Search

Inflammatory markers have a wide range of predictive values in the prognosis of non-small lung cancer (NSCLC). Poor nutritional status usually means a poor prognosis in patients with NSCLC, which is widely recognized by oncologists and nutritionists. Serum albumin has a certain value in evaluating the prognosis of patients. Several inflammatory albumin-related markers have been proposed, but they have not been widely used in predicting the prognosis of NSCLC in clinical practice. We aim to systematically review the published clinical evidence of albumin-related inflammatory markers in predicting the prognosis of NSCLC and to describe their progress and value. The results showed that the markers included in the review could be prognostic indicators in patients with NSCLC. However, we found that the cut-off value of albumin-related inflammatory markers with quantitative nature was very chaotic and needed to be defined by recognized standards. We summarized and compared the advantages and disadvantages of these markers, but a prospective cohort study with long-term follow-up after adjustment for important confounders is still necessary. Whether the results and conclusions could be directly applied in clinical practice needs to be identified and evaluated. There is an urgent need to classify and standardize the albumin-related inflammatory markers that play an important role in the prognosis of NSCLC, which is the key to ensuring the transformation from clinical study to clinical application. Albumin-related inflammatory markers could be prognostic indicators in non-small cell lung cancer. The classification and standardization of albumin-related inflammatory markers guarantee the transformation from clinical study to clinical application. Future prospective studies of albumin-related inflammatory markers excluding confounding factors are very necessary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To observe the preventive and therapeutic effect of advanced airway management on pulmonary infection in patients with inhalation injury after tracheotomy., Methods: fourteen burn patients with inhalation injury admitted to our hospital from January 2001 to December 2004 were enrolled as control (C) group, and they were treated with conventional systemic therapy and management of airway. Twenty-seven burn patients with inhalation injury admitted to our hospital from January 2005 to October 2009 were enrolled as advanced (A) group, and they were treated with conventional systemic therapy and advanced airway management, including bedside isolation of airway, fixation of both oxygen supply tube and humidifying tube, humidification in specific body position, thinning of sputum, lavement of airway and procedural sputum elimination, steam inhalation combined with medicine, and suction of sputum with interrupted negative pressure. Result of bacterial culture of sputum (the 7th day after tracheotomy) and chest X-ray (at admission and the 7th day after tracheotomy), pulmonary infection, change in blood gas analysis index and oxygen saturation (SO(2)), (within 7 days after tracheotomy), and the number of patients curd in 2 groups were observed and compared., Results: (1) Positive result of bacterial culture of sputum was observed in 11 (78.6%) patients in C group and 12 (44.4%) patients in A group. The difference between them was statistically significant (chi(2) = 4.36, P < 0.05). The main bacterium detected was Pseudomonas aeruginosa. (2) Pneumonia was suspected in 7 patients (25.9%) in A group by chest X-ray, which was obviously fewer than that in C group (8 Cases, 57.1%, chi(2) = 3.87, P < 0.05). The result was in accordance with the diagnosis of pulmonary infection. (3) No CO(2) retention, SO(2) and PaCO(2) abnormality caused by asphyxia was observed in 2 groups, PaCO(2) value in A group was close to that in C group (t = 0.89, P > 0.05). (4) In C group, 9 (64.3%) patients were cured, 5 patients died of pneumonia, wound sepsis, and MODS. In A group, 25 (92.6%) patients were cured, 2 patients died of MODS. Number of cure was obviously larger in A group than in C group (chi(2)= 5.22, P < 0.05)., Conclusions: The advanced airway management has better effects on isolation and humidification of airway, and thinning, drainage, and elimination of sputum. And it can decrease the probability of blind suction and injury to airway, and it prevents pulmonary infection following tracheotomy.