Comparison of QSOFA score and SIRS criteria as screening mechanisms for emergency department sepsis

Moving Beyond Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome and Bacteremia: Are Modern Critical Care Calculators Useful in Predicting Debridement, Antibiotics, and Implant Retention Treatment Outcomes in Periprosthetic Joint Infection?

BACKGROUND

In critically ill periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) patients, surgeons need to balance the need for aggressive, definitive treatment against the health state of a potentially unstable patient. A clear understanding of the association between treatment outcomes and assessment scores for sepsis would benefit clinical decision-making in these urgent cases. The current study evaluates the effect of critical illness on debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) outcomes, as defined by systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) and, for the first time, by contemporary markers quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) and Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS).

METHODS

We retrospectively identified 253 patients who underwent DAIR for PJI at a single institution between 2017 and 2021. The SIRS, qSOFA, and MEWS scores were calculated based on variables on admission. A DAIR treatment failure, defined as reoperation or mortality, was measured at 90 days and two years. Univariate analysis was used to determine the association between elevated critical care scores and DAIR failure.

RESULTS

The DAIR treatment success was 59% at two years, with hip procedures and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) ≥ 1 independently associated with higher odds of DAIR failure. There were 43 patients (16%) who presented with SIRS, however, only four (2%) had positive qSOFA scores. Neither SIRS nor qSOFA were predictive of DAIR failure. For knees only, elevated MEWS scores were predictive of 90-day DAIR failure (P = 0.019).

CONCLUSION

Over one in six patients undergoing DAIR for PJI presented with SIRS, while only one in 50 had a positive qSOFA. The SIRS and qSOFA scores were not predictive of DAIR failure. Elevated MEWS scores were associated with DAIR failure at 90 days postoperatively in knee PJIs only, and should be confirmed in a larger cohort. Our results suggest that SIRS is not predictive of DAIR outcomes, possibly because it overestimates the proportion of critically ill patients.

Risk Factors and Scoring Systems to Predict the Mortality Risk of Afebrile Adult Patients with Monomicrobial Gram-Negative Bacteremia: A 10-Year Observational Study in the Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

The mortality rate of afebrile bacteremia has been reported to be as high as 45%. This investigation focused on the risk factors and predictive performance of scoring systems for the clinical outcomes of afebrile patients with monomicrobial gram-negative bacteria (GNB) in the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of afebrile adult ED patients with monomicrobial GNB bacteremia from January 2012 to December 2021. We dissected the demographics, clinical pictures, and laboratory investigations. We applied five scoring systems and three revised systems to predict the clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

There were 600 patients included (358 males and 242 females), with a mean age of 69.6 ± 15.4 years. The overall mortality rate was 50.17%, reaching 68.52% (74/108) in cirrhotic patients. Escherichia coli was the leading pathogen (42.83%). The non-survivors had higher scores of the original MEDS (p < 0.001), NEWS (p < 0.001), MEWS (p < 0.001), qSOFA (p < 0.001), and REMS (p = 0.030). In univariate logistic regression analyses, several risk factors had a higher odds ratio (OR) for mortality, including liver cirrhosis (OR 2.541, p < 0.001), malignancy (OR 2.259, p < 0.001), septic shock (OR 2.077, p = 0.002), and male gender (OR 0.535, p < 0.001). The MEDS demonstrated that the best predictive power with the maximum area under the curve (AUC) was measured at 0.773 at the cut-off point of 11. The AUCs of the original NEWS, MEWS, qSOFA, and REMS were 0.663, 0.584, 0.572, and 0.553, respectively. We revised the original MEDS, NEWS, and qSOFA by adding red cell distribution width, albumin, and lactate scores and found a better predictive power of the AUC of 0.797, 0.719, and 0.694 on the revised MEDS ≥11, revised qSOFA ≥ 3, and revised NEWS ≥ 6, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The original MEDS, revised MEDS, revised qSOFA, and revised NEWS were valuable tools for predicting the mortality risk in afebrile patients with monomicrobial GNB bacteremia. We suggested that clinicians should explore patients with the risk factors mentioned above for possible severe infection, even in the absence of fever and initiate hemodynamic support and early adequate antibiotic therapy in patients with higher scores of the original MEDS (≥11), revised MEDS (≥11), revised NEWS (≥6), and revised qSOFA (≥3).

Prognostic accuracy of qSOFA score, SIRS criteria, and EWSs for in-hospital mortality among adult patients presenting with suspected infection to the emergency department (PASSEM) Multicenter prospective external validation cohort study protocol

BACKGROUND

Early identification of a patient with infection who may develop sepsis is of utmost importance. Unfortunately, this remains elusive because no single clinical measure or test can reflect complex pathophysiological changes in patients with sepsis. However, multiple clinical and laboratory parameters indicate impending sepsis and organ dysfunction. Screening tools using these parameters can help identify the condition, such as SIRS, quick SOFA (qSOFA), National Early Warning Score (NEWS), or Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS). We aim to externally validate qSOFA, SIRS, and NEWS/NEWS2/MEWS for in-hospital mortality among adult patients with suspected infection who presenting to the emergency department.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

PASSEM study is an international prospective external validation cohort study. For 9 months, each participating center will recruit consecutive adult patients who visited the emergency departments with suspected infection and are planned for hospitalization. We will collect patients' demographics, vital signs measured in the triage, initial white blood cell count, and variables required to calculate Charlson Comorbidities Index; and follow patients for 90 days since their inclusion in the study. The primary outcome will be 30-days in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcome will be intensive care unit (ICU) admission, prolonged stay in the ICU (i.e., ≥72 hours), and 30- as well as 90-days all-cause mortality. The study started in December 2021 and planned to enroll 2851 patients to reach 200 in-hospital death. The sample size is adaptive and will be adjusted based on prespecified consecutive interim analyses.

DISCUSSION

PASSEM study will be the first international multicenter prospective cohort study that designated to externally validate qSOFA score, SIRS criteria, and EWSs for in-hospital mortality among adult patients with suspected infection presenting to the ED in the Middle East region.

STUDY REGISTRATION

The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05172479).

Early Management of Severe Biliary Infection in the Era of the Tokyo Guidelines

Sepsis of biliary origin is increasing worldwide and has become one of the leading causes of emergency department admissions. The presence of multi-resistant bacteria (MRB) is increasing, and mortality rates may reach 20%. This review focuses on the changes induced by the Tokyo guidelines and new concepts related to the early treatment of severe biliary disease. If cholecystitis or cholangitis is suspected, ultrasound is the imaging test of choice. Appropriate empirical antibiotic treatment should be initiated promptly, and selection should be performed while bearing in mind the severity and risk factors for MRB. In acute cholecystitis, laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the main therapeutic intervention. In patients not suitable for surgery, percutaneous cholecystostomy is a valid alternative for controlling the infection. Treatment of severe acute cholangitis is based on endoscopic or transhepatic bile duct drainage and antibiotic therapy. Endoscopic ultrasound and other new endoscopic techniques have been added to the arsenal as novel alternatives in high-risk patients. However, biliary infections remain serious conditions that can lead to sepsis and death. The introduction of internationally accepted guidelines, based on clinical presentation, laboratory tests, and imaging, provides a framework for their rapid diagnosis and treatment. Prompt assessment of patient severity, timely initiation of antimicrobials, and early control of the source of infection are essential to reduce morbidity and mortality rates.

Evaluation of Sepsis-1 and Sepsis-3 Diagnostic Criteria in Patients with Sepsis in Intensive Care Unit

Background

The use of SIRS and SOFA criteria in diagnosing sepsis among patients has been characterized by increasingly growing criticism. Indeed, the definition of sepsis has attracted significant controversy in history across medical and academic realms.

Methods

The study used the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care-III (MIMIC-III) database in assessing the effectiveness of the SIRS and SOFA diagnostic criteria. It ascertained the severity and specificity of sepsis infection in ICU patients. The Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care-III (MIMIC-III) database was established by the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) and MIT's Computational Physiology Laboratory. The database is a voluminous single-center database containing information pertaining to 38,000 adults who were admitted to the BIDMC in the 11 years leading up to 2012. The identification of patients with sepsis was conducted using the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10-CM) diagnosis codes.

Results

The analysis of data for this study was based on the chi-square test, which is significant in comparing the specificity, mortality, and sensitivity of the data. The process of screening the MIMIC-III database resulted in the identification of 21,368 patients with infections from the hospital admissions in the database. The results also indicate a significantly higher mortality rate within 28 days of admission in sepsis-3 patients compared with sepsis-1. In this experiment, we limited the study period to 28 days to restrict the potential of mortality caused by other factors. Additionally, we evaluated the clinical factors associated with the sepsis-1 or sepsis-3 and found out similar results in the analysis for sepsis-1 and sepsis-3.

Conclusions

The study results also portray numerous challenges in using the sepsis-3 criteria as a diagnostic tool. In particular, the ICD-10-CM diagnosis approach was limiting because it inhibited the measure of uncertainty of infection present at the beginning of the two diagnostic criteria of sepsis-1 and sepsis-3.

SIRS, SOFA, qSOFA, and NEWS in the diagnosis of sepsis and prediction of adverse outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We compared Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), Quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), and National Early Warning Score (NEWS) for sepsis diagnosis and adverse outcomes prediction.

METHODS

Clinical studies that used SIRS, SOFA, qSOFA, and NEWS for sepsis diagnosis and prognosis assessment were included. Data were extracted, and meta-analysis was performed for outcome measures, including sepsis diagnosis, in-hospital mortality, 7/10/14-day mortality, 28/30-day mortality, and ICU admission.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven included studies showed good overall quality. Regarding sepsis prediction, SIRS demonstrated high sensitivity (0.85) but low specificity (0.41), qSOFA showed low sensitivity (0.42) but high specificity (0.98), and NEWS exhibited high sensitivity (0.71) and specificity (0.85). For predicting in-hospital mortality, SOFA demonstrated the highest sensitivity (0.89) and specificity (0.69). In terms of predicting 7/10/14-day mortality, SIRS exhibited high sensitivity (0.87), while qSOFA had high specificity (0.75). For predicting 28/30-day mortality, SOFA showed high sensitivity (0.97) but low specificity (0.14), whereas qSOFA displayed low sensitivity (0.41) but high specificity (0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

NEWS independently demonstrates good diagnostic capability for sepsis, especially in high-income countries. SOFA emerges as the optimal choice for predicting in-hospital mortality and can be employed as a screening tool for 28/30-day mortality in low-income countries.

Adjunctive hemoperfusion with Resin Hemoadsorption (HA) 330 cartridges improves outcomes in patients sustaining multiple Blunt Trauma: a prospective, quasi-experimental study

BACKGROUND

Multi-organ dysfunction syndrome and multi-organ failure are the leading causes of late death in patients sustaining severe blunt trauma. So far, there is no established protocol to mitigate these sequelae. This study assessed the effect of hemoperfusion using resin-hemoadsorption 330 (HA330) cartridges on mortality and complications such as acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) among such patients.

METHODS

This quasi-experimental study recruited patients ≥ 15 years of age with blunt trauma, injury severity score (ISS) ≥ 15, or initial clinical presentation consistent with SIRS. They were divided into two groups: the Control group received only conventional acute care, while the case group received adjunctive hemoperfusion. P-values less than 0.05 were statistically significant.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients were included (Control and Case groups: 13 and 12 patients). The presenting vital signs, demographic and injury-related features (except for thoracic injury severity) were similar (p > 0.05). The Case group experienced significantly more severe thoracic injuries than the Control group (Thoracic AIS, median [IQR]: 3 [2-4] vs. 2 [0-2], p = 0.01). Eleven and twelve patients in the Case group had ARDS and SIRS before the hemoperfusion, respectively, and these complications were decreased considerably after hemoperfusion. Meanwhile, the frequency of ARDS and SIRS did not decrease in the Control group. Hemoperfusion significantly reduced the mortality rate in the Case group compared to the Control group (three vs. nine patients, p = 0.027).

CONCLUSIONS

Adjunctive Hemoperfusion using an HA330 cartridge decreases morbidity and improves outcomes in patients suffering from severe blunt trauma.

Evaluation of qSOFA Combined with Inflammatory Mediators for Diagnosing Sepsis and Predicting Mortality among Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

There are no guidelines in China or worldwide that clearly recommend indicators for the early diagnosis of sepsis in the emergency department. Simple and unified joint diagnostic criteria are also scarce. We compare the Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score and inflammatory mediator concentrations in patients with normal infection, sepsis, and sepsis death.

METHODS

This study used a prospective and consecutive manner, including 79 patients with sepsis in the Emergency Department of Shenzhen People's Hospital from December 2020 to June 2021, and 79 patients with common infections (non-sepsis) matched by age and sex during the same period. The sepsis patients were then divided into a sepsis survival group (n=67) and a sepsis death group (n=12) based on whether they survived within 28 days. The baseline characteristics, qSOFA scores, the concentrations of tumor necrosis factor-α(TNF-α), interleukin (IL) -6, IL-1b, IL-8, IL-10, procalcitonin (PCT), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (HSCRP) and other indicators were collected in all subjects.

RESULTS

PCT and qSOFA were independent risk factors for predicting sepsis in the emergency department. The AUC value of PCT was the largest (0.819) among all diagnostic indicators of sepsis, with a cut-off value of 0.775ng/ml and sensitivity and specificity of 0.785 and 0.709, respectively. The AUC of qSOFA combined PCT was the largest (0.842) in the combination of the 2 indicators, and the sensitivity and specificity were 0.722 and 0.848, respectively. IL-6 was an independent risk factor for predicting death within 28 days. IL-8 had the largest AUC value (0.826) among all indicators predicting sepsis death, with a cut-off value of 215 pg/ml and sensitivity and specificity of 0.667 and 0.895, respectively. Among the combination of two indicators, qSOFA combined with IL-8 had the largest AUC value (0.782) and sensitivity and specificity of 0.833 and 0.612, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

QSOFA and PCT are independent risk factors for sepsis, and qSOFA combined with PCT may be an ideal combination for early diagnosis of sepsis in the emergency department. IL-6 is an independent risk factor for death within 28 days of sepsis, and qSOFA combined with IL-8 may be an ideal combination for early prediction of death within 28 days in sepsis patients in the emergency department.

Monocyte Distribution Width as a predictor of community acquired sepsis in patients prospectively enrolled at the Emergency Department

Background

Monocyte Distribution Width (MDW), a simple cellular marker of innate monocyte activation, can be used for the early recognition of sepsis. We performed an observational prospective monocentric study to assess the predictive role of MDW in detecting sepsis in a sample of consecutive patients presenting at the Emergency Department.

Methods

Prospective observational study using demographic and clinical characteristics, past medical history and other laboratory measurements to predict confirmed sepsis using multivariate logistic regression.

Results

A total of 2724 patients were included in the study, of which 272 (10%) had sepsis or septic shock. After adjusting for known and potential risk factors, logistic regression found the following independent predictors of sepsis: SIRS equal to 1 (OR: 2.32, 1.16–4.89) and 2 or more (OR: 27.8, 14.8–56.4), MDW > 22 (OR: 3.73, 2.46–5.70), smoking (OR: 3.0, 1.22–7.31), end stage renal function (OR: 2.3, 1.25–4.22), neurodegenerative disease (OR: 2.2, 1.31–3.68), Neutrophils ≥ 8.9 × 10³/µL (OR: 2.73, 1.82–4.11), Lymphocytes < 1.3 × 10³/µL (OR: 1.72, 1.17–2.53) and CRP ≥ 19.1 mg/L (OR: 2.57, 1.63–4.08). A risk score derived from predictive models achieved high accuracy by using an optimal threshold (AUC: 95%; 93–97%).

Conclusions

The study suggests that incorporating MDW in the clinical decision process may improve the early identification of sepsis, with minimal additional effort on the standard procedures adopted during emergency care.

Predictive validity of the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score for the mortality in patients with sepsis in Vietnamese intensive care units

Background

The simple scoring systems for predicting the outcome of sepsis in intensive care units (ICUs) are few, especially for limited-resource settings. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of the quick Sequential (Sepsis-Related) Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score in predicting the mortality of ICU patients with sepsis in Vietnam.

Methods

We did a multicenter cross-sectional study of patients with sepsis (≥18 years old) presenting to 15 adult ICUs throughout Vietnam on the specified days (i.e., 9th January, 3rd April, 3rd July, and 9th October) representing the different seasons of 2019. The primary and secondary outcomes were the hospital and ICU all-cause mortalities, respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was calculated to determine the discriminatory ability of the qSOFA score for deaths in the hospital and ICU. The cut-off value of the qSOFA scores was determined by the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Upon ICU admission, factors associated with the hospital and ICU mortalities were assessed in univariable and multivariable logistic models.

Results

Of 252 patients, 40.1% died in the hospital, and 33.3% died in the ICU. The qSOFA score had a poor discriminatory ability for both the hospital (AUROC: 0.610 [95% CI: 0.538 to 0.681]; cut-off value: ≥2.5; sensitivity: 34.7%; specificity: 84.1%; P_AUROC = 0.003) and ICU (AUROC: 0.619 [95% CI: 0.544 to 0.694]; cutoff value: ≥2.5; sensitivity: 36.9%; specificity: 83.3%; P_AUROC = 0.002) mortalities. However, multivariable logistic regression analyses show that the qSOFA score of 3 was independently associated with the increased risk of deaths in both the hospital (adjusted odds ratio, AOR: 3.358; 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.756 to 6.422) and the ICU (AOR: 3.060; 95% CI: 1.651 to 5.671).

Conclusion

In our study, despite having a poor discriminatory value, the qSOFA score seems worthwhile in predicting mortality in ICU patients with sepsis in limited-resource settings.

Clinical trial registration

Clinical trials registry–India: CTRI/2019/01/016898

Monocyte Distribution Width (MDW) as an Early Investigational Marker for the Diagnosis of Sepsis in an Emergency Department of a Tertiary Care Hospital in North India

Background Sepsis is an emergency state in response to an infectious process ultimately leading to multiorgan dysfunction and death. There is an urgent need for sepsis detection methods, especially in emergency settings. To fill this gap, monocyte distribution width (MDW) was studied as an early indicator of sepsis. Aim To evaluate MDW as an early marker of sepsis. Material and methods This was a prospective observational study including critically ill adult patients who presented to the emergency department. MDW was measured using a DxH 900 Hematology Analyser (Beckman Coulter Inc., Miami, FL). Abnormal MDW (>20.0) was considered a predictor of sepsis. Results A total of 148 patients were included and categorized according to the Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 criteria, as having sepsis (25.6%), sepsis with shock (21.6%), and non-sepsis (52.8%). In patients with sepsis with and without shock, MDW was 28.28 ± 9.20 and 28.02 ± 9.01, respectively, significantly higher than in patients without sepsis (p < 0.001). The diagnostic accuracy value of MDW testing for early sepsis detection was highly significant (0.74, p < 0.000). Conclusion MDW can be used as a marker for the early prediction of sepsis.

Performance of quick sequential organ failure assessment and modified age disease adjusted qadSOFA for the prediction of outcomes in emergency general surgery patients

BACKGROUND

Sepsis is a highly prevalent condition and is associated with a reported in-hospital mortality rate up to 40% in patients with abdominal sepsis requiring emergency general surgery (EGS). The quick sequential organ failure assessment score (qSOFA) has not been studied for EGS patients.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study in adult patients undergoing abdominal EGS at a university tertiary care center from 2016 to 2018. The primary outcome was mortality. The effect of clinical variables on outcomes was assessed in univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses. Based on these results, the qSOFA score was modified. The performance of scores was assessed using receiver operating characteristics.

RESULTS

Five hundred seventy-eight patients undergoing abdominal EGS were included. In-hospital mortality was 4.8% (28/578). Independent predictors for mortality were mesenteric ischemia (odds ratio [OR] 15.9; 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.2-48.6; p < 0.001), gastrointestinal tract perforation (OR 4.9; 95% CI 1.7-14.0; p = 0.003), 65 years or older (OR 4.1; 95% CI 1.5-11.4; p = 0.008), and increasing qSOFA (OR 1.8; 95% CI 1.2-2.8; p = 0.007). The modified qSOFA (qadSOFA) was developed. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the qSOFA and qadSOFA for mortality was 0.715 and 0.859, respectively. Optimal cutoff value was identified as qadSOFA ≥ 3 (Youden Index 64.1%).

CONCLUSION

This is the first study investigating the qSOFA as a predictor for clinical outcomes in EGS. Compared with the qSOFA, the new qadSOFA revealed an excellent predictive power for clinical outcomes. Further validation of qadSOFA is warranted.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnostic test/criteria; Level II.

The prognostic value of sepsis scores and dichotomized triage score in patients presenting to the emergency department with fever: A prospective, observational study

BACKGROUND

The performance of the Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score needs to be explored further in the emergency triage room. This study aims to explore the performance of triage (tqSOFA) versus the dichotomized triage score (DTS) in patients admitted to the emergency room triage with fever.

METHODS

This research was designed as a prospective, observational study within a six-month period, including patients who presented to the emergency room triage with infrared fever ≥ 37.5 °C.

RESULTS

771 patients were analyzed.The highest sensitivity for predicting overall hospitalization and intensive care admission was seen for DTS (95.4 %, 100 %; p < 0.0001, p < 0.0001, respectively) (AUC:0.697, 95 % CI 0.663 to 0.730; AUC:0.684, 95 % CI 0.650 to 0.717, respectively). The highest sensitivity for predicting 1st week and 1st month mortality was found for DTS (100 %, 96.3 %; p < 0.0001, p < 0.0001, respectively). However, the highest specificity for predicting 1st week and 1st month mortality was observed in tqSOFA (94.1 %, 95.16; p = 0.0845, p < 0.0001, respectively) (AUC:0.658, 95 % CI 0.623 to 0.691; AUC:0.698, 95 % CI 0.664 to 0.730, respectively).

CONCLUSION

We found DTS to be as effective as tqSOFA and SIRS in determining all hospitalization times and mortality.

Sepsis Electronic Decision Support Screen in High-Risk Patients Across Age Groups in a Pediatric Emergency Department

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the performance of a pediatric decision support algorithm to detect severe sepsis between high-risk pediatric and adult patients in a pediatric emergency department (PED).

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of patients presenting from March 2017 to February 2018 to a tertiary care PED. Patients were identified as high risk for sepsis based on a priori defined criteria and were considered adult if 18 years or older. The 2-step decision support algorithm consists of (1) an electronic health record best-practice alert (BPA) with age-adjusted vital sign ranges, and (2) physician screen. The difference in test characteristics of the intervention for the detection of severe sepsis between pediatric and adult patients was assessed at 0.05 statistical significance.

RESULTS

The 2358 enrolled subjects included 2125 children (90.1%) and 233 adults (9.9%). The median ages for children and adults were 3.8 (interquartile range, 1.2-8.6) and 20.1 (interquartile range, 18.2-22.0) years, respectively. In adults, compared with children, the BPA alone had significantly higher sensitivity (0.83 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.74-0.89] vs 0.72 [95% CI, 0.69-0.75]; P = 0.02) and lower specificity (0.11 [95% CI, 0.07-0.19] vs 0.48 [95% CI, 0.45-0.51; P < 0.001). With the addition of provider screen, sensitivity and specificity were comparable across age groups, with a lower negative predictive value in adults compared with children (0.66 [95% CI, 0.58-0.74] vs 0.77 [95% CI, 0.75-0.79]; P = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

The BPA was less specific in adults compared with children. With the addition of provider screen, specificity improved; however, the lower negative predictive value suggests that providers may be less likely to suspect sepsis even after automated screen in adult patients. This study invites further research aimed at improving screening algorithms, particularly across the diverse age spectrum presenting to a PED.

Axial light loss of monocytes as a readily available prognostic biomarker in patients with suspected infection at the emergency department

Objectives

To evaluate the prognostic value of the coefficient of variance of axial light loss of monocytes (cv-ALL of monocytes) for adverse clinical outcomes in patients suspected of infection in the emergency department (ED).

Methods

We performed an observational, retrospective monocenter study including all medical patients ≥18 years admitted to the ED between September 2016 and June 2019 with suspected infection. Adverse clinical outcomes included 30-day mortality and ICU/MCU admission <3 days after presentation. We determined the additional value of monocyte cv-ALL and compared to frequently used clinical prediction scores (SIRS, qSOFA, MEWS). Next, we developed a clinical model with routinely available parameters at the ED, including cv-ALL of monocytes.

Results

A total of 3526 of patients were included. The OR for cv-ALL of monocytes alone was 2.21 (1.98–2.47) for 30-day mortality and 2.07 (1.86–2.29) for ICU/MCU admission <3 days after ED presentation. When cv-ALL of monocytes was combined with a clinical score, the prognostic accuracy increased significantly for all tested scores (SIRS, qSOFA, MEWS). The maximum AUC for a model with routinely available parameters at the ED was 0.81 to predict 30-day mortality and 0.81 for ICU/MCU admission.

Conclusions

Cv-ALL of monocytes is a readily available biomarker that is useful as prognostic marker to predict 30-day mortality. Furthermore, it can be used to improve routine prediction of adverse clinical outcomes at the ED.

Clinical trial registration

Registered in the Dutch Trial Register (NTR) und number 6916.

Evaluation of quick sequential organ failure scores in dogs with severe sepsis and septic shock

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the prognostic utility of the quick sequential organ failure assessment score in dogs with severe sepsis and septic shock presenting to an emergency service, and evaluate the clinical value of the quick sequential organ failure assessment score to predict severe sepsis and septic shock.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The quick sequential organ failure assessment score was calculated by evaluating respiratory rate (>22 breaths per minute), arterial systolic blood pressure (≤100 mmHg) and altered mentation. The quick sequential organ failure assessment scores with respiratory rate cut-offs of greater than 22, greater than 30 and greater than 40 were compared. Cases were defined as dogs presented to the emergency room and met at least 2 systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria, had documented infection, and at least one organ dysfunction. A control population of dogs included animals with non-infectious systemic inflammatory response syndrome.

RESULTS

Forty-five dogs with severe sepsis and septic shock and 45 dogs with non-infectious systemic inflammatory response syndrome were included in the final analysis. The quick sequential organ failure assessment provided poor discrimination between survivors and non-survivors for severe sepsis and septic shock (area under receiving operating characteristic curve, 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.35 to 0.67). Discrimination remained poor when quick sequential organ failure assessment greater than 30 and quick sequential organ failure assessment greater than 40 scores were calculated (area under receiving operating characteristic curve, 0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.39 to 0.72, and 0.54; 95% confidence interval, 0.36 to 0.71). The quick sequential organ failure assessment of at least 2, quick sequential organ failure assessment greater than 30 of at least 2 and quick sequential organ failure assessment greater than 40 of at least 2 produced sensitivity and specificity to detect severe sepsis and septic shock of 66.7% and 64.5%, 62.2% and 71.1%, 44.4% and 80%, respectively.

CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Scoring systems utilised in emergency rooms should have high sensitivity to reduce missed sepsis cases and treatment delays. The use of the quick sequential organ failure assessment for severe sepsis and septic shock demonstrated poor mortality prediction and low sensitivity to detect canine patients with severe sepsis and septic shock and should not be used alone when screening for sepsis.

Developing a shared sepsis data infrastructure: a systematic review and concept map to FHIR

The development of a shared data infrastructure across health systems could improve research, clinical care, and health policy across a spectrum of diseases, including sepsis. Awareness of the potential value of such infrastructure has been heightened by COVID-19, as the lack of a real-time, interoperable data network impaired disease identification, mitigation, and eradication. The Sepsis on FHIR collaboration establishes a dynamic, federated, and interoperable system of sepsis data from 55 hospitals using 2 distinct inpatient electronic health record systems. Here we report on phase 1, a systematic review to identify clinical variables required to define sepsis and its subtypes to produce a concept mapping of elements onto Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR). Relevant papers described consensus sepsis definitions, provided criteria for sepsis, severe sepsis, septic shock, or detailed sepsis subtypes. Studies not written in English, published prior to 1970, or "grey" literature were prospectively excluded. We analyzed 55 manuscripts yielding 151 unique clinical variables. We then mapped variables to their corresponding US Core FHIR resources and specific code values. This work establishes the framework to develop a flexible infrastructure for sharing sepsis data, highlighting how FHIR could enable the extension of this approach to other important conditions relevant to public health.

Positioning the role of qSOFA for screening and prognostication in critically ill medical and surgical patients with suspected sepsis

-

A novel artificial intelligence based intensive care unit monitoring system: using physiological waveforms to identify sepsis

A massive amount of multimodal data are continuously collected in the intensive care unit (ICU) along each patient stay, offering a great opportunity for the development of smart monitoring devices based on artificial intelligence (AI). The two main sources of relevant information collected in the ICU are the electronic health records (EHRs) and vital sign waveforms continuously recorded at the bedside. While EHRs are already widely processed by AI algorithms for prompt diagnosis and prognosis, AI-based assessments of the patients' pathophysiological state using waveforms are less developed, and their use is still limited to real-time monitoring for basic visual vital sign feedback at the bedside. This study uses data from the MIMIC-III database (PhysioNet) to propose a novel AI approach in ICU patient monitoring that incorporates features estimated by a closed-loop cardiovascular model, with the specific goal of identifying sepsis within the first hour of admission. Our top benchmark results (AUROC = 0.92, AUPRC = 0.90) suggest that features derived by cardiovascular control models may play a key role in identifying sepsis, by continuous monitoring performed through advanced multivariate modelling of vital sign waveforms. This work lays foundations for a deeper data integration paradigm which will help clinicians in their decision-making processes. This article is part of the theme issue 'Advanced computation in cardiovascular physiology: new challenges and opportunities'.

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.

Risk prediction of biomarkers for early multiple organ dysfunction in critically ill patients

Background

Shock and organ damage occur in critically ill patients in the emergency department because of biological responses to invasion, and cytokines play an important role in their development. It is important to predict early multiple organ dysfunction (MOD) because it is useful in predicting patient outcomes and selecting treatment strategies. This study examined the accuracy of biomarkers, including interleukin (IL)-6, in predicting early MOD in critically ill patients compared with that of quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA).

Methods

This was a multicenter observational sub-study. Five universities from 2016 to 2018. Data of adult patients with systemic inflammatory response syndrome who presented to the emergency department or were admitted to the intensive care unit were prospectively evaluated. qSOFA score and each biomarker (IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, tumor necrosis factor-α, C-reactive protein, and procalcitonin [PCT]) level were assessed on Days 0, 1, and 2. The primary outcome was set as MOD on Day 2, and the area under the curve (AUC) was analyzed to evaluate qSOFA scores and biomarker levels.

Results

Of 199 patients, 38 were excluded and 161 were included. Patients with MOD on Day 2 had significantly higher qSOFA, SOFA, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores and a trend toward worse prognosis, including mortality. The AUC for qSOFA score (Day 0) that predicted MOD (Day 2) was 0.728 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.651–0.794). IL-6 (Day 1) showed the highest AUC among all biomarkers (0.790 [95% CI: 0.711–852]). The combination of qSOFA (Day 0) and IL-6 (Day 1) showed improved prediction accuracy (0.842 [95% CI: 0.771–0.893]). The combination model using qSOFA (Day 1) and IL-6 (Day 1) also showed a higher AUC (0.868 [95% CI: 0.799–0.915]). The combination model of IL-8 and PCT also showed a significant improvement in AUC.

Conclusions

The addition of IL-6, IL-8 and PCT to qSOFA scores improved the accuracy of early MOD prediction.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12873-021-00534-z.

Clinical Value of the Lactate/Albumin Ratio and Lactate/Albumin Ratio × Age Score in the Assessment of Prognosis in Patients With Sepsis

Objective: To examine the clinical significance of the blood lactate (Lac)/serum albumin (Alb) ratio and the Lac/Alb × age score for assessing the severity and prognosis of patients with sepsis.

Methods: A total of 8,029 patients with sepsis, aged >18 years were enrolled between June 2001 to October 2012 from the latest version of the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care III (MIMIC-III v.1.4). The general data of the patients were obtained from hospital records and included gender, age, body mass index (BMI), laboratory indices, the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score, and simplified acute physiology score II (SAPS II). The patients were graded and scored according to their age and then divided into a survival or death group based on their prognosis. The Lac/Alb ratio after ICU admission was calculated and compared between the two groups. The risk factors for death in patients with sepsis were determined using multivariate logistic regression analysis, while mortality was examined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and survival curve plots. Finally, the values of the Lac/Alb ratio and Lac/Alb × age score for assessing prognosis of patients with sepsis were analyzed and compared.

Results: After items with default values were excluded, a total of 4,555 patients with sepsis were enrolled (2,526 males and 2,029 females). 2,843 cases were classified as the death group and 1,712 cases in the survival group. (1) The mean age, BMI, SOFA and SAPS II scores were higher in the death group than those in the survival group. Significant differences in baseline data between the two groups were also observed. (2) The patients in the death group were divided further into four subgroups according to the quartile of the Lac/Alb ratio from low to high. Comparison of the four subgroups showed that the death rate rose with an increase in the Lac/Alb ratio, while analysis of the survival curve revealed that patients with a higher Lac/Alb ratio had a worse prognosis. (3) Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that age ≥ 60 years, overweight (BMI ≥ 24 kg/m²), Lac/Alb ratio ≥ 0.16, SOFA score ≥ 2 points, and SAPS II ≥ 40 points were independent risk factors for death in patients with septic. (4) ROC curve analysis indicated that the SAPS II, Lac/Alb x age score, SOFA, and Lac/Alb ratio were the best predictors of death in patients with sepsis. The Lac/Alb × age score was characterized by its simple acquisition and ability to quickly analyze the prognosis of patients.

Conclusion: (1)A high Lac/Alb ratio is an independent risk factor for death in patients with sepsis. (2) Although the prognosis of sepsis can be accurately and comprehensively assessed by multi-dimensional analysis of multiple indices, the Lac/Alb×age score is more accurate and convenient for providing a general assessment of prognosis, so is worthy of further clinical recognition.

Comparison of Diagnostic Accuracies of qSOFA, NEWS, and MEWS to Identify Sepsis in Older Inpatients With Suspected Infection

OBJECTIVES

To determine and compare the accuracies of the quick Sequential (Sepsis-related) Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) and Modified and National Early Warning Scores (NEWS and MEWS) to identify sepsis in older inpatients with suspected infection.

DESIGN

Prospective diagnostic accuracy study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Patients admitted to an acute geriatric unit of an Italian University Hospital with at least one sepsis risk factor and suspected infection defined as antibiotic prescription and associated culture test during hospital stay.

METHODS

Sepsis diagnosis was defined as the presence on discharge documents of International Classification of Diseases, Ninth revision, Clinical Modification codes for severe sepsis, septic shock, or for infection and acute organ disfunction. For each patient, clinical parameters were evaluated at least twice daily throughout hospital stay; qSOFA, NEWS, and MEWS were derived, and worst scores recorded. Positive cutoffs were set at ≥2, ≥7, and ≥5, respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV, respectively), and positive and negative likelihood ratios, as well as areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROCs) were calculated.

RESULTS

Among 230 geriatric patients with suspected infection at risk for sepsis (median age 86 years, 49% women), 30.9% had a sepsis diagnosis. A qSOFA ≥2 was recorded in 111 (48.3%) patients, a MEWS ≥5 in 65 (28.3%), and a NEWS ≥7 in 115 (50.0%). The qSOFA showed the highest sensitivity [81.7%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 71.7%-89.5%], but low specificity (66.7%, 95% CI 59.1%-73.7%), resulting in a high NPV (89.1%; 95% CI 82.7%-93.8%) and poor PPV (52.3%, 95% CI 43.0%-61.4%). The AUROC for qSOFA was 0.76 (95% CI 0.69-0.83), comparable with that of NEWS (0.74, 95% CI 0.67-0.81, P = .44), but significantly higher than that of MEWS (0.70, 95% CI 0.63-0.77, P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Repeated qSOFA determinations are useful to rule out sepsis in geriatric inpatients with suspected infection, but poorly support its diagnosis due to low specificity. More complex MEWS and NEWS do not perform better. Implementation of clinical scores to reliably identify sepsis in older patients is urgently needed.

Performance of qSOFA, SIRS, and the qSOFA + SIRS combinations for predicting 30-day adverse outcomes in patients with suspected infection

BACKGROUND

The use of the quick sequential organ failure assessment score (qSOFA) score and systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria to identify patients at high risk for adverse outcomes in the emergency department (ED) remains controversial due to their low predictive performance and lack of supporting evidence. This study aimed to determine the predictive performance of qSOFA, SIRS, and the qSOFA + SIRS combinations for adverse outcomes.

METHODS

All adult patients admitted to the ED with suspected infection were prospectively included. qSOFA scores ≥ 2, SIRS score ≥ 2 were defined as risk-positive for adverse outcome. Furthermore, combination‑1, which was defined as either qSOFA or SIRS positivity, and combination‑2, which was defined as both qSOFA and SIRS positivity, were also considered as risk-positive for adverse outcome. The predictive performance of qSOFA, SIRS, combination‑1, and combination‑2 for a composite adverse outcome within 30 days, including mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and non-ICU hospitalization, were determined.

RESULTS

A total of 350 patients were included in the analysis. The composite outcome occurred in 211 (60.3%) patients within 30 days: mortality in 84 (24%), ICU admission in 78 (22.3%), and non-ICU hospitalization in 154 (44%). The sensitivity and specificity, respectively, were determined in predicting composite outcome as 0.34 and 0.93 for qSOFA, 0.81 and 0.31 for SIRS, 0.84 and 0.28 for combination‑1, and 0.31 and 0.96 for combination‑2.

CONCLUSION

The study results suggest that qSOFA and combination‑2 could be a useful tool for confirming patients at high risk for adverse outcomes. Although SIRS and combination‑1 could be helpful for excluding high-risk patients, the requirement of white blood cell counts limits their utilization for screening.

Monocyte Distribution Width, Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio, and Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Improves Early Prediction for Sepsis at the Emergency

(1) Background: Sepsis is a life-threatening condition, and most patients with sepsis first present to the emergency department (ED) where early identification of sepsis is challenging due to the unavailability of an effective diagnostic model. (2) Methods: In this retrospective study, patients aged ≥20 years who presented to the ED of an academic hospital with systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) were included. The SIRS, sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA), and quick SOFA (qSOFA) scores were obtained for all patients. Routine complete blood cell testing in conjugation with the examination of new inflammatory biomarkers, namely monocyte distribution width (MDW), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), was performed at the ED. Propensity score matching was performed between patients with and without sepsis. Logistic regression was used for constructing models for early sepsis prediction. (3) Results: We included 296 patients with sepsis and 1184 without sepsis. A SIRS score of >2, a SOFA score of >2, and a qSOFA score of >1 showed low sensitivity, moderate specificity, and limited diagnostic accuracy for predicting early sepsis infection (c-statistics of 0.660, 0.576, and 0.536, respectively). MDW > 20, PLR > 9, and PLR > 210 showed higher sensitivity and moderate specificity. When we combined these biomarkers and scoring systems, we observed a significant improvement in diagnostic performance (c-statistics of 0.796 for a SIRS score of >2, 0.761 for a SOFA score of >2, and 0.757 for a qSOFA score of >1); (4) Conclusions: The new biomarkers MDW, NLR, and PLR can be used for the early detection of sepsis in the current sepsis scoring systems.

The Importance of Early Management of Severe Biliary Infection: Current Concepts

Background

The incidence of biliary infections is rising worldwide and has become one of the main reasons for emergency admissions.

Methods

This is a narrative review of the literature emphasizing news concepts related to the early management of biliary diseases.

Results

The bacteriology is frequently polymicrobial, with a progressive increase of multidrug resistant bacteria. The form of presentation is variable, and the mortality rate may reach 20%. When cholecystitis or cholangitis is suspected, ultrasound is the gold standard imaging test. Depending on the severity of presentation, local resistances, and risk factors for multiresistant organisms, the most appropriate empirical antibiotic treatment must be initiated. In acute cholecystitis, cholecystectomy plays the main therapeutic role. In patients not suitable for surgery, percutaneous cholecystostomy is a valid alternative for source control. Treatment of severe cholangitis is based on the drainage of the bile duct and antibiotic therapy.

Conclusions

Biliary infections are serious conditions that can lead to sepsis and death. The introduction of new internationally accepted guidelines, based on clinical presentation, laboratory tests, and imaging, provides a platform for their timely diagnosis and management. Early severity assessment, initiation of intravenous antibiotics, and source control are fundamental to improving morbidity and mortality.

Comparison of SIRS criteria and qSOFA score for identifying culture-positive sepsis in the emergency department: a prospective cross-sectional multicentre study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the daily practice of two emergency departments (ED) in the Netherlands, where systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score are used differently as screening tools for culture-positive sepsis.

DESIGN

A prospective cross-sectional multicentre study.

SETTING

Two EDs at two European clinical teaching hospitals in the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

760 patients with suspected infection who met SIRS criteria or had a qualifying qSOFA score who were treated at two EDs in the Netherlands from 1 January to 1 March 2018 were included.

METHODS

SIRS criteria and qSOFA score were calculated for each patient. The first hospital treated the patients who met SIRS criteria following the worldwide Surviving Sepsis Campaign protocol. At the second hospital, only patients who met the qualifying qSOFA score received this treatment. Therefore, patients could be divided into five groups: (1) SIRS+, qSOFA-, not treated according to protocol (reference group); (2) SIRS+, qSOFA-, treated according to protocol; (3) SIRS+, qSOFA+, treated according to protocol; (4) SIRS-, qSOFA+, not treated according to protocol; (5) SIRS-, qSOFA+, treated according to protocol.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

To prove culture-positive sepsis was present, cultures were used as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and intensive care unit (ICU) admission.

RESULTS

98.9% met SIRS criteria and 11.7% met qSOFA score. Positive predictive values of SIRS criteria and qSOFA score were 41.2% (95% CI 37.4% to 45.2%) and 48.1% (95% CI 37.4% to 58.9%), respectively. HRs were 0.79 (95% CI 0.40 to 1.56, p=0.500), 3.42 (95% CI 1.82 to 6.44, p<0.001), 18.94 (95% CI 2.48 to 144.89, p=0.005) and 4.97 (95% CI 1.44 to 17.16, p=0.011) for groups 2-5, respectively.

CONCLUSION

qSOFA score performed as well as SIRS criteria for identifying culture-positive sepsis and performed significantly better for predicting in-hospital mortality and ICU admission. This study shows that SIRS criteria are no longer necessary and recommends qSOFA score as the standard for identifying culture-positive sepsis in the ED.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NL8315.

Impact of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Sepsis Core Measure on Antibiotic Use

BACKGROUND

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) implemented a core measure sepsis (SEP-1) bundle in 2015. One element was initiation of broad-spectrum antibiotics within 3 hours of diagnosis. The policy has the potential to increase antibiotic use and Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). We evaluated the impact of SEP-1 implementation on broad-spectrum antibiotic use and CDI occurrence rates.

METHODS

Monthly adult antibiotic data for 4 antibiotic categories (surgical prophylaxis, broad-spectrum for community-acquired infections, broad-spectrum for hospital-onset/multidrug-resistant [MDR] organisms, and anti-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus [MRSA]) from 111 hospitals participating in the Clinical Data Base Resource Manager were evaluated in periods before (October 2014-September 2015) and after (October 2015-June 2017) policy implementation. Interrupted time series analyses, using negative binomial regression, evaluated changes in antibiotic category use and CDI rates.

RESULTS

At the hospital level, there was an immediate increase in the level of broad-spectrum agents for hospital-onset/MDR organisms (+2.3%, P = .0375) as well as a long-term increase in trend (+0.4% per month, P = .0273). There was also an immediate increase in level of overall antibiotic use (+1.4%, P = .0293). CDI rates unexpectedly decreased at the time of SEP-1 implementation. When analyses were limited to patients with sepsis, there was a significant level increase in use of all antibiotic categories at the time of SEP-1 implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

SEP-1 implementation was associated with immediate and long-term increases in broad-spectrum hospital-onset/MDR organism antibiotics. Antimicrobial stewardship programs should evaluate sepsis treatment for opportunities to de-escalate broad therapy as indicated.

Development and validation of an early warning tool for sepsis and decompensation in children during emergency department triage

This study was designed to develop and validate an early warning system for sepsis based on a predictive model of critical decompensation. Data from the electronic medical records for 537,837 visits to a pediatric Emergency Department (ED) from March 2013 to December 2019 were collected. A multiclass stochastic gradient boosting model was built to identify early warning signs associated with death, severe sepsis, non-severe sepsis, and bacteremia. Model features included triage vital signs, previous diagnoses, medications, and healthcare utilizations within 6 months of the index ED visit. There were 483 patients who had severe sepsis and/or died, 1102 had non-severe sepsis, 1103 had positive bacteremia tests, and the remaining had none of the events. The most important predictors were age, heart rate, length of stay of previous hospitalizations, temperature, systolic blood pressure, and prior sepsis. The one-versus-all area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC) were 0.979 (0.967, 0.991), 0.990 (0.985, 0.995), 0.976 (0.972, 0.981), and 0.968 (0.962, 0.974) for death, severe sepsis, non-severe sepsis, and bacteremia without sepsis respectively. The multi-class macro average AUROC and area under the precision recall curve were 0.977 and 0.316 respectively. The study findings were used to develop an automated early warning decision tool for sepsis. Implementation of this model in pediatric EDs will allow sepsis-related critical decompensation to be predicted accurately after a few seconds of triage.

Monocyte distribution width compared with C-reactive protein and procalcitonin for early sepsis detection in the emergency department

PURPOSE

Monocyte distribution width (MDW) has been suggested as an early biomarker of sepsis, but few studies have compared MDW with conventional biomarkers, including C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT). This study evaluated MDW as a biomarker for sepsis and compared it with CRP and PCT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients aged 18-80 years who visited the emergency department were screened and prospectively enrolled in a tertiary medical center. Complete blood count, MDW, CRP, and PCT were examined. Diagnostic performance for sepsis was tested using the area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, sensitivity, and specificity.

RESULTS

In total, 665 patients were screened, and 549 patients with valid laboratory test results were included in the analysis. The patients were categorized into three groups according to the Sepsis-3 criteria: non-infection, infection, and sepsis. MDW showed the highest value in the sepsis group (median [interquartile range], 24.0 [20.8-27.8]). The AUC values for MDW, CRP, PCT, and white blood cells for predicting sepsis were 0.71 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67-0.75), 0.75 (95% CI, 0.71-0.78], 0.76 (95% CI, 0.72-0.79, and 0.61 (95% CI, 0.57-0.65), respectively. With the optimal cutoff value of the cohort, the sensitivity was 83.0% for MDW (cutoff, 19.8), 69.7% for CRP (cutoff, 4.0), and 76.6% for PCT (cutoff, 0.05). The combination of quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) with MDW improved the AUC (0.76; 95% CI, 0.72-0.80) to a greater extent than qSOFA alone (0.67; 95% CI, 0.62-0.72).

CONCLUSIONS

MDW reflected a diagnostic performance comparable to that of conventional diagnostic markers, implying that MDW is an alternative biomarker. The combination of MDW and qSOFA improves the diagnostic performance for early sepsis.

Quick sequential organ failure assessment versus systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria for emergency department patients with suspected infection

Previous studies have shown inconsistent prognostic accuracy for mortality with both quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) and the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria. We aimed to validate the accuracy of qSOFA and the SIRS criteria for predicting in-hospital mortality in patients with suspected infection in the emergency department. A prospective study was conducted including participants with suspected infection who were hospitalised or died in 34 emergency departments in Japan. Prognostic accuracy of qSOFA and SIRS criteria for in-hospital mortality was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve. Of the 1060 participants, 402 (37.9%) and 915 (86.3%) had qSOFA ≥ 2 and SIRS criteria ≥ 2 (given thresholds), respectively, and there were 157 (14.8%) in-hospital deaths. Greater accuracy for in-hospital mortality was shown with qSOFA than with the SIRS criteria (AUROC: 0.64 versus 0.52, difference + 0.13, 95% CI [+ 0.07, + 0.18]). Sensitivity and specificity for predicting in-hospital mortality at the given thresholds were 0.55 and 0.65 based on qSOFA and 0.88 and 0.14 based on SIRS criteria, respectively. To predict in-hospital mortality in patients visiting to the emergency department with suspected infection, qSOFA was demonstrated to be modestly more accurate than the SIRS criteria albeit insufficiently sensitive.Clinical Trial Registration: The study was pre-registered in the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000027258).

Comparing the Ability and Accuracy of mSOFA, qSOFA, and qSOFA-65 in Predicting the Status of Nontraumatic Patients Referred to a Hospital Emergency Department: A Prospective Study

Introduction

This study was proposed to compare the ability and accuracy of modified sequential organ failure assessment (mSOFA), quick SOFA (qSOFA), and qSOFA-65 in predicting the status of nontraumatic patients referred to hospital emergency departments (EDs).

Materials and methods

This study was a prospective design that performed on the 746 nontraumatic patients referred to the ED. Each patient data was collected using a demographic questionnaire, mSOFA, qSOFA, and qSOFA-65 scales. Related variables of each scale were recorded based on patients’ medical records. Then, the outcome of each patient in the ED was followed up and recorded. The severity and specificity of each scale were estimated by the area under receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve at 99% confidence interval (CI).

Results

The mean and standard deviation of scores were as follows: mSOFA = 4.40 ± 2.58, qSOFA = 0.50 ± 0.70, and qSOFA-65 = 0.92 ± 0.96. Patients requiring admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) were identified with AUROC curve as follows: mSOFA = 0.882 (99% CI = 0.778–0.865); qSOFA = 0.717 (99% CI = 0.662–0.773); and qSOFA-65 = 0.771 (99% CI = 0.721–0.820), which showed that mSOFA has higher sensitivity and specificity than the other two scales in identifying patients requiring admission to the ICU.

Conclusion

All three scales were found to be reliable for identifying nontraumatic patients at risk of death and patients requiring admission to the ICU. However, since the time and data required to complete qSOFA and qSOFA-65 are much less than those of mSOFA, it is recommended that qSOFA and especially qSOFA-65 be used in ED to identify critically ill nontraumatic patients.

How to cite this article

Ebrahimian A, Shahcheragh SMT, Fakhr-Movahedi A. Comparing the Ability and Accuracy of mSOFA, qSOFA, and qSOFA-65 in Predicting the Status of Nontraumatic Patients Referred to a Hospital Emergency Department: A Prospective Study. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(11):1045–1050.

Unpacking Prevalence and Dichotomy in Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment and Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome Parameters: Observational Data-Driven Approach Backed by Sepsis Pathophysiology

BACKGROUND

Considering morbidity, mortality, and annual treatment costs, the dramatic rise in the incidence of sepsis and septic shock among intensive care unit (ICU) admissions in US hospitals is an increasing concern. Recent changes in the sepsis definition (sepsis-3), based on the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), have motivated the international medical informatics research community to investigate score recalculation and information retrieval, and to study the intersection between sepsis-3 and the previous definition (sepsis-2) based on systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) parameters.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was three-fold. First, we aimed to unpack the most prevalent criterion for sepsis (for both sepsis-3 and sepsis-2 predictors). Second, we intended to determine the most prevalent sepsis scenario in the ICU among 4 possible scenarios for qSOFA and 11 possible scenarios for SIRS. Third, we investigated the multicollinearity or dichotomy among qSOFA and SIRS predictors.

METHODS

This observational study was conducted according to the most recent update of Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC-III, Version 1.4), the critical care database developed by MIT. The qSOFA (sepsis-3) and SIRS (sepsis-2) parameters were analyzed for patients admitted to critical care units from 2001 to 2012 in Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (Boston, MA, USA) to determine the prevalence and underlying relation between these parameters among patients undergoing sepsis screening. We adopted a multiblind Delphi method to seek a rationale for decisions in several stages of the research design regarding handling missing data and outlier values, statistical imputations and biases, and generalizability of the study.

RESULTS

Altered mental status in the Glasgow Coma Scale (59.28%, 38,854/65,545 observations) was the most prevalent sepsis-3 (qSOFA) criterion and the white blood cell count (53.12%, 17,163/32,311 observations) was the most prevalent sepsis-2 (SIRS) criterion confronted in the ICU. In addition, the two-factored sepsis criterion of high respiratory rate (≥22 breaths/minute) and altered mental status (28.19%, among four possible qSOFA scenarios besides no sepsis) was the most prevalent sepsis-3 (qSOFA) scenario, and the three-factored sepsis criterion of tachypnea, high heart rate, and high white blood cell count (12.32%, among 11 possible scenarios besides no sepsis) was the most prevalent sepsis-2 (SIRS) scenario in the ICU. Moreover, the absolute Pearson correlation coefficients were not significant, thereby nullifying the likelihood of any linear correlation among the critical parameters and assuring the lack of multicollinearity between the parameters. Although this further bolsters evidence for their dichotomy, the absence of multicollinearity cannot guarantee that two random variables are statistically independent.

CONCLUSIONS

Quantifying the prevalence of the qSOFA criteria of sepsis-3 in comparison with the SIRS criteria of sepsis-2, and understanding the underlying dichotomy among these parameters provides significant inferences for sepsis treatment initiatives in the ICU and informing hospital resource allocation. These data-driven results further offer design implications for multiparameter intelligent sepsis prediction in the ICU.

Rapid Systematic Review: The Appropriate Use of Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) in the Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

The concept of sepsis has recently been redefined by an International Task Force. The task force recommended the use of the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score instead of Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) criteria to identify patients at high risk of mortality from sepsis outside of the intensive care unit, including in emergency departments (EDs). However, the primary outcome for qSOFA is prediction of risk for mortality, which is not the principal outcome measure considered in the ED. From the ED perspective, the priorities are the identification (diagnosis) of the septic patient and then the initiation of time-sensitive, life-saving interventions.

METHOD

We performed a structured review of PubMed from January 2012 to December 2018, limited to reports involving human subjects and written in English language and containing relevant keywords. The highest-quality studies were then reviewed in a structured format. We utilized these studies to estimate the sensitivity and specificity of SIRS and qSOFA for diagnosis of sepsis.

RESULTS

Thirteen unique articles were identified for further review, and the 11 highest-grade articles (C and D) were determined to be appropriate for inclusion in this review, and the two low-grade articles were excluded (E).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on multiple retrospective and few prospective studies, it appears that qSOFA performs poorly in comparison with SIRS as a diagnostic tool for ED patients who may have sepsis or septic shock. However, qSOFA does have a strong prognostic accuracy for mortality in those ED patients already diagnosed with sepsis or septic shock.

Lactate-enhanced-qSOFA (LqSOFA) score is superior to the other four rapid scoring tools in predicting in-hospital mortality rate of the sepsis patients

Background

The rising prevalence of early therapy for sepsis has led to the demand for rapid risk-stratification tools that can estimate the risk of in-hospital mortality for sepsis patients and the need for intensive care unit (ICU) admission. A robust risk-stratification tool is crucial for in-time sepsis treatment. This study aimed to compare the abilities of five rapid scoring systems, i.e., LqSOFA score, qSOFA score, SIRS, MEDS, and MEWS, in predicting the mortality in hospital and ICU admission for sepsis patients.

Methods

A retrospective observational clinical study was conducted in West China Hospital. Our cases included all patients admitted to the hospital with a diagnosis of sepsis (sepsis-3). We calculated five rapid prediction scores for the enrolled cases. We then compared each rapid score’s ability to predict in-hospital mortality and ICU admission.

Results

A total of 821 of mixed sepsis patients by sepsis-3 definition were included. The all-cause hospital mortality rate was 21.1%. The LqSOFA score presented the most significant discrimination with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.751. The AUC of the LqSOFA score for mortality in the hospital was significantly higher than qSOFA (AUC 0.717), SIRS (AUC 0.704), MEDS (AUC 0.670), and MEWS (AUC 0.685).

Conclusions

LqSOFA is a superior prognostic tool for predicting mortality in the hospital. It may provide more exact information for hospital mortality than the other 4 rapid scores in treating sepsis patients.

Sepsis and Septic Shock - Basics of diagnosis, pathophysiology and clinical decision making

Sepsis and septic shock are major causes of mortality among hospitalized patients. The sepsis state is due to dysregulated host response to infection, leading to inflammatory damage to nearly every organ system. Early recognition of sepsis and appropriate treatment with antibiotics, fluids, and vasopressors is essential to reducing organ system injury and mortality. This review summarizes the current understanding of the epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment of sepsis and septic shock.

Predictive Accuracy of the Quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment Score in Brazil. A Prospective Multicenter Study

Rationale: Although proposed as a clinical prompt to sepsis based on predictive validity for mortality, the Quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score is often used as a screening tool, which requires high sensitivity.

Objectives: To assess the predictive accuracy of qSOFA for mortality in Brazil, focusing on sensitivity.

Methods: We prospectively collected data from two cohorts of emergency department and ward patients. Cohort 1 included patients with suspected infection but without organ dysfunction or sepsis (22 hospitals: 3 public and 19 private). Cohort 2 included patients with sepsis (54 hospitals: 24 public and 28 private). The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. The predictive accuracy of qSOFA was examined considering only the worst values before the suspicion of infection or sepsis.

Measurements and Main Results: Cohort 1 contained 5,460 patients (mortality rate, 14.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 13.1–15.0), among whom 78.3% had a qSOFA score less than or equal to 1 (mortality rate, 8.3%; 95% CI, 7.5–9.1). The sensitivity of a qSOFA score greater than or equal to 2 for predicting mortality was 53.9% and the 95% CI was 50.3 to 57.5. The sensitivity was higher for a qSOFA greater than or equal to 1 (84.9%; 95% CI, 82.1–87.3), a qSOFA score greater than or equal to 1 or lactate greater than 2 mmol/L (91.3%; 95% CI, 89.0–93.2), and systemic inflammatory response syndrome plus organ dysfunction (68.7%; 95% CI, 65.2–71.9). Cohort 2 contained 4,711 patients, among whom 62.3% had a qSOFA score less than or equal to 1 (mortality rate, 17.3%; 95% CI, 15.9–18.7), whereas in public hospitals the mortality rate was 39.3% (95% CI, 35.5–43.3).

Conclusions: A qSOFA score greater than or equal to 2 has low sensitivity for predicting death in patients with suspected infection in a developing country. Using a qSOFA score greater than or equal to 2 as a screening tool for sepsis may miss patients who ultimately die. Using a qSOFA score greater than or equal to 1 or adding lactate to a qSOFA score greater than or equal to 1 may improve sensitivity.

Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03158493).

Prospective evaluation of the quickSOFA score as a screening for sepsis in the emergency department

In 2016, the new bedside tool quick Sequential (Sepsis-related) Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) was presented to identify patients at high risk of developing sepsis or adverse outcome. The aim of this study was to investigate the diagnostic performance of the qSOFA scoring system as a screening in patients presenting at an emergency department (ED) of any cause. Therefore, we compared qSOFA with the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria and two modifications of qSOFA score. This is a prospective single-center study including patients presenting to the ED of any non-traumatic cause. Primary outcome was development of sepsis within 48 h, secondary outcomes were 30-day mortality and ICU stay for > 3 days. Data were collected within one hour after arrival to indicate an impression of initial medical contact. Among 1,668 patients, 105 sepsis cases were identified. 8.4% presented with qSOFA ≥ 2, 27.2% with SIRS ≥ 2 within one hour. Sensitivity of qSOFA in predicting sepsis was lower compared to the SIRS criteria. qSOFA showed better prognostic accuracy for 30-day mortality compared to SIRS (p < 0.05), but not for prolonged ICU stay (p = 0.56). Modification of qSOFA in replacing GCS by other scoring systems recording altered mental status did not improve its sensitivity. The qSOFA score has poor sensitivity to identify patients at risk of developing sepsis and can therefore not be considered as an adequate screening for sepsis in patients presenting to the ED. Furthermore, a positive qSOFA at arrival at the ED showed no sufficient reliability in detecting patients with adverse clinical course.

Prognostic accuracy of SIRS criteria and qSOFA score for in-hospital mortality among influenza patients in the emergency department

BACKGROUND

The seasonal influenza epidemic is an important public health issue worldwide. Early predictive identification of patients with potentially worse outcome is important in the emergency department (ED). Similarly as with bacterial infection, influenza can cause sepsis. This study was conducted to investigate the effectiveness of the Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) criteria and the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score as prognostic predictors for ED patients with influenza.

METHODS

This single-center, retrospective cohort study investigated data that was retrieved from a hospital-based research database. Adult ED patients (age ≥ 18 at admission) with laboratory-proven influenza from 2010 to 2016 were included for data analysis. The initial SIRS and qSOFA scores were both collected. The primary outcome was the utility of each score in the prediction of in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

For the study period, 3561 patients met the study inclusion criteria. The overall in-hospital mortality was 2.7% (95 patients). When the qSOFA scores were 0, 1, 2, and 3, the percentages of in-hospital mortality were 0.6, 7.2, 15.9, and 25%, respectively. Accordingly, the odds ratios (ORs) were 7.72, 11.92, and 22.46, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity was 24 and 96.2%, respectively, when the qSOFA score was ≥2. However, the SIRS criteria showed no significant associations with the primary outcome. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.864, which is significantly higher than that with SIRS, where the AUC was 0.786 (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The qSOFA score potentially is a useful prognostic predictor for influenza and could be applied in the ED as a risk stratification tool. However, qSOFA may not be a good screening tool for triage because of its poor sensitivity. The SIRS criteria showed poor predictive performance in influenza for mortality as an outcome. Further research is needed to determine the role of these predictive tools in influenza and in other viral infections.

Monocyte distribution width enhances early sepsis detection in the emergency department beyond SIRS and qSOFA

Background

The initial presentation of sepsis in the emergency department (ED) is difficult to distinguish from other acute illnesses based upon similar clinical presentations. A new blood parameter, a measurement of increased monocyte volume distribution width (MDW), may be used in combination with other clinical parameters to improve early sepsis detection. We sought to determine if MDW, when combined with other available clinical parameters at the time of ED presentation, improves the early detection of sepsis.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected clinical data available during the initial ED encounter of 2158 adult patients who were enrolled from emergency departments of three major academic centers, of which 385 fulfilled Sepsis-2 criteria, and 243 fulfilled Sepsis-3 criteria within 12 h of admission. Sepsis probabilities were determined based on MDW values, alone or in combination with components of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) or quick sepsis-related organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score obtained during the initial patient presentation (i.e., within 2 h of ED admission).

Results

Abnormal MDW (> 20.0) consistently increased sepsis probability, and normal MDW consistently reduced sepsis probability when used in combination with SIRS criteria (tachycardia, tachypnea, abnormal white blood count, or body temperature) or qSOFA criteria (tachypnea, altered mental status, but not hypotension). Overall, and regardless of other SIRS or qSOFA variables, MDW > 20.0 (vs. MDW ≤ 20.0) at the time of the initial ED encounter was associated with an approximately 6-fold increase in the odds of Sepsis-2, and an approximately 4-fold increase in the odds of Sepsis-3.

Conclusions

MDW improves the early detection of sepsis during the initial ED encounter and is complementary to SIRS and qSOFA parameters that are currently used for this purpose. This study supports the incorporation of MDW with other readily available clinical parameters during the initial ED encounter for the early detection of sepsis.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03145428. First posted May 9, 2017. The first subjects were enrolled June 19, 2017, and the study completion date was January 26, 2018.

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.

qSOFA score for prediction of sepsis outcome in emergency department

Objective:

The third international consensus definition for sepsis and septic shock (sepsis 3) task force recently introduced qSOFA (quick sequential organ failure assessment) as a score for detection of patients at risk of sepsis outside of intensive care units. We performed this study to evaluate the validity of qSOFA for early detection and risk stratification of septic patients in emergency department.

Methods:

We conducted this study in an emergency department of the largest university affiliated hospital in northwest of Iran from Sept 2015 to Sept 2016. One hundred and forty patients who were SIRS positive with a suspected infection without alternative diagnosis and a microbiological proven infection were enrolled in this study. qSOFA was calculated for each patient and correlated with sepsis grades and mortality.

Results:

From 140 patients 84 (60%) had positive qSOFA score and 56 (40%) patients had negative qSOFA score. Our results showed that near half of patients with positive qSOFA expired during their stay in hospital while this was about 5% for patients with negative qSOFA. ROC curve of study regarding prediction of outcome with qSOFA showed an area under curve of 0.59. (P value: 0.04). Time spent to sepsis detection was 16 minutes shorter with qSOFA score compared to SIRS criteria in this study.

Conclusion:

In patients with suspected sepsis, qSOFA has acceptable value for risk stratification of severity, multi organ failure and mortality. It seems that education of medical staff and frequent screening of patients for warning signs can help to increase the value of qSOFA in prediction of mortality in critically ill septic patients.

Monocyte Distribution Width: A Novel Indicator of Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 in High-Risk Emergency Department Patients

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Objectives:

Most septic patients are initially encountered in the emergency department where sepsis recognition is often delayed, in part due to the lack of effective biomarkers. This study evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of peripheral blood monocyte distribution width alone and in combination with WBC count for early sepsis detection in the emergency department.

Design:

An Institutional Review Board approved, blinded, observational, prospective cohort study conducted between April 2017 and January 2018.

Setting:

Subjects were enrolled from emergency departments at three U.S. academic centers.

Patients:

Adult patients, 18–89 years, with complete blood count performed upon presentation to the emergency department, and who remained hospitalized for at least 12 hours. A total of 2,212 patients were screened, of whom 2,158 subjects were enrolled and categorized per Sepsis-2 criteria, such as controls (n = 1,088), systemic inflammatory response syndrome (n = 441), infection (n = 244), and sepsis (n = 385), and Sepsis-3 criteria, such as control (n = 1,529), infection (n = 386), and sepsis (n = 243).

Interventions:

The primary outcome determined whether an monocyte distribution width of greater than 20.0 U, alone or in combination with WBC, improves early sepsis detection by Sepsis-2 criteria. Secondary endpoints determined monocyte distribution width performance for Sepsis-3 detection.

Measurements and Main Results:

Monocyte distribution width greater than 20.0 U distinguished sepsis from all other conditions based on either Sepsis-2 criteria (area under the curve, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.76–0.82) or Sepsis-3 criteria (area under the curve, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.69–0.76). The negative predictive values for monocyte distribution width less than or equal to 20 U for Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 were 93% and 94%, respectively. Monocyte distribution width greater than 20.0 U combined with an abnormal WBC further improved Sepsis-2 detection (area under the curve, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.83–0.88) and as reflected by likelihood ratio and added value analyses. Normal WBC and monocyte distribution width inferred a six-fold lower sepsis probability.

Conclusions:

An monocyte distribution width value of greater than 20.0 U is effective for sepsis detection, based on either Sepsis-2 criteria or Sepsis-3 criteria, during the initial emergency department encounter. In tandem with WBC, monocyte distribution width is further predicted to enhance medical decision making during early sepsis management in the emergency department.

Factors associated with the development of septic shock in patients with candidemia: a post hoc analysis from two prospective cohorts

BACKGROUND

Almost one third of the patients with candidemia develop septic shock. The understanding why some patients do and others do not develop septic shock is very limited. The objective of this study was to identify variables associated with septic shock development in a large population of patients with candidemia.

METHODS

A post hoc analysis was performed on two prospective, multicenter cohort of patients with candidemia from 12 hospitals in Spain and Italy. All episodes occurring from September 2016 to February 2018 were analyzed to assess variables associated with septic shock development defined according to The Third International Consensus Definition for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3).

RESULTS

Of 317 candidemic patients, 99 (31.2%) presented septic shock attributable to candidemia. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identifies the following factors associated with septic shock development: age > 50 years (OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.03-6.41, p = 0.04), abdominal source of the infection (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.04-4.55, p = 0.04), and admission to a general ward at the time of candidemia onset (OR 0.21, 95% CI, 0.12-0.44, p = 0.001). Septic shock development was independently associated with a greater risk of 30-day mortality (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.08-4.24, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Age and abdominal source of the infection are the most important factors significantly associated with the development of septic shock in patients with candidemia. Our findings suggest that host factors and source of the infection may be more important for development of septic shock than intrinsic virulence factors of organisms.

Evaluation of quick sequential organ failure assessment and systemic inflammatory response syndrome in patients with gram negative bloodstream infection

BACKGROUND

The quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score predicts mortality in patients with suspected infection. We sought to understand how well qSOFA and the Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) criteria predict gram negative bacteraemia.

METHODS

We prospectively evaluated 99 patients with gram negative bloodstream infection from a single tertiary centre. We assessed the utility of SIRS and qSOFA for their rate of positivity and association with early delivery of antibiotics (<3 h).

RESULTS

The SIRS criteria had the highest positivity rate amongst patients with gram negative bacteraemia (85%) compared to the qSOFA criteria (25%) on the day of first positive culture. Positive SIRS criteria was the only score associated with delivery of antibiotics within 3 h (Relative risk 3.5, 95% Confidence interval 1.3 to 12.5, p = < 0.02).

CONCLUSION

In patients with gram negative bloodstream infection SIRS criteria was the most common positive risk score and had a higher association with early delivery of antibiotics when compared to qSOFA.

Time to Recognition of Sepsis in the Emergency Department Using Electronic Health Record Data: A Comparative Analysis of Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, and Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment

OBJECTIVES

Early identification of sepsis is critical to improving patient outcomes. Impact of the new sepsis definition (Sepsis-3) on timing of recognition in the emergency department has not been evaluated. Our study objective was to compare time to meeting systemic inflammatory response syndrome (Sepsis-2) criteria, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (Sepsis-3) criteria, and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment criteria using electronic health record data.

DESIGN

Retrospective, observational study.

SETTING

The emergency department at the University of California, San Francisco.

PATIENTS

Emergency department encounters between June 2012 and December 2016 for patients greater than or equal to 18 years old with blood cultures ordered, IV antibiotic receipt, and identification with sepsis via systemic inflammatory response syndrome or Sequential Organ Failure Assessment within 72 hours of emergency department presentation.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We analyzed timestamped electronic health record data from 16,612 encounters identified as sepsis by greater than or equal to 2 systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria or a Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score greater than or equal to 2. The primary outcome was time from emergency department presentation to meeting greater than or equal to 2 systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment greater than or equal to 2, and/or greater than or equal to 2 quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment criteria. There were 9,087 patients (54.7%) that met systemic inflammatory response syndrome-first a median of 26 minutes post-emergency department presentation (interquartile range, 0-109 min), with 83.1% meeting Sequential Organ Failure Assessment criteria a median of 118 minutes later (interquartile range, 44-401 min). There were 7,037 patients (42.3%) that met Sequential Organ Failure Assessment-first, a median of 113 minutes post-emergency department presentation (interquartile range, 60-251 min). Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment was met in 46.4% of patients a median of 351 minutes post-emergency department presentation (interquartile range, 67-1,165 min). Adjusted odds of in-hospital mortality were 39% greater in patients who met systemic inflammatory response syndrome-first compared with those who met Sequential Organ Failure Assessment-first (odds ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.20-1.61).

CONCLUSIONS

Systemic inflammatory response syndrome and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment initially identified distinct populations. Using systemic inflammatory response syndrome resulted in earlier electronic health record sepsis identification in greater than 50% of patients. Using Sequential Organ Failure Assessment alone may delay identification. Using systemic inflammatory response syndrome alone may lead to missed sepsis presenting as acute organ dysfunction. Thus, a combination of inflammatory (systemic inflammatory response syndrome) and organ dysfunction (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment) criteria may enhance timely electronic health record-based sepsis identification.