Diagnosing Sepsis: qSOFA is Not the Tool We're Looking For

Navigating the Modern Landscape of Sepsis: Advances in Diagnosis and Treatment

Sepsis poses a significant threat to human health due to its high morbidity and mortality rates worldwide. Traditional diagnostic methods for identifying sepsis or its causative organisms are time-consuming and contribute to a high mortality rate. Biomarkers have been developed to overcome these limitations and are currently used for sepsis diagnosis, prognosis prediction, and treatment response assessment. Over the past few decades, more than 250 biomarkers have been identified, a few of which have been used in clinical decision-making. Consistent with the limitations of diagnosing sepsis, there is currently no specific treatment for sepsis. Currently, the general treatment for sepsis is conservative and includes timely antibiotic use and hemodynamic support. When planning sepsis-specific treatment, it is important to select the most suitable patient, considering the heterogeneous nature of sepsis. This comprehensive review summarizes current and evolving biomarkers and therapeutic approaches for sepsis.

The value of the INFECTIONS scoring system in identifying bacterial infections among patients presenting at the emergency department of a middle-income country: A pilot study

PURPOSE

To investigate which scoring system is the most accurate tool in predicting mortality among the infected patients who present to the emergency department in a middle-income country, and to validate a new scoring system to predict bacterial infections.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, single-center study among patients who were admitted via the emergency department of a public hospital. All patients who were started on antibiotics were included in the study, while patients aged < 18 years were excluded. Data collected includeding patients' demographics, vital signs and basic laboratory parameters like white blood cell count and creatinine. The sensitivity and specificity of different scoring systems were calculated as well as their negative and positive predictive values. Logistic regression was used to derive a novel early warning system for bacterial infections. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) was computed for each scoring model.

RESULTS

In total, 109 patients were included in this study. The quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA), search out severity and rapid acute physiology score had the highest AUROC (≥ 0.89) for predicting mortality, while qSOFA and universal vital assessment were the simplest scoring systems with an AUROC > 0.85; however, these scoring systems failed to predict whether patients were truly infected. The INFECTIONS (short for impaired mental status, not conscious, fast heart rate, elevated creatinine, high temperature, on inotrope, low oxygen, high neutrophils and high sugar) model reached an AUROC of 0.88 to more accurately predict the infectious state of a patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Middle-income countries should use the qSOFA or universal vital assessment score to identify the sickest patients in emergency department. The INFECTIONS score may help recognize patients with bacterial infections, but it should be further validated in multiple countries prior to widely use.

Biomarker-Based Assessment Model for Detecting Sepsis: A Retrospective Cohort Study

The concept of the quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) simplifies sepsis detection, and the next SOFA should be analyzed subsequently to diagnose sepsis. However, it does not include the concept of suspected infection. Thus, we simply developed a biomarker-based assessment model for detecting sepsis (BADS). We retrospectively reviewed the electronic health records of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) of a 2000-bed university tertiary referral hospital in South Korea. A total of 989 patients were enrolled, with 77.4% (n = 765) of them having sepsis. The patients were divided into a ratio of 8:2 and assigned to a training and a validation set. We used logistic regression analysis and the Hosmer-Lemeshow test to derive the BADS and assess the model. BADS was developed by analyzing the variables and then assigning weights to the selected variables: mean arterial pressure, shock index, lactate, and procalcitonin. The area under the curve was 0.754, 0.615, 0.763, and 0.668 for BADS, qSOFA, SOFA, and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) II, respectively, showing that BADS is not inferior in sepsis prediction compared with SOFA. BADS could be a simple scoring method to detect sepsis in critically ill patients quickly at the bedside.

SOFA Score in relation to Sepsis: Clinical Implications in Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prognostic Assessment

Purpose

To analyze the clinical significance of the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score in the diagnosis, treatment, and prognostic assessment of sepsis.

Methods

140 patients with sepsis from January 2020 to January 2021 were selected as the observation group, and 40 healthy people were selected as the control group. The observation group was divided into mild group, severe group, and septic shock group by single blind grouping according to the condition of the disease, and they were also divided into survival group and death group according to the prognosis. Collect the fasting venous blood of the subjects in each group in the morning, compare the levels of total bilirubin (TBIL), blood creatinine (CR), and platelet count (PLT) in each group, and record and compare the patients' respiratory system oxygen partial pressure/inhaled oxygen concentration (po2/fio2), acute physiology and chronic health scoring system II (APACHE II), sequential organ failure assessment (sofa) score, q-SOFA score, and △SOFA score; Pearson analysis was used to analyze the correlation between SOFA score and other indicators; multivariate logistic regression was used to analyze the prognostic risk factors of patients with sepsis; receiver-operating characteristic curve (ROC) was used to analyze the value of SOFA score alone and in combination in the diagnosis, condition, and prognosis of sepsis.

Results

There were significant differences in Apache II score, SOFA score, q-SOFA score map, po2/fio2, PLT, GCS, TBIL, and serum creatinine (SCR) between the control group and the observation group (P < 0.05). There were significant differences in Apache II score, SOFA score, q-SOFA score, mean arterial pressure (map) po2/fio2, PLT, Glasgow Coma Score (GCS), TBIL, SCR, and △SOFA score among patients in mild, severe, and septic shock groups (P < 0.05). There were significant differences in age, Apache II score, SOFA score, q-SOFA score, map, po2/fio2, PLT, GCS, TBIL, SCR, and △SOFA score between survival group and death group (P < 0.05). SOFA score and q-SOFA score were significantly positively correlated with TBIL and SCR and significantly negatively correlated with po2/fio2 and PLT; △SOFA score was significantly negatively correlated with TBIL and SCR and significantly positively correlated with map, po2/fio2, PLT, and GCS. Apache II score, SOFA score, and q-SOFA score were independent risk factors for sepsis patients, and △SOFA score, po2/fio2, and GCS score were protective factors (P < 0.05). ROC curve analysis showed that the AUC of sepsis combined with SOFA score and q-SOFA score was 0.880; the AUC of sepsis assessed by SOFA score, q-SOFA score, and △SOFA score was 0.929; the AUC of sepsis prognosis assessed by SOFA score, q-SOFA score, and △SOFA score was 0.900.

Conclusion

SOFA score, q-SOFA score, and △SOFA score were abnormally expressed in patients with sepsis and were risk factors for the severity of the patient's condition and prognosis. The SOFA score, q-SOFA score, and △SOFA score were risk factors for the severity and prognosis of patients with sepsis and had some value in diagnosing sepsis and assessing the condition and prognosis, of which the combined value of the three was higher.

Strengthening sepsis care at a tertiary care teaching hospital in New Delhi, India

Introduction

Failure of early identification of sepsis in the emergency department (ED) leads to significant delays in antibiotic administration which adversely affects patient outcomes.

Aim

The primary objective of our Quality Improvement (QI) project was to reduce the door-to-antibiotic time (DTAT) by 30% from the preintervention in patients with suspected sepsis. Secondary objectives were to increase the blood culture collection rate by 30% from preintervention, investigate the predictors of improving DTAT and study the effect of these interventions on 24-hour in-hospital mortality.

Methods

This QI project was conducted in the ED of a tertiary care teaching hospital of North India; the ED receives approximately 400 patients per day. Adult patients with suspected sepsis presenting to our ED were included in the study, between January 2019 and December 2020. The study was divided into three phases; preintervention phase (100 patients), intervention phase (100 patients) and postintervention phase (93 patients). DTAT and blood cultures prior to antibiotic administration was recorded for all patients. Blood culture yield and 24-hour in-hospital mortality were also recorded using standard data templates. Change ideas planned by the Sepsis QI Team were implemented after conducting plan-do-study-act cycles.

Results

The median DTAT reduced from 155 min in preintervention phase to 78 min in postintervention phase. Drawing of blood cultures prior to antibiotic administration improved by 67%. Application of novel screening tool at triage was found to be an independent predictor of reduced DTAT.

Conclusion

Our QI project identified the existing lacunae in implementation of the sepsis bundle which were dealt with in a stepwise manner. The sepsis screening tool and on-site training improved care of patients with sepsis. A similar approach can be used to deal with complex quality issues in other high-volume low-resource settings.

A cross-sectional analysis of variables associated with morbidity and mortality in postoperative neurosurgical patients diagnosed with sepsis

BACKGROUND

Sepsis is a systemic, inflammatory response to infection associated with significant morbidity and mortality. There is a considerable lack of literature exploring sepsis in neurosurgery. We aimed to identify variables that were correlated with mortality and increased morbidity as defined by readmission and increased length of stay in postoperative neurosurgical patients that met a sepsis diagnosis.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted of 105 patients who underwent a neurosurgical operation at our institution from 2012 to 2017 who were discharged with at least one sepsis diagnosis code and who did not have a preoperative infection. We identified variables that were correlated with mortality, readmission, and increased length of stay.

RESULTS

Patients who survived were preferentially distributed towards lower ASA Physical Status Classification scores. A larger percentage of patients who did not survive had cranial surgery, whereas patients who survived were more likely to have undergone spinal surgery. Higher respiratory rates, higher maximum lactic acid levels, positive sputum cultures, and lower incoming Glasgow Coma Scores (GCS) were significantly correlated with mortality. A larger fraction of readmitted patients had positive surgical site cultures but had negative sputum cultures. Length of hospitalization was correlated with incoming GCS, non-elective operations, and Foley catheter, arterial line, central line, and endotracheal tube duration.

CONCLUSIONS

Neurosurgical postoperative patients diagnosed with sepsis may be risk stratified for mortality, readmission, and increased length of stay based on certain variables that may help direct their care. Further prospective studies are needed to explore causal relationships.