Predicting in-hospital mortality for sepsis: a comparison between qSOFA and modified qSOFA in a 2-year single-centre retrospective analysis

Comparison between Capillary and Serum Lactate Levels in Predicting Short-Term Mortality of Septic Patients at the Emergency Department

Sepsis is a time-dependent and life-threating condition related to macro- and micro-circulatory impairment leading to anaerobic metabolism and lactate increase. We assessed the prognostic accuracy of capillary lactates (CLs) vs. serum ones (SLs) on 48-h and 7-day mortality in patients with suspected sepsis. This observational, prospective, single-centre study was conducted between October 2021 and May 2022. Inclusion criteria were: (i) suspect of infection; (ii) qSOFA ≥ 2; (iii) age ≥ 18 years; (iv) signed informed consent. CLs were assessed with LactateProTM2^®. 203 patients were included: 19 (9.3%) died within 48 h from admission to the Emergency Department, while 28 (13.8%) within 7 days. Patients deceased within 48 h (vs. survived) had higher CLs (19.3 vs. 5 mmol/L, p < 0.001) and SLs (6.5 vs. 1.1 mmol/L, p = 0.001). The best CLs predictive cut-off for 48-h mortality was 16.8 mmol/L (72.22% sensitivity, 94.02% specificity). Patients within 7 days had higher CLs (11.5 vs. 5 mmol/L, p = 0.020) than SLs (2.75 vs. 1.1 mmol/L, p < 0.001). The multivariate analysis confirmed CLs and SLs as independent predictors of 48-h and 7-day mortality. CLs can be a reliable tool for their inexpensiveness, rapidity and reliability in identifying septic patients at high risk of short-term mortality.

Screening auf Sepsis in der Notfallmedizin – qSOFA ist uns nicht genug

Hintergrund

Die Sepsis ist eine häufige und lebensbedrohliche Komplikation einer akuten Infektion. In der Notfallmedizin hat sich zum Screening auf Sepsis der Quick Sequential-Organ-Failure-Assessment(qSOFA)-Score etabliert. Bereits mit der Einführung des Scores wurde dessen schwache Sensitivität kritisiert. Nun fordern aktuelle Leitlinien, den qSOFA-Score nicht mehr zum Screening auf Sepsis einzusetzen. Als eine Alternative wird der National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) vorgeschlagen.

Ziel der Arbeit

In einer Subanalyse einer Kohorte von notfallmedizinischen Patient*innen soll die diagnostische Aussagekraft des qSOFA-Scores und des NEWS2 zur Erkennung einer Sepsis verglichen werden. Zusätzlich soll gezeigt werden, inwieweit mithilfe von abweichenden Vitalparametern bereits eine Risikoerhöhung für eine Sepsis ableitbar ist.

Methodik

Mittels AUROC (Area Under Receiver Operating Characteristics) und Odds Ratios wurden die Scores bzw. die Vitalparameter auf ihre Fähigkeit untersucht, septische Patient*innen zu erkennen.

Ergebnisse

Von 312 eingeschlossenen Patient*innen wurde bei 17,9 % eine Sepsis diagnostiziert. Der qSOFA-Score erkannte eine Sepsis mit einer AUROC von 0,77 (NEWS2 0,81). Für qSOFA fand sich eine Sensitivität von 57 % (Spezifität 83 %), für NEWS2 96 % (Spezifität 45 %). Die Analyse der einzelnen Vitalparameter zeigte, dass unter Patient*innen mit einer akuten Infektion eine Vigilanzminderung als deutliches Warnsignal für eine Sepsis zu werten ist.

Diskussion

In der Notfallmedizin sollte qSOFA nicht als alleiniges Tool für das Screening auf Sepsis verwendet werden. Bei Verdacht auf eine akute Infektion sollten grundsätzlich sämtliche Vitalparameter erfasst werden, um das Vorliegen einer akuten Organschädigung und somit einen septischen Krankheitsverlauf frühzeitig zu erkennen.

Graphic abstract

A comparison of qSOFA, SIRS and NEWS in predicting the accuracy of mortality in patients with suspected sepsis: A meta-analysis

Objective

To identify and compare prognostic accuracy of quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score, Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) criteria, and National Early Warning Score (NEWS) to predict mortality in patients with suspected sepsis.

Methods

This meta-analysis followed accordance with the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases from establishment of the database to November 29, 2021. The pooled sensitivity and specificity with 95% CIs were calculated using a bivariate random-effects model (BRM). Hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) curves were generated to assess the overall prognostic accuracy.

Results

Data of 62338 patients from 26 studies were included in this meta-analysis. qSOFA had the highest specificity and the lowest sensitivity with a specificity of 0.82 (95% CI: 0.76–0.86) and a sensitivity of 0.46 (95% CI: 0.39–0.53). SIRS had the highest sensitivity and the lowest specificity with a sensitivity of 0.82 (95% CI: 0.78–0.85) and a specificity 0.24 (95% CI: 0.19–0.29). NEWS had both an intermediate sensitivity and specificity with a sensitivity of 0.73 (95% CI: 0.63–0.81) and a specificity 0.52 (95% CI: 0.39–0.65). qSOFA showed higher overall prognostic accuracy than SIRS and NEWS by comparing HSROC curves.

Conclusions

Among qSOFA, SIRS and NEWS, qSOFA showed higher overall prognostic accuracy than SIRS and NEWS. However, no scoring system has both high sensitivity and specificity for predicting the accuracy of mortality in patients with suspected sepsis.

A New Early Predictor of Fatal Outcome for COVID-19 in an Italian Emergency Department: The Modified Quick-SOFA

Background: Since 2019, the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is causing a rapidly spreading pandemic. The present study aims to compare a modified quick SOFA (MqSOFA) score with the NEWS-2 score to predict in-hospital mortality (IHM), 30-days mortality and recovery setting. Methods: All patients admitted from March to October 2020 to the Emergency Department of St. Anna Hospital, Ferrara, Italy with clinically suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection were retrospectively included in this single-centre study and evaluated with the MqSOFA and NEWS-2 scores. Statistical and logistic regression analyses were applied to our database. Results: A total of 3359 individual records were retrieved. Among them, 2716 patients were excluded because of a negative nasopharyngeal swab and 206 for lacking data; thus, 437 patients were eligible. The data showed that the MqSOFA and NEWS-2 scores equally predicted IHM (p < 0.001) and 30-days mortality (p < 0.001). Higher incidences of coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure, cerebrovascular accidents, dementia, chronic kidney disease and cancer were found in the deceased vs. survived group. Conclusions: In this study we confirmed that the MqSOFA score was non-inferior to the NEWS-2 score in predicting IHM and 30-days mortality. Furthermore, the MqSOFA score was easier to use than NEWS-2 and is more suitable for emergency settings. Neither the NEWS-2 nor the MqSOFA scores were able to predict the recovery setting.

A 2-year retrospective analysis of the prognostic value of MqSOFA compared to lactate, NEWS and qSOFA in patients with sepsis

Purpose

Sepsis is a life-threating organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection. Being a time-dependent condition, the present study aims to compare a recently established score, i.e., modified quick SOFA (MqSOFA), with other existing tools commonly applied to predict in-hospital mortality.

Methods

All cases of sepsis and septic shock consecutively observed at St. Anna University Hospital of Ferrara, Italy, from January 2017 to December 2018 were included in this study. Each patient was evaluated with MqSOFA, lactate assay, NEWS and qSOFA. Accurate statistical and logistic regression analyses were applied to our database.

Results

A total of 1001 consecutive patients with sepsis/septic shock were retrieved. Among them, 444 were excluded for incomplete details about vital parameters; thus, 556 patients were eligible for the study. Data analysis showed that MqSOFA, NEWS and lactate assay provided a better predictive ability than qSOFA in terms of in-hospital mortality (p < 0.001). Aetiology-based stratification in 5 subgroups demonstrated the superiority of NEWS vs. other tools in predicting fatal outcomes (p = 0.030 respiratory, p = 0.036 urinary, p = 0.044 abdominal, p = 0.047 miscellaneous and p = 0.041 for indeterminate causes). After Bonferroni’s correction, MqSOFA was superior to qSOFA over respiratory (p < 0.001) and urinary (p < 0.001) aetiologies. Age was an independent factor for negative outcomes (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

MqSOFA, NEWS and lactate assay better predicted in-hospital mortality compared to qSOFA. Since sepsis needs a time-dependent assessment, an easier and non-invasive score, i.e., MqSOFA, could be used to establish patients’ outcome in the emergency setting.

Comparison of different versions of the quick sequential organ failure assessment for predicting in-hospital mortality of sepsis patients: A retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

The quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) is recommended to identify sepsis and predict sepsis mortality. However, some studies have recently shown its poor performance in sepsis mortality prediction. To enhance its effectiveness, researchers have developed various revised versions of the qSOFA by adding other parameters, such as the lactate-enhanced qSOFA (LqSOFA), the procalcitonin-enhanced qSOFA (PqSOFA), and the modified qSOFA (MqSOFA). This study aimed to compare the performance of these versions of the qSOFA in predicting sepsis mortality in the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed data obtained from an electronic register system of adult patients with sepsis between January 1 and December 31, 2019. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses were performed to determine the area under the curve (AUC), with sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values calculated for the various scores.

RESULTS

Among the 936 enrolled cases, there were 835 survivors and 101 deaths. The AUCs of the LqSOFA, MqSOFA, PqSOFA, and qSOFA were 0.740, 0.731, 0.712, and 0.705, respectively. The sensitivity of the LqSOFA, MqSOFA, PqSOFA, and qSOFA were 64.36%, 51.40%, 71.29%, and 39.60%, respectively. The specificity of the four scores were 70.78%, 80.96%, 61.68%, and 91.62%, respectively. The LqSOFA and MqSOFA were superior to the qSOFA in predicting in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with sepsis in the ED, the performance of the PqSOFA was similar to that of the qSOFA and the values of the LqSOFA and MqSOFA in predicting in-hospital mortality were greater compared to qSOFA. As the added parameter of the MqSOFA was more convenient compared to the LqSOFA, the MqSOFA could be used as a candidate for the revised qSOFA to increase the performance of the early prediction of sepsis mortality.