Predictive performance of quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment for mortality and ICU admission in patients with infection at the ED

Risk factors predicting the need for intensive care unit admission within forty-eight hours of emergency department presentation: A case-control study

BACKGROUND

Patients admitted from the emergency department to the wards, who progress to a critically unwell state, may require expeditious admission to the intensive care unit. It can be argued that earlier recognition of such patients, to facilitate prompt transfer to intensive care, could be linked to more favourable clinical outcomes. Nevertheless, this can be clinically challenging, and there are currently no established evidence-based methods for predicting the need for intensive care in the future.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to analyse the emergency department data to describe the characteristics of patients who required an intensive care admission within 48 h of presentation. Secondly, we planned to test the feasibility of using this data to identify the associated risk factors for developing a predictive model.

METHODS

We designed a retrospective case-control study. Cases were patients admitted to intensive care within 48 h of their emergency department presentation. Controls were patients who did not need an intensive care admission. Groups were matched based on age, gender, admission calendar month, and diagnosis. To identify the associated variables, we used a conditional logistic regression model.

RESULTS

Compared to controls, cases were more likely to be obese, and smokers and had a higher prevalence of cardiovascular (39 [35.1%] vs 20 [18%], p = 0.004) and respiratory diagnoses (45 [40.5%] vs 25 [22.5%], p = 0.004). They received more medical emergency team reviews (53 [47.8%] vs 24 [21.6%], p < 0.001), and more patients had an acute resuscitation plan (31 [27.9%] vs 15 [13.5%], p = 0.008). The predictive model showed that having acute resuscitation plans, cardiovascular and respiratory diagnoses, and receiving medical emergency team reviews were strongly associated with having an intensive care admission within 48 h of presentation.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study used emergency department data to provide a detailed description of patients who had an intensive care unit admission within 48 h of their presentation. It demonstrated the feasibility of using such data to identify the associated risk factors to develop a predictive model.

Predictors of In-Hospital Mortality in Older Inpatients with Suspected Infection

OBJECTIVES

To determine the rate and predictors of death in older individuals with suspected infection at any time during hospital stay in a geriatric acute ward and the prognostic ability of different tools [quick Sequential (Sepsis-related) Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), Modified and National Early Warning Scores (MEWS) and (NEWS)] in such population.

DESIGN

Prospective observational single-center cohort study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Among patients admitted to an acute geriatric unit of an Italian University Hospital with at least 1 sepsis risk factor, all subjects with suspected infection at admission or during hospital stay (defined as antibiotic prescription and associated culture test) were considered.

METHODS

A geriatric assessment including comorbidity and social, functional, and cognitive status was performed for each patient. Clinical parameters were evaluated at least twice daily throughout hospital stay; qSOFA, MEWS, and NEWS were derived, with positive cutoffs set at ≥2, ≥5, and ≥7, respectively.

RESULTS

Among 305 older inpatients (median age 86.0 years, 49.2% female), 21% died during hospital stay. Sepsis was diagnosed in 31.8% of the overall sample and in 64.1% of deceased patients. Deceased patients showed a significantly higher prevalence of prior institutionalization, functional dependence, cognitive impairment, and multimorbidity. The prognostic accuracy of the qSOFA score at infection onset was only fair (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.72; 95% CI, 0.65-0.79, P < .001) and comparable with that of MEWS and NEWS. After multivariable analysis, in-hospital death was positively associated with male sex [odds ratio (OR), 2.11; 95% CI, 1.01-4.44; P = .048] and abnormal white blood cells count (OR, 4.93; 95% CI, 2.36-10.29; P < .001), platelet count (OR, 2.61; 95% CI, 1.10-6.16; P = .029) and serum creatinine (OR, 2.70; 95% CI, 1.30-5.61; P = .008), along with any of the score considered, and negatively associated with autonomy in instrumental activities (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.68-0.90; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Prognosis in older inpatients with infection or sepsis appears to be determined both by the geriatric characteristics and by the severity of the acute event, expressed by recommended tools and blood test results.

Blood Lactate Level and the Predictor of Death in Non-shock Septic Patients

Objective

To evaluate the association of initial blood lactate with mortality and subsequent septic shock in non-shock septic patients.

Materials and methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted at Maharaj Nakorn Chiang Mai Hospital, Chiang Mai University, Muang, Chiang Mai, Thailand. Inclusion criteria included septic patients admitted to a non-critical medical ward and had initial serum lactate at the emergency department (ED). Shock and other causes of hyperlactatemia were excluded.

Results

A total of 448 admissions were included with median age [interquartile range (IQR)] of 71 (59, 87) years and 200 males (44.6%). Pneumonia was the most common cause of sepsis (47.5%). The median systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) and quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) scores were 3 (2, 3) and 1 (1, 2), respectively. The median initial blood lactate was 2.19 (1.45, 3.23) mmol/L. The high blood lactate (≥2 mmol/L) group; N = 248, had higher qSOFA and other predictive scores and had significantly higher 28 days mortality (31.9% vs 10.0%; p < 0.001) and subsequent 3 days septic shock (18.1% vs 5.0%; p < 0.001) than the normal blood lactate group; N = 200. A combination of blood lactate above or equal to 2 mmol/L plus the national early warning score (NEWS) above or equal to 7 showed the highest prediction of 28 days mortality with the area under receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.70 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.65-0.75].

Conclusions

An initial blood lactate level above or equal to 2 mmol/L is associated with high mortality and subsequent septic shock among non-shock septic patients. The composite of blood lactate levels and other predictive scores yields better accuracy to predict mortality.

How to cite this article

Noparatkailas N, Inchai J, Deesomchok A. Blood Lactate Level and the Predictor of Death in Non-shock Septic Patients. Indian J Crit Care Med 2023;27(2):93-100.

Mortality estimation using APACHE and CT scores with stepwise linear regression method in COVID-19 intensive care unit: A retrospective study

Background

COVID-19 is a disease with high mortality worldwide, and which parameters that affect mortality in intensive care are still being investigated. This study aimed to show the factors affecting mortality in COVID-19 intensive care patients and write a model that can predict mortality.

Methods

The data of 229 patients in the COVID-19 intensive care unit were scanned. Laboratory tests, APACHE, SOFA, and GCS values were recorded. CT scores were calculated with chest CTs. The effects of these data on mortality were examined. The effects of the variables were modeled using the stepwise regression method.

Results

While the mean age of female (30.14%) patients was 69.1 ± 12.2, the mean age of male (69.86%) patients was 66.9 ± 11.5. The mortality rate was 69.86%. Age, CRP, D-dimer, creatinine, procalcitonin, APACHE, SOFA, GCS, and CT score were significantly different in the deceased patients than the survival group. When we attempted to create a model using stepwise linear regression analysis, the appropriate model was achieved at the fourth step. Age, CRP, APACHE, and CT score were included in the model, which has the power to predict mortality with 89.9% accuracy.

Conclusion

Although, when viewed individually, there is a significant difference in parameters such as creatinine, procalcitonin, D-dimer, GCS, and SOFA score, the probability of mortality can be estimated by knowing only the age, CRP, APACHE, and CT scores. These four simple parameters will help clinicians effectively use resources in treatment.

Serum Bicarbonate: Reconsidering the Importance of a Neglected Biomarker in Predicting Clinical Outcomes in Sepsis

Background

Despite being an important pathophysiological component, information on the predictive value of serum bicarbonate level in sepsis is limited.

Study design and method

This is a single-centered retrospective study involving 4176 patients admitted to the medical ICU (MICU) with a diagnosis of sepsis. Patients were divided into two groups based on the presence or absence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) on admission: CKD and non-CKD, respectively. Each group was then divided into three sub-groups based on serum bicarbonate level at presentation (in mEq/l)- low (<22), normal (22-28), and high (>28). We compared the clinical outcomes between the sub-groups in each group, with in-hospital mortality as the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints included vasopressor-free days, ventilator-free days, ICU-free days, and hospital-free days.

Result

In both the CKD and non-CKD groups, low serum bicarbonate was associated with significantly increased in-hospital mortality. There was no difference in the mortality between the sub-groups with normal and high serum bicarbonate. When adjusted for other known predictors of mortality, the association of low serum bicarbonate with increased in-hospital mortality was statistically significant only in the patient group with a Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score of ≥9. Additionally, the SOFA score had a better predictive value for in-hospital mortality, ICU-free days, and ventilator-free days when the serum bicarbonate level was <22.

Interpretation

Serum bicarbonate is a good predictor of clinical outcomes in sepsis and can be used along with other markers of sepsis to predict clinical outcomes.

An Evaluation of the Predictive Value of Sepsis Patient Evaluation in the Emergency Department (SPEED) Score in Estimating 28-Day Mortality Among Patients With Sepsis Presenting to the Emergency Department: A Prospective Observational Study

Background and objective

Sepsis is a life-threatening medical emergency and a significant cause of mortality. Risk stratification scores for sepsis can be unsuitable for use in the emergency department (ED) due to their complexity, and an appropriate solution has yet to be found. In this study, the predictive value of the Sepsis Patient Evaluation in the Emergency Department (SPEED) score in estimating 28-day mortality was assessed among patients with sepsis presenting to the ED, in order to determine its suitability as an efficient risk stratification system.

Materials and methods

This was a single-center, prospective observational study conducted at an urban tertiary care center. We included patients presenting to the ED with suspected or confirmed sepsis who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of our study. The patients were evaluated with the following scoring systems on arrival: the SPEED score; Predisposition, Infection, Response, and Organ dysfunction (PIRO) score; and Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis (MEDS) score; the patients were subsequently followed up on the 28th day to record the final outcomes with regard to mortality and discharge rates.

Results

This study included 127 patients in total. The median age of the study population was 49 years, and the 28-day mortality rate was 50.4%. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve for the SPEED score for predicting mortality was 0.899 (95% CI: 0.847-0.951). In comparison, the AUROC for MEDS and PIRO scores was 0.857 (95% CI: 0.793-0.92) and 0.895 (95% CI: 0.838-0.951), respectively. Based on the DeLong test, no significant difference was found in the diagnostic performances with respect to these scores.

Conclusion

The SPEED score is a simple and handy parameter that can be used for the early and appropriate risk stratification of patients with sepsis in the ED.

Which scoring system is effective in predicting mortality in patients with Crimean Congo hemorrhagic fever? A validation study

We aimed to decide which scoring system is the best for the evaluation of the course of Crimean-Congo Hemorrhagic Fever (CCHF) by comparing scoring systems such as qSOFA (quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment), SOFA (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment), APACHE II (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II) and SGS (Severity Grading System) in centers where patients with CCHF were monitored. The study was conducted with patients diagnosed with CCHF in five different centers where the disease was encountered most commonly. Patients having proven PCR and/or IgM positivity for CCHF were included in the study. The scores of the scoring systems on admission, at the 72^nd hour and at the 120^th hour were calculated and evaluated. The data of 388 patients were obtained from five centers and evaluated. SGS, SOFA and APACHE II were the best scoring systems in predicting mortality on admission. All scoring systems were significant in predicting mortality at the 72^nd and 120^th hours. On admission, there was a correlation between the qSOFA, SOFA and APACHE II scores and the SGS scores in the group of survivors. All scoring systems had a positive correlation in the same direction. The correlation coefficients were strong for qSOFA and SOFA, but poor for APACHE II. A one-unit rise in SGS increased the probability of death by 12.818 times. qSOFA did not provide significant results in predicting mortality on admission. SGS, SOFA and APACHE II performed best at admission and at the 72^nd and 120^th hours.

The timing of use of risk stratification tools affects their ability to predict mortality from sepsis. A meta-regression analysis

Background: Risk stratification tools (RSTs) are used in healthcare settings to identify patients at risk of sepsis and subsequent adverse outcomes. In practice RSTs are used on admission and thereafter as ‘trigger’ tools prompting sepsis management. However, studies investigating their performance report scores at a single timepoint which varies in relation to admission. The aim of this meta-analysis was to determine if the predictive performance of RSTs is altered by the timing of their use. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-regression analysis of studies published from inception to 31 October 2018, using EMBASE and PubMed databases. Any cohort studies investigating the ability of an RST to predict mortality in adult sepsis patients admitted to hospital, from which a 2x2 table was available or could be constructed, were included. The diagnostic performance of RSTs in predicting mortality was the primary outcome. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and area under the receiver-operating curve (AUROC) were the primary measures, enabling further meta-regression analysis. Results: 47 studies were included, comprising 430,427 patients. Results of bivariate meta-regression analysis found tools using a first-recorded score were less sensitive than those using worst-recorded score (REML regression coefficient 0.57, 95% CI 0.07-1.08). Using worst-recorded score led to a large increase in sensitivity (summary sensitivity 0.76, 95% CI 0.67-0.83, for worst-recorded scores vs. 0.64 (0.57-0.71) for first-recorded scores). Scoring system type did not have a significant relationship with studies’ predictive ability. The most analysed RSTs were qSOFA (n=37) and EWS (n=14). Further analysis of these RSTs also found timing of their use to be associated with predictive performance. Conclusion: The timing of any RST is paramount to their predictive performance. This must be reflected in their use in practice, and lead to prospective studies in future.

Age-adjusted quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score for predicting mortality and disease severity in children with infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of the age-adjusted quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (qSOFA) for predicting mortality and disease severity in pediatric patients with suspected or confirmed infection. We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Eleven studies with a total of 172,569 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio of the age-adjusted qSOFA for predicting mortality and disease severity were 0.69 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53–0.81), 0.71 (95% CI 0.36–0.91), and 6.57 (95% CI 4.46–9.67), respectively. The area under the summary receiver-operating characteristic curve was 0.733. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for predicting mortality were 0.73 (95% CI 0.66–0.79) and 0.63 (95% CI 0.21–0.92), respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for predicting disease severity were 0.73 (95% CI 0.21–0.97) and 0.72 (95% CI 0.11–0.98), respectively. The performance of the age-adjusted qSOFA for predicting mortality and disease severity was better in emergency department patients than in intensive care unit patients. The age-adjusted qSOFA has moderate predictive power and can help in rapidly identifying at-risk children, but its utility may be limited by its insufficient sensitivity.

Application of a 72 h National Early Warning Score and Incorporation with Sequential Organ Failure Assessment for Predicting Sepsis Outcomes and Risk Stratification in an Intensive Care Unit: A Derivation and Validation Cohort Study

We investigated the best timing for using the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) for predicting sepsis outcomes and whether combining the NEWS2 and the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) was applicable for mortality risk stratification in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with severe sepsis. All adult patients who met the Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock criteria between August 2013 and January 2017 with complete clinical parameters and laboratory data were enrolled as a derivation cohort. The primary outcomes were the 7-, 14-, 21-, and 28-day mortalities. Furthermore, another group of patients under the same setting between January 2020 and March 2020 were also enrolled as a validation cohort. In the derivation cohort, we included 699 consecutive adult patients. The 72 h NEWS2 had good discrimination for predicting 7-, 14-, 21-, and 28-day mortalities (AUC: 0.780, 0.724, 0.700, and 0.667, respectively) and was not inferior to the SOFA (AUC: 0.740, 0.680, 0.684, and 0.677, respectively). With the new combined NESO tool, the hazard ratio was 1.854 (1.203-2.950) for the intermediate-risk group and 6.810 (3.927-11.811) for the high-risk group relative to the low-risk group. This finding was confirmed in the validation cohort using a separated survival curve for 28-day mortality. The 72 h NEWS2 alone was non-inferior to the admission SOFA or day 3 SOFA for predicting sepsis outcomes. The NESO tool was found to be useful for 7-, 14-, 21-, and 28-day mortality risk stratification in patients with severe sepsis.

A comparison of predictors for mortality and bacteraemia in patients suspected of infection

Background

Stratification by clinical scores of patients suspected of infection can be used to support decisions on treatment and diagnostic workup. Seven clinical scores, SepsisFinder (SF), National Early Warning Score (NEWS), Sequential Orgen Failure Assessment (SOFA), Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis (MEDS), quick SOFA (qSOFA), Shapiro Decision Rule (SDR) and Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS), were evaluated for their ability to predict 30-day mortality and bacteraemia and for their ability to identify a low risk group, where blood culture may not be cost-effective and a high risk group where direct-from-blood PCR (dfbPCR) may be cost effective.

Methods

Retrospective data from two Danish and an Israeli hospital with a total of 1816 patients were used to calculate the seven scores.

Results

SF had higher Area Under the Receiver Operating curve than the clinical scores for prediction of mortality and bacteraemia, significantly so for MEDS, qSOFA and SIRS. For mortality predictions SF also had significantly higher area under the curve than SDR. In a low risk group identified by SF, consisting of 33% of the patients only 1.7% had bacteraemia and mortality was 4.2%, giving a cost of € 1976 for one positive result by blood culture. This was higher than the cost of € 502 of one positive dfbPCR from a high risk group consisting of 10% of the patients, where 25.3% had bacteraemia and mortality was 24.2%.

Conclusion

This may motivate a health economic study of whether resources spent on low risk blood cultures might be better spent on high risk dfbPCR.

Risk Scoring System of Mortality and Prediction Model of Hospital Stay for Critically Ill Patients Receiving Parenteral Nutrition

Predicting the clinical progression of intensive care unit (ICU) patients is crucial for survival and prognosis. Therefore, this retrospective study aimed to develop the risk scoring system of mortality and the prediction model of ICU length of stay (LOS) among patients admitted to the ICU. Data from ICU patients aged at least 18 years who received parenteral nutrition support for ≥50% of the daily calorie requirement from February 2014 to January 2018 were collected. In-hospital mortality and log-transformed LOS were analyzed by logistic regression and linear regression, respectively. For calculating risk scores, each coefficient was obtained based on regression model. Of 445 patients, 97 patients died in the ICU; the observed mortality rate was 21.8%. Using logistic regression analysis, APACHE II score (15–29: 1 point, 30 or higher: 2 points), qSOFA score ≥ 2 (2 points), serum albumin level < 3.4 g/dL (1 point), and infectious or respiratory disease (1 point) were incorporated into risk scoring system for mortality; patients with 0, 1, 2–4, and 5–6 points had approximately 10%, 20%, 40%, and 65% risk of death. For LOS, linear regression analysis showed the following prediction equation: log(LOS) = 0.01 × (APACHE II) + 0.04 × (total bilirubin) − 0.09 × (admission diagnosis of gastrointestinal disease or injury, poisoning, or other external cause) + 0.970. Our study provides the mortality risk score and LOS prediction equation. It could help clinicians to identify those at risk and optimize ICU management.

Hypoalbuminemia on admission in COVID-19 infection: An early predictor of mortality and adverse events. A retrospective observational study

Objectives

Hypoalbuminemia is a negative acute phase reactant which has been associated with inflammatory response and poor outcome in infectious diseases. The aim of this study was to analyze the value of hypoalbuminemia on admission as a predictor of mortality and adverse events in COVID-19 patients.

Methods

We analyzed retrospective data from a cohort of 609 consecutive patients, with confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19, discharged from hospital (deceased or alive). Demographic characteristics, previous comorbidities, symptoms and laboratory findings on admission were collected. Comorbidities were assessed by Charlson-Age Comorbidity Index.

Results

Hypoalbuminemia on admission (<34 g/L) was more frequent in nonsurvivors than survivors (65.6% vs. 38%, p < 0.001) and was significantly associated with the development of sepsis, macrophage activation syndrome, acute heart failure, acute respiratory distress syndrome and acute kidney injury, regardless of Charlson-Age Comorbidity Index. Hypoalbuminemia was a predictor of mortality in multivariable Cox regression analysis (HR 1.537, 95% CI 1.050–2.250, p = 0.027), independently of Charlson-Age Index, gender, lymphocyte count <800/μL, creatinine, high-sensitivity C- reactive protein >8 mg/L, lactate dehydrogenase >250 U/L, bilateral infiltration on chest X-ray and q-SOFA ≥2.

Conclusions

Hypoalbuminemia was an early predictor of in-hospital mortality in COVID-19, regardless of age, comorbidity and inflammatory markers. It also had significant association with severe adverse events, independently of Charlson-Age Comorbidity Index. Our results suggest that serum albumin determination on admission may help to identify patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection at high risk of developing potential life-threatening conditions and death.

Serum G protein-coupled estrogen receptor-1 levels and its relation with death in patients with sepsis: a prospective study

BACKGROUND

The sex hormone estrogen has an immune-supporting role in both trauma and sepsis-related to its immune-modulator role. The aim of the current study was to examine the prognostic role of (serum G Protein-coupled estrogen receptor-1) GPER-1 in sepsis and sepsis-related mortality.

METHODS

Prospective evaluation was made of the data on a total 160 patients followed-up in the Intensive Care Unit because of sepsis. Patients were separated into two groups as survivor and non-survivor group. The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) Score, APACHE II Score and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) were calculated for each patient. Serum GPER-1 levels were evaluated for each patient.

RESULTS

Compared with non-survivors, the surviving patients were determined with significantly higher levels of PLT, CRP, GPER-1, SOFA, and APACHE II scores. The GPER-1 levels showed a significant positive correlation with CRP levels, SOFA, and APACHE II scores. ROC curve analysis demonstrated 85.7% sensitivity and 72.1% specificity of GPER-1 to predict 28-day mortality. GPER-1 and APACHE II scores were determined to be an independent prognostic factor for predicting mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Serum GPER-1 can be used as a new prognostic factor for survival in patients diagnosed with sepsis.

Variation of vital signs with potential to influence the performance of qSOFA scoring in the Ethiopian general population at different altitudes of residency: A multisite cross-sectional study

Introduction

The physiological range of different vital signs is dependent on various environmental and individual factors. There is a strong interdependent relationship between vital signs and health conditions. Deviations of the physiological range are commonly used for risk assessment in clinical scores, e.g. respiratory rate (RR) and systolic blood pressure (BP_sys) in patients with infections within the quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score. A limited number of studies have evaluated the performance of such scores in resource-limited health care settings, showing inconsistent results with mostly poor discriminative power. Divergent standard values of vital parameters in different populations, e.g. could influence the accuracy of various clinical scores.

Methods

This multisite cross-sectional observational study was performed among Ethiopians residing at various altitudes in the cities of Asella (2400m above sea level (a.s.l.)), Adama (1600m a.s.l.), and Semara (400m a.s.l.). Volunteers from the local general population were asked to complete a brief questionnaire and have vital signs measured. Individuals reporting acute or chronic illness were excluded.

Results

A positive qSOFA score (i.e. ≥2), indicating severe illness in patients with infection, was common among the studied population (n = 612). The proportion of participants with a positive qSOFA score was significantly higher in Asella (28.1%; 55/196), compared with Adama, (8.3%; 19/230; p<0.001) and Semara (15.1%; 28/186; p = 0.005). Concerning the parameters comprised in qSOFA, the thresholds for RR (≥22/min) were reached in 60.7%, 34.8%, and 38.2%, and for BP_sys (≤100 mmHg) in 48.5%, 27.8%, and 36.0% in participants from Asella, Adama, and Semara, respectively.

Discussion

The high positivity rate of qSOFA score in the studied population without signs of acute infection may be explained by variations of the physiological range of different vital signs, possibly related to the altitude of residence. Adaptation of existing scores using local standard values could be helpful for reliable risk assessment.

Hypoalbuminemia on admission in COVID-19 infection: An early predictor of mortality and adverse events. A retrospective observational study

Objectives

Hypoalbuminemia is a negative acute phase reactant which has been associated with inflammatory response and poor outcome in infectious diseases. The aim of this study was to analyze the value of hypoalbuminemia on admission as a predictor of mortality and adverse events in COVID-19 patients.

Methods

We analyzed retrospective data from a cohort of 609 consecutive patients, with confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19, discharged from hospital (deceased or alive). Demographic characteristics, previous comorbidities, symptoms and laboratory findings on admission were collected. Comorbidities were assessed by Charlson-Age Comorbidity Index.

Results

Hypoalbuminemia on admission (<34 g/L) was more frequent in nonsurvivors than survivors (65.6% vs. 38%, p < 0.001) and was significantly associated with the development of sepsis, macrophage activation syndrome, acute heart failure, acute respiratory distress syndrome and acute kidney injury, regardless of Charlson-Age Comorbidity Index. Hypoalbuminemia was a predictor of mortality in multivariable Cox regression analysis (HR 1.537, 95% CI 1.050–2.250, p = 0.027), independently of Charlson-Age Index, gender, lymphocyte count <800/μL, creatinine, high-sensitivity C- reactive protein >8 mg/L, lactate dehydrogenase >250 U/L, bilateral infiltration on chest X-ray and q-SOFA ≥2.

Conclusions

Hypoalbuminemia was an early predictor of in-hospital mortality in COVID-19, regardless of age, comorbidity and inflammatory markers. It also had significant association with severe adverse events, independently of Charlson-Age Comorbidity Index. Our results suggest that serum albumin determination on admission may help to identify patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection at high risk of developing potential life-threatening conditions and death.

The predictive value of HEART score for acute coronary syndrome and significant coronary artery stenosis

Objective

Rapid determination of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in the emergency department (ED) is very important for patients presenting with ischemic symptoms. The aim of this study was to determine the predictive value of HEART score for ACS and significant coronary artery stenosis (SCS).

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed data of patients who visited the ED with chest discomfort and were admitted to the cardiology department. Enrolled patients were classified into ACS and non-ACS groups according to their discharge diagnosis. Patients who underwent imaging were further divided into SCS and non-SCS groups according to study results. We compared age, sex, vital signs, risk factors, electrocardiogram, troponin, and HEART score for each group. For ACS and SCS predictive performance, the test characteristics of HEART score was calculated using sensitivity, specificity, predictive value, likelihood ratio, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.

Results

Of 207 patients, 112 had ACS. Among enrolled patients, 155 underwent imaging workup, of whom 67 had SCS. HEART score ≤3 had 93% sensitivity for ACS and 97% for SCS. HEART score ≥7 had 82% specificity for ACS and 83% for SCS. HEART score area under ROC curve for ACS was 0.706 (95% confidence interval, 0.627–0.776) and 0.737 (95% confidence interval, 0.660–0.804) for SCS.

Conclusion

HEART score was a fair predictor of ACS and SCS in ED patients who presented with chest symptoms and were admitted to the cardiology department. The predictive power of HEART score was better for SCS than for ACS.

Effect of age and comorbidity on the ability of quick-Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score to predict outcome in emergency department patients with suspected infection

OBJECTIVE

To determine if a combination of the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and quick-Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score is superior to qSOFA alone for predicting the outcome of ED patients with suspected infection.

METHODS

A prospective, observational single-centre study recruited consecutive adult patients who underwent blood culture collection in the ED and were admitted to hospital. The primary outcome was 28-day in-hospital mortality, and the secondary outcome a composite of mortality and/or ICU admission ≥72 h duration. The qSOFA and CCI were combined using logistic regression models, and the resulting area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) compared to that for qSOFA alone.

RESULTS

Of 551 patients recruited, 18 (3%) died and 27 (5%) attained the composite outcome. The AUROC for qSOFA/CCI versus qSOFA for the primary outcome is 0.79 versus 0.72 (95% confidence interval 0.71-0.88 vs 0.62-0.82, P = 0.055) and 0.80 versus 0.76 (95% confidence interval 0.73-0.86 vs 0.68-0.84, P = 0.048). Deaths among patients not admitted to ICU (12/495) accounted for most of the overall differences in AUROC.

CONCLUSIONS

This generates the hypothesis that age and comorbid disease status augment the qSOFA score for predicting adverse outcome among patients with suspected infection in the ED. The results may reflect the predominance of these factors in determining suitability for admission to ICU. Reported limitations of qSOFA to detect the risk of adverse outcome may reflect the influence of unmeasured patient factors.

Role of qSOFA and SOFA Scoring Systems for Predicting In-Hospital Risk of Deterioration in the Emergency Department

The objective of this study was to analyze and compare the usefulness of quick sequential organ failure assessment score (qSOFA) and sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) scores for the detection of early (two-day) mortality in patients transported by emergency medical services (EMSs) to the emergency department (ED) (infectious and non-infectious). We performed a multicentric, prospective and blinded end-point study in adults transported with high priority by ambulance from the scene to the ED with the participation of five hospitals. For each score, the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was calculated. We included 870 patients in the final cohort. The median age was 70 years (IQR 54–81 years), and 338 (38.8%) of the participants were women. Two-day mortality was 8.3% (73 cases), and 20.9% of cases were of an infectious pathology. For two-day mortality, the qSOFA presented an AUC of 0.812 (95% CI: 0.75–0.87; p < 0.001) globally with a sensitivity of 84.9 (95% CI: 75.0–91.4) and a specificity of 69.4 (95% CI: 66.1–72.5), and a SOFA of 0.909 (95% CI: 0.86–0.95; p < 0.001) with sensitivity of 87.7 (95% CI: 78.2–93.4) and specificity of 80.7 (95% CI: 77.4–83.3). The qSOFA score can serve as a simple initial assessment to detect high-risk patients, and the SOFA score can be used as an advanced tool to confirm organ dysfunction.

Mortality prediction model for the triage of COVID-19, pneumonia, and mechanically ventilated ICU patients: A retrospective study

Rationale

Prediction of patients at risk for mortality can help triage patients and assist in resource allocation.

Objectives

Develop and evaluate a machine learning-based algorithm which accurately predicts mortality in COVID-19, pneumonia, and mechanically ventilated patients.

Methods

Retrospective study of 53,001 total ICU patients, including 9166 patients with pneumonia and 25,895 mechanically ventilated patients, performed on the MIMIC dataset. An additional retrospective analysis was performed on a community hospital dataset containing 114 patients positive for SARS-COV-2 by PCR test. The outcome of interest was in-hospital patient mortality.

Results

When trained and tested on the MIMIC dataset, the XGBoost predictor obtained area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) values of 0.82, 0.81, 0.77, and 0.75 for mortality prediction on mechanically ventilated patients at 12-, 24-, 48-, and 72- hour windows, respectively, and AUROCs of 0.87, 0.78, 0.77, and 0.734 for mortality prediction on pneumonia patients at 12-, 24-, 48-, and 72- hour windows, respectively. The predictor outperformed the qSOFA, MEWS and CURB-65 risk scores at all prediction windows. When tested on the community hospital dataset, the predictor obtained AUROCs of 0.91, 0.90, 0.86, and 0.87 for mortality prediction on COVID-19 patients at 12-, 24-, 48-, and 72- hour windows, respectively, outperforming the qSOFA, MEWS and CURB-65 risk scores at all prediction windows.

Conclusions

This machine learning-based algorithm is a useful predictive tool for anticipating patient mortality at clinically useful timepoints, and is capable of accurate mortality prediction for mechanically ventilated patients as well as those diagnosed with pneumonia and COVID-19.

•

Mortality predictions have not previously been evaluated for COVID-19 patients.

•

Machine learning may be a useful predictive tool for anticipating patient mortality.

•

Prediction can be estimated at clinically useful windows up to 72 h in advance.

Evaluation of prognostic value of MEDS, MEWS, and CURB-65 criteria and sepsis I and sepsis III criteria in patients with community-acquired infection in emergency department

Background:

Early and effective treatment of patients with sepsis requires early recognition in emergency department and understanding the severity of the disease. Many studies have been conducted for this purpose, and many of scoring systems have been developed that provide early recognition of these patients and show their severity.

Objectives:

The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of the scoring systems used to determine the mortality of patients with infections admitted in emergency department.

Methods:

In all, 400 patients who admitted to Uludağ University Hospital Emergency Department were prospectively included in this study. In addition to Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome score, Quick SOFA score, Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis score, Modified Early Warning Score, and Charlson Comorbidity Index score in all patients, CURB-65 score was calculated in the patients diagnosed with pneumonia. It has been aimed to determine the power of these scores’ predictive mortality rates and their superiority to each other.

Results:

It was found that Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis score and Quick SOFA score could be used with similar efficacy (respectively p = 0.761 and p = 0.073) in determining early mortality in emergency department (5th and 14th days) and that MEDS score was more effective (p < 0.001) in predicting the 28th-day mortality. While these recommendations were valid in patients diagnosed with pneumonia, it was determined that CURB-65 score could also be used to estimate 5th-, 14th-, and 28th-day mortalities (respectively, for the 5th day, p = 0.894 and p = 0.256; for the 14th day, p = 0.425 and p = 0.098; and for the 28th day, p = 0.095 and p = 0.158). The power of Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome score, previously used to identify sepsis, in predicting mortality was detected to be lower.

Conclusion:

Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis score and Quick SOFA score could be used with similar efficacy in determining early mortality in emergency department. However, if you want to predict 28th-day mortality rate, it can be better to use Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis score or CURB-65 (in patients diagnosed with pneumonia).

Variation in SOFA (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment) Score Performance in Different Infectious States

INTRODUCTION

In this study, we investigated whether the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score performance differs based on the type of infection among patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with infection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Single-center, retrospective study of adult ICU patients admitted with infection between January 2008 and April 2018 at an urban tertiary care center. Patients were uniquely classified into different infection types based on International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) and ICD-10 codes. Infection types included were pneumonia, meningitis, bacteremia, cellulitis, cholangitis/cholecystitis, intestinal and diarrheal disease, endocarditis, urinary tract infection (UTI), and peritonitis. The SOFA score performance and mortality in relation to SOFA score were compared across infection types.

RESULTS

A total of 12 283 patients were included. Of these, 50.6% were female and the median age was 70 years (interquartile range: 57-82). The most common infection types were pneumonia (32.2%) and UTI (31.0%). Overall, 1703 (13.9%) patients died prior to hospital discharge. The median baseline SOFA score (within 24 hours of ICU admission) for the cohort was 5 (3-8). Patients with peritonitis had the highest median SOFA score, 7 (4-9), and patients with cellulitis and UTI had the lowest median SOFA score, 4 (2-7). The SOFA score discrimination to predict mortality was highest among patients with endocarditis (area under the receiver operating characteristic [AUC]: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.69-0.90) and lowest for patients with isolated bacteremia (AUC: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.49-0.70). Observed mortality by quartile of SOFA score differed substantially across infection types.

CONCLUSIONS

Type of infection is an important consideration when interpreting the SOFA score. This is relevant as SOFA emerges as an important tool in the definition and prognostication of sepsis.

Comparison the accuracy of early warning scores with qSOFA and SIRS for predicting sepsis in the emergency department

INTRODUCTION

The aims of this study were to evaluate the accuracy of early warnings scores including National Early Warning Score (NEWS), Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis score (MEDS), Search Out Severity score (SOS) and compare them with quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) and Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) for detecting sepsis among infected patients at the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted at ED of a university hospital. Primary outcome was sepsis defined by sepsis-2 definition. Secondary outcomes were sepsis defined by sepsis-3 definition, hospital admission and in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 652 (83.9%) from 777 infected patients were classified as sepsis by sepsis-2. MEWS and SOS outperformed other scores in predicting sepsis with the area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) (95%CI) 0.845 (0.805-0.885) and 0.839 (0.799-0.879), followed by NEWS 0.800 (0.753-0.846), MEDS 0.608 (0.551-0.665) and qSOFA 0.657 (0.609-0.706) (p < .001 for all). MEWS ≥3 had a sensitivity of 87.7%, specificity of 69.6%, positive and negative likelihood ratio of 2.88 and 0.18 for predicting sepsis by sepsis-2. Whereas, MEDS and NEWS presented the highest AUC for predicting sepsis according to sepsis-3 (AUC 0.738 and 0.722). NEWS ≥7 predicted sepsis by sepsis-3 with 53.3% sensitivity, 80.9% specificity, 2.75 positive likelihood ratio (LR+) and 0.59 negative likelihood ratio. qSOFA had the highest LR+ of 3.69 for predicting hospital mortality.

CONCLUSION

The early warning scores, qSOFA and SIRS had limited decision making for predicting sepsis and adverse outcomes among infected patients.

SOFA and qSOFA usefulness for in-hospital death prediction of elderly patients admitted for suspected infection in internal medicine

PURPOSE

To reduce intensive care unit overcrowding and optimize resources, elderly patients affected by suspected infection with declining clinical conditions could be managed in internal medicine departments with stepdown beds. However, commonly used prognostic scores, as Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) or quick SOFA (qSOFA) have never been studied in this specific setting. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role and the accuracy of SOFA and qSOFA as prognostic scores in a population of elderly patients with suspected infection admitted to stepdown beds of two internal medicine departments.

METHODS

Elderly patients admitted from the emergency department in the stepdown beds of two different internal medicine departments for suspected infection were assessed with SOFA and qSOFA scores at the admission. All patients were treated according to current guidelines. Age, sex, comorbidities, Charlson comorbidity index, SOFA and qSOFA were assessed. In-hospital death and length of hospital admission were also recorded.

RESULTS

390 subjects were enrolled. In-hospital death occurred in 144 (36.9%) patients; we observed that both SOFA (HR 1.189; 95% CI 1.128-1.253; p < 0.0001) and qSOFA (HR 1.803; 95% CI 1.503-2.164; p < 0.0001) scores were independently associated with an increased risk of in-hospital death. However, the accuracy of both SOFA (AUC: 0.686; 95% CI 0.637-0.732; p < 0.0001) and qSOFA (AUC: 0.680; 95% CI 0.641-0.735; p < 0.0001) in predicting in-hospital death was low in this population.

CONCLUSION

Elderly patients admitted to stepdown beds for suspected infection experience a high rate of in-hospital death; both SOFA and qSOFA scores can be useful to identify a group of patients who can benefit from admission to an intermediate care environment, however their accuracy is low.

Febrile Illness Evaluation in a Broad Range of Endemicities (FIEBRE): protocol for a multisite prospective observational study of the causes of fever in Africa and Asia

INTRODUCTION

Fever commonly leads to healthcare seeking and hospital admission in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia. There is only limited guidance for clinicians managing non-malarial fevers, which often results in inappropriate treatment for patients. Furthermore, there is little evidence for estimates of disease burden, or to guide empirical therapy, control measures, resource allocation, prioritisation of clinical diagnostics or antimicrobial stewardship. The Febrile Illness Evaluation in a Broad Range of Endemicities (FIEBRE) study seeks to address these information gaps.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

FIEBRE investigates febrile illness in paediatric and adult outpatients and inpatients using standardised clinical, laboratory and social science protocols over a minimum 12-month period at five sites in sub-Saharan Africa and Southeastern and Southern Asia. Patients presenting with fever are enrolled and provide clinical data, pharyngeal swabs and a venous blood sample; selected participants also provide a urine sample. Laboratory assessments target infections that are treatable and/or preventable. Selected point-of-care tests, as well as blood and urine cultures and antimicrobial susceptibility testing, are performed on site. On day 28, patients provide a second venous blood sample for serology and information on clinical outcome. Further diagnostic assays are performed at international reference laboratories. Blood and pharyngeal samples from matched community controls enable calculation of AFs, and surveys of treatment seeking allow estimation of the incidence of common infections. Additional assays detect markers that may differentiate bacterial from non-bacterial causes of illness and/or prognosticate illness severity. Social science research on antimicrobial use will inform future recommendations for fever case management. Residual samples from participants are stored for future use.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval was obtained from all relevant institutional and national committees; written informed consent is obtained from all participants or parents/guardians. Final results will be shared with participating communities, and in open-access journals and other scientific fora. Study documents are available online (https://doi.org/10.17037/PUBS.04652739).

Comparison of the Predictive Performances of qSOFA, APACHE II, and SGS for Evaluation of the Disease Prognosis of CCHF Patients at the Emergency Department

In this study, we compared the predictive performances of quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA), the acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE II) scores, and the severity grading score (SGS) for evaluation of the disease prognosis of patients with Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever (CCHF) at the emergency department. We recorded the qSOFA, SGS, and APACHE II scores at admission and at the 72nd and 120th hour in 97 patients admitted to the emergency department and diagnosed with CCHF. In our study, the area under a receiver operating characteristic curve values of qSOFA, SGS, and APACHE II at admission were found to be 0.640, 0.824, and 0.576, respectively. No statistical significance was found for a qSOFA score ≥ 2 at admission as a predictor of mortality. The use of qSOFA score for diseases with a mortal prognosis such as CCHF is insufficient in predicting the prognosis.

Performance of the MEDS score in predicting mortality among emergency department patients with a suspected infection: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To carry out a meta-analysis to examine the prognostic performance of the Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis (MEDS) score in predicting mortality among emergency department patients with a suspected infection.

METHODS

Electronic databases-PubMed, Embase, Scopus, EBSCO and the Cochrane Library-were searched for eligible articles from their respective inception through February 2019. Sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios and receiver operator characteristic area under the curve were calculated. Subgroup analyses were performed to explore the prognostic performance of MEDS in selected populations.

RESULTS

We identified 24 studies involving 21 246 participants. The pooled sensitivity of MEDS to predict mortality was 79% (95% CI 72% to 84%); specificity was 74% (95% CI 68% to 80%); positive likelihood ratio 3.07 (95% CI 2.47 to 3.82); negative likelihood ratio 0.29 (95% CI 0.22 to 0.37) and area under the curve 0.83 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.86). Significant heterogeneity was seen among included studies. Meta-regression analyses showed that the time at which the MEDS score was measured and the cut-off value used were important sources of heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

The MEDS score has moderate accuracy in predicting mortality among emergency department patients with a suspected infection. A study comparison MEDS and qSOFA in the same population is needed.

Part II: Minimum Quality Threshold in Preclinical Sepsis Studies (MQTiPSS) for Types of Infections and Organ Dysfunction Endpoints

Although the clinical definitions of sepsis and recommended treatments are regularly updated, a systematic review has not been done for preclinical models. To address this deficit, a Wiggers-Bernard Conference on preclinical sepsis modeling reviewed the 260 most highly cited papers between 2003 and 2012 using sepsis models to create a series of recommendations. This Part II report provides recommendations for the types of infections and documentation of organ injury in preclinical sepsis models. Concerning the types of infections, the review showed that the cecal ligation and puncture model was used for 44% of the studies while 40% injected endotoxin. Recommendation #8 (numbered sequentially from Part I): endotoxin injection should not be considered as a model of sepsis; live bacteria or fungal strains derived from clinical isolates are more appropriate. Recommendation #9: microorganisms should replicate those typically found in human sepsis. Sepsis-3 states that sepsis is life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection, but the review of the papers showed limited attempts to document organ dysfunction. Recommendation #10: organ dysfunction definitions should be used in preclinical models. Recommendation #11: not all activities in an organ/system need to be abnormal to verify organ dysfunction. Recommendation #12: organ dysfunction should be measured in an objective manner using reproducible scoring systems. Recommendation #13: not all experiments must measure all parameters of organ dysfunction, but investigators should attempt to fully capture as much information as possible. These recommendations are proposed as "best practices" for animal models of sepsis.

Accuracy of the qSOFA Score and RED Sign in Predicting Critical Care Requirements in Patients with Suspected Infection in the Emergency Department: A Retrospective Observational Study

Background and objectives: We aimed to compare the accuracy of positive quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) scores and the RED sign in predicting critical care requirements (CCRs) in patients with suspected infection who presented to the emergency department (ED). Materials and Methods: In this retrospective observational study, we examined adult patients with suspected infection in the ED from June 2018 to September 2018. A positive qSOFA (qSOFA+) was defined as the presence of ≥2 of the following criteria: altered mental status (AMS), systolic blood pressure (SBP) < 100 mmHg, and respiratory rate (RR) ≥ 22 breaths/min. A positive RED sign (RED sign+) was defined as the presence of at least one of the RED sign criteria: AMS, skin mottling, SBP < 90 mmHg, heart rate >130 beats/min, or RR > 30 breaths/min. A qSOFA/RED+ was defined as the presence of qSOFA+ or RED+. We applied these tools twice using the initial values upon ED arrival and all values within 2 h after ED arrival. The accuracy of qSOFA+, RED+, and qSOFA/RED+ in predicting CCR was assessed. Results: Data from 5353 patients with suspected infection were analyzed. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of RED+ (0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.65–0.70) and that of qSOFA/RED+ (0.68, 95% CI: 0.66–0.70, p < 0.01) were higher than the AUC of qSOFA+ (0.59, 95% CI: 0.57–0.60) in predicting CCR on ED arrival. The qSOFA/RED+ within 2 h showed the highest accuracy (AUC 0.72, 95% CI: 0.70–0.75, p < 0.001). Conclusions: The accuracy of the RED sign in predicting CCR in patients with suspected infection who presented at ED was better than that of qSOFA. The combined use of the RED sign and qSOFA (positive qSOFA or RED sign) showed the highest accuracy.

The ability of an improved qSOFA score to predict acute sepsis severity and prognosis among adult patients

This study analyzed independent risk factors that could improve the qSOFA scoring system among sepsis patients.This retrospective study evaluated 821 patients (2015-2016) who fulfilled the 2001 International Sepsis Definitions Conference diagnostic criteria. Patients were classified based on their survival outcomes after 28 days, and the predictive values of various predictive scores at admission were compared.The independent risk factors for 28-day mortality were fibrinogen, plasma lactic acid, albumin, oxygenation index, and procalcitonin level >0.5 ng/mL (all P < .05). The "PqSOFA" score combined the qSOFA score with procalcitonin, which provided an area under the curve value of 0.751 (95% CI: 0.712-0.790) for predicting 28-day mortality. A cut-off score of 2 points provided sensitivity of 83.2%, specificity of 54.9%, negative predictive value (NPV) of 33.03%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 92.47%, positive-likelihood ratio (PLR) of 1.85, and negative-likelihood ratio (NLR) of 0.31. The area under the curve for predicting 28-day mortality was significantly greater for the PqSOFA score than for the qSOFA score (Z = 7.019, P < .0001). The PqSOFA score was comparable to the SOFA and APACHE II scores.The PqSOFA score independently predicted poor short-term outcomes among high-risk sepsis patients.

Sepsis patient evaluation emergency department (SPEED) score & mortality in emergency department sepsis (MEDS) score in predicting 28-day mortality of emergency sepsis patients

PURPOSE

Sepsis is a common acute life-threatening condition that emergency physicians routinely face. Diagnostic options within the Emergency Department (ED) are limited due to lack of infrastructure, consequently limiting the use of invasive hemodynamic monitoring or imaging tests. The mortality rate due to sepsis can be assessed via multiple scoring systems, for example, mortality in emergency department sepsis (MEDS) score and sepsis patient evaluation in the emergency department (SPEED) score, both of which quantify the variation of mortality rates according to clinical findings, laboratory data, or therapeutic interventions. This study aims to improve the management processes of sepsis patients by comparing SPEED score and MEDS score for predicting the 28-day mortality in cases of emergency sepsis.

METHODS

The study is a cross-sectional, prospective study including 61 sepsis patients in ED in Suez Canal University Hospital, Egypt, from August 2017 to June 2018. Patients were selected by two steps: (1) suspected septic patients presenting with at least one of the following abnormal clinical findings: (a) body temperature higher than 38 °C or lower than 36 °C, (b) heart rate higher than 90 beats/min, (c) hyperventilation evidenced by respiratory rate higher than 20 breaths/min or PaCO₂ lower than 32 mmHg, and (d) white blood cell count higher than 12,000/μL or lower than 4000/μL; (2) confirmed septic patients with at least a 2-point increase from the baseline total sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score following infection. Other inclusion criteria included adult patients with an age ≥18 years regardless of gender and those who had either systemic inflammatory response syndrome or suspected/confirmed infection. Patients were shortly follow-up for the 28-day mortality. Each patient was subject to SPEED score and MEDS score and then the results were compared to detect which of them was more effective in predicting outcome. The receiver operating characteristic curves were also done for MEDS and SPEED scores.

RESULTS

Among the 61 patients, 41 died with the mortality rate of 67.2%. The mortality rate increased with a higher SPEED and MEDS scores. Both SPEED and MEDS scores revealed significant difference between the survivors and nonsurvivors (p = 0.004 and p < 0.001, respectively), indicating that both the two systems are effective in predicting the 28-day mortality of sepsis patients. Thereafter, the receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted, which showed that SPEED was better than the MEDS score when applied to the complete study population with an area under the curve being 0.87 (0.788-0.963) as compared with 0.75 (0.634-0.876) for MEDS. Logistic regression analysis revealed that the best fitting predictor of 28-day mortality for sepsis patients was the SPEED scoring system. For every one unit increase in SPEED score, the odds of 28-day mortality increased by 37%.

CONCLUSION

SPEED score is more useful and accurate than MEDS score in predicting the 28-day mortality among sepsis patients. Therefore SPEED rather than MEDS should be more widely used in the ED for sepsis patients.

Screening for sepsis: SIRS or qSOFA? A literature review

In 2016, definitions of sepsis and septic shock were updated to focus on organ dysfunction rather than systemic inflammatory response as the identifying trait. This article aims to compare and evaluate the effectiveness of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) in detecting sepsis in emergency department (ED) patients. A systematic search of the literature was undertaken using four databases. A total of 307 articles was identified. After the selection process, 13 articles met the inclusion criteria for the review. Five themes emerged from the meta-analysis: SIRS; qSOFA; timeliness and simplicity; sensitivity versus specificity; and adding lacate. SIRS offered users greater sensitivity when assessing for sepsis. However, qSOFA is a simple bedside tool with greater specificity, which does not require any blood test results. The author created a new qSOFA screening tool, which incorporated the use of point-of-care serum lactate measurement. He found that qSOFA outperforms SIRS as an ED sepsis screening tool with its strengths of efficacy, efficiency and ease. It was also found to differentiate better between uncomplicated infection and sepsis, which can commonly cause trigger fatigue in EDs.

External validation of the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score for mortality and bacteraemia risk evaluation in Japanese patients undergoing haemodialysis: a retrospective multicentre cohort study

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to examine the validity of the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score for mortality and bacteraemia risk assessment in Japanese haemodialysis patients.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective multicentre cohort study.

SETTING

The six participating hospitals are tertiary-care institutions that receive patients on an emergency basis and provide primary, secondary and tertiary care. The other participating hospital is a secondary-care institution that receives patients on an emergency basis and provides both primary and secondary care.

PARTICIPANTS

This study included haemodialysis outpatients admitted for bacteraemia suspicion, who had blood drawn for cultures within 48 hours of their initial admission.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was overall in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included 28-day in-hospital mortality and the incidence of bacteraemia diagnosed based on blood culture findings. The discrimination, calibration and test performance of the qSOFA score were assessed. Missing data were handled using multiple imputation.

RESULTS

Among the 507 haemodialysis patients admitted with bacteraemia suspicion between August 2011 and July 2013, the overall in-hospital mortality was 14.6% (74/507), the 28-day in-hospital mortality was 11.1% (56/507) and the incidence of bacteraemia, defined as a positive blood culture, was 13.4% (68/507). For predicting in-hospital mortality among haemodialysis patients, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.61 (95% CI 0.56-0.67) for a qSOFA score ≥2. The Hosmer-Lemeshow χ² statistics for the qSOFA score as a predictor of overall and 28-day in-hospital mortality were 5.72 (p=0.02) and 7.40 (p<0.01), respectively.

CONCLUSION

On external validation, the qSOFA score exhibited low diagnostic accuracy and miscalibration for in-hospital mortality and bacteraemia among haemodialysis patients.

Evaluation of qSOFA as a Predictor of Mortality Among ICU Patients With Positive Clinical Cultures-A Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the discriminative value of the quick-sequential organ failure assessment score (qSOFA) to SOFA in a critically ill population, in which a microbial pathogen was isolated within 48 hours of admission to intensive care.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Academic tertiary referral center from July 2008 to June 2017.

PATIENTS

Hospitalized patients admitted to intensive care unit.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality for all patients with confirmed positive microbiological cultures within 48 hours of admission to intensive care unit (ICU). Subgroup analysis was performed on patients with pathogenic bacteremia or positive cultures in cerebrospinal fluid. Of the 11 415 patients analyzed with positive microbiology specimens within 48 hours of admission, 2933 (25.7%) had a qSOFA ≥2. Of these, 16.6% reached the primary outcome of in-hospital mortality. Unsurprisingly, the discriminative value of qSOFA on admission was significantly worse than that of SOFA (0.73 vs 0.76; P = .0004), despite observing a significant association between qSOFA category and in-hospital mortality (P < .0001). In secondary analyses, similar observations were found using qSOFA within 6 and 24 hours of ICU admission. When analysis was focused on patients with pathogenic bacteremia or positive cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) cultures (n = 1646), there was no significant difference between the discriminative value of qSOFA and SOFA (0.75 vs 0.78; P = .17).

CONCLUSIONS

Quick-sequential organ failure assessment score at admission was not superior to SOFA in predicting in-hospital mortality in patients with positive clinical cultures within 48 hours of admission to ICU. Quick-sequential organ failure assessment score at admission to the ICU was associated with mortality and showed reasonable calibration and discrimination. When the analysis was focused on patients with pathogenic bacteremia or positive CSF cultures, qSOFA performed similarly to SOFA in discriminatory those who will die from sepsis.

Clinical Value of Whole Blood Procalcitonin Using Point of Care Testing, Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score, C-Reactive Protein and Lactate in Emergency Department Patients with Suspected Infection

We investigated the clinical value of whole blood procalcitonin using point of care testing, quick sequential organ failure assessment score, C-reactive protein and lactate in emergency department patients with suspected infection and assessed the accuracy of the whole blood procalcitonin test by point-of-care testing. Participants were randomly selected from emergency department patients who complained of a febrile sense, had suspected infection and underwent serum procalcitonin testing. Whole blood procalcitonin levels by point-of-care testing were compared with serum procalcitonin test results from the laboratory. Participants were divided into two groups-those with bacteremia and those without bacteremia. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value of procalcitonin, lactate and Quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment scores were investigated in each group. Area under receiving operating curve of C-reactive protein, lactate and procalcitonin for predicting bacteremia and 28-day mortality were also evaluated. Whole blood procalcitonin had an excellent correlation with serum procalcitonin. The negative predictive value of procalcitonin and lactate was over 90%. Area under receiving operating curve results proved whole blood procalcitonin to be fair in predicting bacteremia or 28-day mortality. In the emergency department, point-of-care testing of whole blood procalcitonin is as accurate as laboratory testing. Moreover, procalcitonin is a complementing test together with lactate for predicting 28-days mortality and bacteremia for patients with suspected infection.

Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment as a prognostic factor for infected patients outside the intensive care unit: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) was proposed to replace SIRS as a new screening tool for the identification of septic patients at high mortality. However, researches from infected patients outside of ICU especially in Emergency Department (ED) drew contradictory conclusions on the prognostic value of qSOFA. This systematic review evaluated qSOFA as a prognostic marker of infected patients outside of ICU. The primary outcome was hospital mortality or 28- or 30-day mortality. Data were pooled based on sensitivity and specificity. Twenty-four trials with 121,237 participants were included. qSOFA had a poor sensitivity (0.58 [95% CI 0.47-0.67], 0.54 [95% CI 0.43-0.65]) and moderate specificity (0.69 [95% CI 0.48-0.84], 0.77 [95% CI 0.66-0.86]) for prediction of mortality in patients outside of ICU and ED patients only. Studies that used in-hospital mortality showed a higher sensitivity (0.61 [95% CI 0.50-0.71] vs 0.32 [95% CI 0.15-0.49]) and lower specificity (0.70 [95% CI 0.59-0.82] vs 0.92 [95% CI 0.85-0.99]) than studies that used 28 or 30-day mortality. Studies with overall mortality < 10% showed higher specificity (0.89 [95% CI 0.82-0.95] vs 0.62 [95% CI 0.48-0.76]) than studies with overall mortality ≥ 10%. There is no difference in the accuracy of diagnosis of sepsis between positive qSOFA scores and SIRS criteria. qSOFA was poor sensitivity and moderate specificity in predicting mortality of infected patients outside of ICU especially in ED. Combining qSOFA and SIRS may be helpful in predicting mortality.

Evaluation of a novel prognostic score based on thrombosis and inflammation in patients with sepsis: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Inflammation and thrombosis are involved in the development and progression of sepsis. A novel thrombo-inflammatory prognostic score (TIPS), based on both an inflammatory and a thrombus biomarker, was assessed for its ability to predict adverse outcomes of sepsis patients in the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of sepsis patients. TIPS (range: 0-2) was predictive of adverse outcomes. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate the associations between TIPS and 28-day adverse outcomes. The study end points were mortality, mechanical ventilation (MV), consciousness disorder (CD) and admission to the intensive care unit (AICU).

RESULTS

In total, 821 sepsis patients were enrolled; 173 patients died within the 28-day follow-up period. Procalcitonin and D-dimer values were used to calculate TIPS because they had the best performance in the prediction of 28-day mortality by receiver operating characteristic curves. The 28-day mortality and the incidence of MV, CD and AICU were significantly higher in patients with higher TIPS. Multivariable logistic regression analysis indicated TIPS was an independent predictor of 28-day mortality, MV and AICU. TIPS performed better than other prognostic scores, including quick sequential organ failure assessment, Modified Early Warning Score and Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis Score for predicting 28-day mortality, and similar to the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, but inferior to sequential organ failure assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

TIPS is useful for stratifying the risk of adverse clinical outcomes in sepsis patients shortly after admission to the ED.

Prognostic value of sepsis-induced coagulation abnormalities: an early assessment in the emergency department

To evaluate if the assessment of coagulation abnormalities at ED admission could improve prognostic assessment of septic patients. This report utilizes a portion of the data collected in a prospective study, with the aim to identify reliable biomarkers for an early sepsis diagnosis. In the period November 2011-December 2016, we enrolled 268 patients, admitted to our High-Dependency Unit with a diagnosis severe sepsis/septic shock. Study-related blood samplings were performed at ED-HDU admission (T0), after 6 h (T6) and 24 h (T24): D-dimer, thrombin-antithrombin complex (TAT) and prothrombin fragment F1 + 2 levels were analyzed. The primary end-points were day-7 and in-hospital mortality. Day-7 mortality rate was 16%. D-dimer (T0: 4661 ± 4562 µg/ml vs 3190 ± 7188 µg/ml; T6: 4498 ± 4931 µg/ml vs 2822 ± 5623 µg/ml; T24 2905 ± 2823 µg/ml vs 2465 ± 4988 µg/ml, all p < 0.05) and TAT levels (T0 29 ± 45 vs 22 ± 83; T6 21 ± 22 vs 15 ± 35; T24 16 ± 19 vs 13 ± 30, all p < 0.05) were higher among non-survivors compared to survivors. We defined an abnormal coagulation activation (COAG+) as D-dimer > 500 µg/ml and TAT > 8 ng/ml (for both, twice the upper normal value). Compared to COAG-, COAG+ patients showed higher lactate levels at the earliest evaluations (T0: 3.3 ± 2.7 vs 2.5 ± 2.3, p = 0.041; T6: 2.8 ± 3.4 vs 1.8 ± 1.6, p = 0.015); SOFA score was higher after 24 h (T24: 6.7 ± 3.1 vs 5.4 ± 2.9, p = 0.008). At T0, COAG+ patients showed a higher day-7 mortality rate (HR 2.64; 95% CI 1.14-6.11, p = 0.023), after adjustment for SOFA score and lactate level. Presence of abnormal coagulation at ED admission shows an independent association with an increased short-term mortality rate.

Use of qSOFA Score in Predicting the Outcomes of Patients With Glyphosate Surfactant Herbicide Poisoning Immediately Upon Arrival at the Emergency Department

AIM

This study aimed to identify whether quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) performed immediately upon arrival can predict the outcome of patients with glyphosate surfactant herbicide (GlySH) poisoning.

METHODS

Adult patients with GlySH poisoning between January 2006 and April 2017 were included in this retrospective observational study. The qSOFA score (respiratory rate ≥22 breaths per minute, systolic blood pressure <100 mm Hg, and altered mental status) was assessed immediately upon arrival at the emergency department. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, and the secondary outcomes were life-threatening complications and organ injury.

RESULTS

Of the 150 patients who ingested GlySH, 14 (9.3%) died. The qSOFA score was significantly higher in the non-survival group (P < 0.001). qSOFA (odds ratio [OR], 2.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.41-5.76) was independently associated with in-hospital mortality. The area under curve value of qSOFA was 0.841 (95% CI, 0.772-0.895). As qSOFA score increased from 0 to 3, the in-hospital mortality significantly increased (P < 0.001). The frequency of life-threatening complications, including organ injury, increased as the qSOFA score increased from 0 to 3 (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The qSOFA score measured upon arrival shows good prognostic performance in patients with GlySH poisoning. Moreover, the qSOFA may predict the development of life-threatening complications including organ injury. Thus, more attention should be paid to patients with GlySH poisoning with higher qSOFA scores.

Efficacy of quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment with lactate concentration for predicting mortality in patients with community-acquired pneumonia in the emergency department

Objective

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a major cause of sepsis, and sepsis-related acute organ dysfunction affects patient mortality. Although the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) is a new screening tool for patients with suspected infection, its predictive value for the mortality of patients with CAP has not been validated. Lactate concentration is a valuable biomarker for critically ill patients. Thus, we investigated the predictive value of qSOFA with lactate concentration for in-hospital mortality in patients with CAP in the emergency department (ED).

Methods

From January 2015 to June 2015, 443 patients, who were diagnosed with CAP in the ED, were retrospectively analyzed. We defined high qSOFA or lactate concentrations as a qSOFA score ≥2 or a lactate concentration >2 mmol/L upon admission at the ED. The primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality.

Results

Among the 443 patients, 44 (9.9%) died. Based on the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, the areas under the curves for the prediction of mortality were 0.720, 0.652, and 0.686 for qSOFA, CURB-65 (confusion, urea, respiratory rate, blood pressure, and age), and Pneumonia Severity Index, respectively. The area under the ROC curve of qSOFA was lower than that of SOFA (0.720 vs. 0.845, P=0.004). However, the area under the ROC curve of qSOFA with lactate concentration was not significantly different from that of SOFA (0.828 vs. 0.845, P=0.509). The sensitivity and specificity of qSOFA with lactate concentration were 71.4% and 83.2%, respectively.

Conclusion

qSOFA with lactate concentration is a useful and practical tool for the early prediction of in-hospital mortality among patients with CAP in the ED.

Utility of qSOFA score in identifying patients at risk for poor outcome in Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia

Background

The prognostic capability of the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) bedside scoring tool is uncertain in non-ICU patients with sepsis due to bacteremia given the low number of patients previously evaluated.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study of adult hospitalized patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB). Medical charts were reviewed to determine qSOFA score, systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria, and Pitt bacteremia score (PBS) at initial presentation; their predictive values were compared for ICU admission within 48 h, ICU stay duration > 72 h, and 30-day mortality.

Results

Four hundred twenty-two patients were included; 22% had qSOFA score ≥2. Overall, mean age was 56y and 75% were male. More patients with qSOFA ≥2 had altered mentation (23% vs 5%, p < 0.0001), were infected with MRSA (42% vs 30%, p = 0.03), had endocarditis or pneumonia (29% vs 15%, p = 0.0028), and bacterial persistence ≥4d (34% vs 20%, p = 0.0039) compared to qSOFA <2 patients. Predictive performance based on AUROC was better (p < 0.0001) with qSOFA than SIRS criteria for all three outcomes, but similar to PBS ≥2. qSOFA≥2 was the strongest predictor for poor outcome by multivariable analysis and showed improved specificity but lower sensitivity than SIRS ≥2.

Conclusions

qSOFA is a simple 3-variable bedside tool for use at the time of sepsis presentation that is more specific than SIRS and simpler to calculate than PBS in identifying septic patients at high risk for poor outcomes later confirmed to have S. aureus bacteremia.

Comparative study on quick sequential organ failure assessment, systemic inflammatory response syndrome and the shock index in prehospital emergency patients: single-site retrospective study

Aim

The quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score, shock index (SI), and systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria are simple indicators for the mortality of patients in the emergency department (ED). These simple indicators using only vital signs might be more useful in prehospital care than in the ED due to their quick calculation. However, these indicators have not been compared in prehospital settings. The aim of the present study is to compare these indicators measured in prehospital care and verify whether the qSOFA score is useful for prehospital triage.

Methods

We undertook a single‐site retrospective study on patients transferred by ambulance to the Kumamoto Medical Center ED (Kumamoto, Japan) between January 2015 and December 2016. We compared areas under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curves of the qSOFA score, SI, and SIRS criteria measured in prehospital care. We also carried out sensitivity and specificity analyses using the Youden index.

Results

A total of 4,827 patients were included in the present study. The AUROC (95% confidence interval) of the qSOFA score for in‐hospital mortality was 0.64 (0.61–0.67), which was significantly higher than those of the SIRS criteria (0.59 [0.56–0.62]) and SI (0.58 [0.54–0.62]). According to the optimal cut‐off values (qSOFA ≥ 2) decided on as the Youden index, the sensitivity of the qSOFA score was 52.3% and its specificity was 69.9%.

Conclusions

The qSOFA score had the highest AUROC among three indicators. However, it might not be practical in actual prehospital triage due to its low sensitivity.

Heart rate variability based machine learning models for risk prediction of suspected sepsis patients in the emergency department

Early identification of high-risk septic patients in the emergency department (ED) may guide appropriate management and disposition, thereby improving outcomes. We compared the performance of machine learning models against conventional risk stratification tools, namely the Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), National Early Warning Score (NEWS), Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), and our previously described Singapore ED Sepsis (SEDS) model, in the prediction of 30-day in-hospital mortality (IHM) among suspected sepsis patients in the ED.Adult patients who presented to Singapore General Hospital (SGH) ED between September 2014 and April 2016, and who met ≥2 of the 4 Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) criteria were included. Patient demographics, vital signs and heart rate variability (HRV) measures obtained at triage were used as predictors. Baseline models were created using qSOFA, NEWS, MEWS, and SEDS scores. Candidate models were trained using k-nearest neighbors, random forest, adaptive boosting, gradient boosting and support vector machine. Models were evaluated on F1 score and area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC).A total of 214 patients were included, of whom 40 (18.7%) met the outcome. Gradient boosting was the best model with a F1 score of 0.50 and AUPRC of 0.35, and performed better than all the baseline comparators (SEDS, F1 0.40, AUPRC 0.22; qSOFA, F1 0.32, AUPRC 0.21; NEWS, F1 0.38, AUPRC 0.28; MEWS, F1 0.30, AUPRC 0.25).A machine learning model can be used to improve prediction of 30-day IHM among suspected sepsis patients in the ED compared to traditional risk stratification tools.

qSOFA is a Poor Predictor of Short-Term Mortality in All Patients: A Systematic Review of 410,000 Patients

BACKGROUND

To determine the validity of the Quick Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) in the prediction of outcome (in-hospital and 1-month mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and hospital and ICU length of stay) in adult patients with or without suspected infections where qSOFA was calculated and reported; Methods: Cochrane Central of Controlled trials, EMBASE, BIOSIS, OVID MEDLINE, OVID Nursing Database, and the Joanna Briggs Institute EBP Database were the main databases searched. All studies published until 12 April 2018 were considered. All studies except case series, case reports, and conference abstracts were considered. Studies that included patients with neutropenic fever exclusively were excluded.

RESULTS

The median AUROC for in-hospital mortality (27 studies with 380,920 patients) was 0.68 (a range of 0.55 to 0.82). A meta-analysis of 377,623 subjects showed a polled AUROC of 0.68 (0.65 to 0.71); however, it also confirmed high heterogeneity among studies (I² = 98.8%, 95%CI 98.6 to 99.0). The median sensitivity and specificity for in-hospital mortality (24 studies with 118,051 patients) was 0.52 (range 0.16 to 0.98) and 0.81 (0.19 to 0.97), respectively. Median positive and negative predictive values were 0.2 (range 0.07 to 0.38) and 0.94 (0.85 to 0.99), respectively.

Comparison of Prognostic Accuracy of the quick Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment between Short- & Long-term Mortality in Patients Presenting Outside of the Intensive Care Unit - A Systematic Review & Meta-analysis

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the ability of the qSOFA in predicting short- (≤30 days or in-hospital mortality) and long-term (>30 days) mortality among patients outside the intensive care unit setting. Studies reporting on the qSOFA and mortality were searched using MEDLINE and SCOPUS. Studies were included if they involved patients presenting to the ED with suspected infection and usage of qSOFA score for mortality prognostication. Data on qSOFA scores and mortality rates were extracted from 36 studies. The overall pooled sensitivity and specificity for the qSOFA were 48% and 86% for short-term mortality and 32% and 92% for long-term mortality, respectively. Studies reporting on short-term mortality were heterogeneous (Odd ratio, OR = 5.6; 95% CI = 4.6-6.8; Higgins's I2 = 94%), while long-term mortality studies were homogenous (OR = 4.7; 95% CI = 3.5-6.1; Higgins's I2 = 0%). There was no publication bias for short-term mortality analysis. The qSOFA score showed poor sensitivity but moderate specificity for both short and long-term mortality, with similar performance in predicting both short- and long- term mortality. Geographical region was shown to have nominal significant (p = 0.05) influence on qSOFA short-term mortality prediction.

The qSOFA Score: A Simple and Accurate Predictor of Outcome in Patients with Glyphosate Herbicide Poisoning

This study aimed to investigate whether the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score at emergency department (ED) presentation can help improve the risk assessment of glyphosate-surfactant herbicide (GlySH) poisoning complications. A total of 150 patients presenting with acute glyphosate herbicide ingestion were enrolled in this retrospective observational study. The qSOFA scores at presentation, ΔqSOFA (calculated by subtracting the worst qSOFA score from 1 hr after admission from the qSOFA score at presentation), baseline characteristics, clinical courses and outcome were collected and analysed. A total of 41 patients had life-threatening complications (27.3%), and 14 patients died (9.3%). Patients with a qSOFA score of 0 at presentation had a 1.5% incidence rate of complications. As the qSOFA score at presentation increased from 1 to 3, the rate of life-threatening complications significantly increased from 29.6% to 100%. Patients with a ΔqSOFA of 1 had a higher frequency of complications than did patients with a ΔqSOFA of 0. The qSOFA score (OR: 8.39, 95% CI: 3.51-26.67) and ΔqSOFA (OR: 27.60, 95% CI: 3.87-575.67) were associated with the development of life-threatening complications in the multivariate analysis. The qSOFA score showed high sensitivity (97.56%), and the ΔqSOFA score showed high specificity (99.08%). The values of area under the curve were significantly higher in the models using the qSOFA and ΔqSOFA than they were in the models using previously known prognostic factors (p < 0.01). The clinician should pay more attention to patients with high qSOFA scores at presentation or an increase in the qSOFA score 1 hr after admission.

Sevoflurane attenuates systemic inflammation compared with propofol, but does not modulate neuro-inflammation: A laboratory rat study

BACKGROUND

Septic encephalopathy is believed to be a result of neuro-inflammation possibly triggered by endotoxins, such as lipopolysaccharides (LPS). Modulation of the immune system is a property of volatile anaesthetics.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to investigate the systemic and cerebral inflammatory response in a LPS-induced sepsis model in rats. We compared two different sedation strategies, intravenous propofol and the volatile anaesthetic sevoflurane, with the hypothesis that the latter may attenuate neuro-inflammatory processes.

DESIGN

Laboratory rat study.

SETTING

Basic research laboratories at the University Hospital Zurich and University Zurich Irchel between August 2014 and June 2016.

PATIENTS

A total of 32 adult male Wistar rats.

INTERVENTIONS

After tracheotomy and mechanical ventilation, the anaesthetised rats were monitored before sepsis was induced by using intravenous LPS or phosphate-buffered saline as control. Rats were sedated with propofol (10 mg kg h) or sevoflurane (2 vol%) continuously for 12 h.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Systemic inflammatory markers such as cytokine-induced neutrophil chemo-attractant protein 1, monocyte chemo-tactic protein-1 and IL-6 were determined. The same cytokines were measured in brain tissue. Cellular response in the brain was assessed by defining neutrophil accumulation with myeloperoxidase and also activation of microglia with ionised calcium-binding adaptor molecule-1 and astrocytes with glial fibrillary acidic protein. Finally, brain injury was determined.

RESULTS

Animals were haemodynamically stable in both sedation groups treated with LPS. Blood cytokine peak values were lower in the sevoflurane-LPS compared with propofol-LPS animals. In brain tissue of LPS animals, chemoattractant protein-1 was the only significantly increased cytokine (P = 0.003), however with no significance between propofol and sevoflurane. After LPS challenge, cerebral accumulation of neutrophils was observed. Microglia activation was pronounced in the hippocampus of animals treated with LPS (P = 0.006). LPS induced prominent astrogliosis (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in microglia or astrocyte activation or apoptosis in the brain between sevoflurane and propofol.

CONCLUSION

We have shown that systemic attenuation of inflammation by the volatile anaesthetic sevoflurane did not translate into attenuated neuro-inflammation in this LPS-induced inflammation model.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Animal approval No. 134/2014, Veterinäramt Zürich.