123–129. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

13 

Gutiérrez-Morlote J, Llorca J, de Elejalde Ibáñez E, Lobato A and José San JM: Predictors of mortality in patients undergoing surgery for ruptured aortic aneurysm. Vasa. 31:265–268. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

14 

Shackleton CR, Schechter MT, Bianco R and Hildebrand HD: Preoperative predictors of mortality risk in ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Vasc Surg. 6:583–589. 1987. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

15 

Lee SW, Kim S, Na KY, Cha RH, Kang SW, Park CW, Cha DR, Kim SG, Yoon SA, Han SY, et al: Serum anion gap predicts all-cause mortality in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease: A retrospective analysis of a randomized controlled study. PLoS One. 11:e01563812016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

16 

Leskovan JJ, Justiniano CF, Bach JA, Cook CH, Lindsey DE, Eiferman DS, Papadimos TJ, Steinberg SM, Bergese SD, Stawicki SP and Evans DC: Anion gap as a predictor of trauma outcomes in the older trauma population: Correlations with injury severity and mortality. Am Surg. 79:1203–1206. 2013.PubMed/NCBI

17 

Honore PM, Joannes-Boyau O and Boer W: Strong ion gap and outcome after cardiac arrest: Another nail in the coffin of traditional acid-base quantification. Intensive Care Med. 35:189–191. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

18 

Sahu A, Cooper HA and Panza JA: The initial anion gap is a predictor of mortality in acute myocardial infarction. Coron Artery Dis. 17:409–412. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

19 

Kim MJ, Kim YH, Sol IS, Kim SY, Kim JD, Kim HY, Kim KW, Sohn MH and Kim KE: Serum anion gap at admission as a predictor of mortality in the pediatric intensive care unit. Sci Rep. 7:14562017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

20 

Glasmacher SA and Stones W: Anion gap as a prognostic tool for risk stratification in critically ill patients-a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Anesthesiol. 16:682016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

21 

Johnson AE, Pollard TJ, Shen L, Lehman LW, Feng M, Ghassemi M, Moody B, Szolovits P, Celi LA and Mark RG: MIMIC-III, a freely accessible critical care database. Sci Data. 3:1600352016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

22 

Johnson AE, Stone DJ, Celi LA and Pollard TJ: The MIMIC Code Repository: Enabling reproducibility in critical care research. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 25:32–39. 2018. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

23 

Vincent JL, Moreno R, Takala J, Willatts S, De Mendonça A, Bruining H, Reinhart CK, Suter PM and Thijs LG: The SOFA (Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment) score to describe organ dysfunction/failure. On behalf of the Working Group on Sepsis-Related Problems of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Intensive Care Med. 22:707–710. 1996. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

24 

Knaus WA, Wagner DP, Draper EA, Zimmerman JE, Bergner M, Bastos PG, Sirio CA, Murphy DJ, Lotring T, Damiano A, et al: The APACHE III prognostic system. Risk prediction of hospital mortality for critically ill hospitalized adults. Chest. 100:1619–1636. 1991. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

25 

Angus DC, Linde-Zwirble WT, Lidicker J, Clermont G, Carcillo J and Pinsky MR: Epidemiology of severe sepsis in the United States: Analysis of incidence, outcome, and associated costs of care. Crit Care Med. 29:1303–1310. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

26 

Steiner C, Elixhauser A and Schnaier J: The healthcare cost and utilization project: An overview. Eff Clin Pract. 5:143–151. 2002.PubMed/NCBI

27 

Donders AR, van der Heijden GJ, Stijnen T and Moons KG: Review: A gentle introduction to imputation of missing values. J Clin Epidemiol. 59:1087–1091. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

28 

Grist G and Thomas D: Blood anion gaps and venoarterial carbon dioxide gradients as risk factors in long-term extracorporeal support. J Extra Corpor Technol. 29:6–10. 1997.PubMed/NCBI

29 

Rocktaeschel J, Morimatsu H, Uchino S and Bellomo R: Unmeasured anions in critically ill patients: Can they predict mortality? Crit Care Med. 31:2131–2136. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

30 

Thompson PC, Dalman RL, Harris EJ, Chandra V, Lee JT and Mell MW: Predictive models for mortality after ruptured aortic aneurysm repair do not predict futility and are not useful for clinical decision making. J Vasc Surg. 64:1617–1622. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

31 

Al-Jaghbeer M and Kellum JA: Acid-base disturbances in intensive care patients: Etiology, pathophysiology and treatment. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 30:1104–1111. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

32 

Taylor EN, Forman JP and Farwell WR: Serum anion gap and blood pressure in the national health and nutrition examination survey. Hypertension. 50:320–324. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

33 

Kent KC, Zwolak RM, Egorova NN, Riles TS, Manganaro A, Moskowitz AJ, Gelijns AC and Greco G: Analysis of risk factors for abdominal aortic aneurysm in a cohort of more than 3 million individuals. J Vasc Surg. 52:539–548. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

Related Articles

Journal Cover

September-2018
Volume 16 Issue 3

Print ISSN: 1792-0981
Online ISSN:1792-1015

Sign up for eToc alerts

Recommend to Library

Copy and paste a formatted citation
x
Spandidos Publications style
Chen Q, Chen Q, Li L, Lin X, Chang SI, Li Y, Tian Z, Liu W and Huang K: Serum anion gap on admission predicts intensive care unit mortality in patients with aortic aneurysm. Exp Ther Med 16: 1766-1777, 2018
APA
Chen, Q., Chen, Q., Li, L., Lin, X., Chang, S., Li, Y. ... Huang, K. (2018). Serum anion gap on admission predicts intensive care unit mortality in patients with aortic aneurysm. Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine, 16, 1766-1777. https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2018.6391
MLA
Chen, Q., Chen, Q., Li, L., Lin, X., Chang, S., Li, Y., Tian, Z., Liu, W., Huang, K."Serum anion gap on admission predicts intensive care unit mortality in patients with aortic aneurysm". Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine 16.3 (2018): 1766-1777.
Chicago
Chen, Q., Chen, Q., Li, L., Lin, X., Chang, S., Li, Y., Tian, Z., Liu, W., Huang, K."Serum anion gap on admission predicts intensive care unit mortality in patients with aortic aneurysm". Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine 16, no. 3 (2018): 1766-1777. https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2018.6391