The role of body computed tomography in hospitalized patients with obscure infection: Retrospective consecutive cohort study

Computed tomography in patients with sepsis presenting to the emergency department: exploring its role in light of patient outcomes

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to explore the role of CT in septic patients presenting to the emergency department (ED).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective secondary analysis of 192 septic patients from a prospective observational study, i.e., the "LIFE POC" study. Sepsis was diagnosed in accordance with the Sepsis-3 definition. Clinical and radiological data were collected from the hospital administration and radiological systems. Information on mortality and morbidity was collected. Time-to-CT between CT scan and sepsis diagnosis (ttCTsd) was calculated. Diagnostic accuracy was assessed with the final sepsis source as reference standard. The reference standard was established through the treating team of the patient based on all available clinical, imaging, and microbiological data.

RESULTS

Sixty-two of 192 patients underwent a CT examination for sepsis focus detection. The final septic source was identified by CT in 69.4% (n = 43). CT detected septic foci with 81.1% sensitivity (95% CI, 68.0-90.6%) and 55.6% specificity (95% CI, 21.2-86.3%). Patients with short versus long ttCTsd did not differ in terms of mortality (16.1%, n = 5 vs 9.7, n = 3; p = 0.449), length of hospital stay (median 16 d, IQR 9 d 12 h-23 d 18 h vs median 13 d, IQR 10 d 00 h-24 d 00 h; p = 0.863), or duration of intensive care (median 3d 12 h, IQR 2 d 6 h-7 d 18 h vs median 5d, IQR 2 d-11 d; p = 0.800).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings show a high sensitivity of CT in ED patients with sepsis, confirming its relevance in guiding treatment decisions. The low specificity suggests that a negative CT requires further ancillary diagnostic tests for focus detection. The timing of CT did not affect morbidity or mortality outcomes.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

In patients with sepsis who present to the ED, CT can be used to identify infectious foci on the basis of clinical suspicion, but should not be used as a rule-out test. Scientific evidence for the optimal timing of CT beyond clinical decision-making is currently missing, as potential mortality benefits are clouded by differences in clinical severity at the time of ED presentation.

KEY POINTS

• In patients with sepsis who present to the ED, CT for focus identification has a high sensitivity and can thereby be valuable for patient management. • As the specificity is considerably lower, a thorough microbiological assessment is important in these cases. • The timing of CT did not affect morbidity and mortality outcomes in this study, which might be due to variability in clinical severity at the time of ED presentation.

Interdisciplinary perspectives on computed tomography in sepsis: survey among medical doctors at a large university medical center

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to describe physicians' perspectives on the use of computed tomography (CT) in patients with sepsis.

METHODS

In January 2022, physicians of a large European university medical center were surveyed using a web-based questionnaire asking about their views on the role of CT in sepsis. A total of 371 questionnaires met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed using work experience, workplace, and medical specialty of physicians as variables. Chi-square tests were performed.

RESULTS

Physicians considered the ability to detect an unknown focus as the greatest benefit of CT scans in sepsis (70.9%, n = 263/371). Two clinical criteria - "signs of decreased vigilance" (89.2%, n = 331/371) and "increased catecholamine demand" (84.7%, n = 314/371) - were considered highly relevant for a CT request. Elevated procalcitonin (82.7%, n = 307/371) and lactate levels (83.6%, n = 310/371) were consistently found to be critical laboratory values to request a CT. As long as there is evidence of infection in one organ region, most physicians (42.6%, n = 158/371) would order a CT scan based on clinical assessment. Combined examination of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis was favored (34.8%, n = 129/371) in cases without clinical clues of an infection source. A time window of ≥ 1-6 h was preferred for both CT examinations (53.9%, n = 200/371) and CT-guided interventions (59.3%, n = 220/371) in patients with sepsis.

CONCLUSION

Despite much consensus, there are significant differences in attitudes towards the use of CT in septic patients among physicians from different workplaces and medical specialties. Knowledge of these perspectives may improve patient management and interprofessional communication.

KEY POINTS

Despite interdisciplinary consensus on the use of CT in sepsis, statistically significant differences in the responses are apparent among physicians from different workplaces and medical specialties. The detection of a previously unknown source of infection and the ability to plan interventions and/or surgery based on CT findings are considered key advantages of CT in septic patients. Timing of CT reflects the requirements of specific disciplines.

Body computed tomography in sepsis: predictors of CT findings and patient outcomes in a retrospective medical ICU cohort study

Background

Sepsis is a life-threatening condition that requires immediate focus identification and control. However, international sepsis guidelines do not provide information on imaging choice.

Purpose

To identify predictors of CT findings and patient outcomes in a population of septic patients from a medical ICU.

Material and methods

A full-text search in the radiological information system (RIS) retrieved 227 body CT examinations conducted to identify infectious sources in 2018. CT reports were categorized according to identified foci and their diagnostic certainty. Diagnostic accuracy of CT was compared to microbiological results. Clinical and laboratory information was gathered. Statistical analysis was performed using nonparametric tests and logistic regression analysis.

Results

CT revealed more positive infectious foci 52.4% (n = 191/227) than microbiological tests 39.3% (n = 79/201). There were no significant differences between focus-positive CT scans with regard to positive microbiological testing (p = 0.32). Sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) scores were slightly but nonsignificantly higher in patients with a focus-positive CT, odds ratio (OR) = 0.999 (95% CI 0.997–1.001) with p = 0.52. Among C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin (PCT), and leukocytes, in focus-positive versus focus-negative CT scans, CRP showed a minor but statistically significant elevation in the group with focus-positive CT scans (OR = 1.004, 95% CI = 1.000–1.007, p = 0.04). No significant association was found for PCT (OR = 1.007, 95% CI = 0.991–1.023; p = 0.40) or leukocytes (OR = 1.003, 95% CI = 0.970–1.038; p = 0.85). In 33.5% (n = 76/227) of cases, the CT findings had at least one therapeutic consequence. In 81.6% (n = 62/76), the CT findings resulted in one consequence, in 14.5% (n = 11/76) in two consequences, and in 3.9% (n = 3/76) in three consequences. There was no significant association between focus-positive CT scans and mortality (p = 0.81).

Conclusion

In this population of septic patients in medical intensive care, microbiological analysis complemented CT findings. Both clinical and laboratory parameters were not predictive of CT findings. While therapeutic consequences of CT findings in this study population underline the role of CT for decision making in septic patients, CT findings do not predict patient outcomes in this retrospective analysis.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10140-022-02083-9.

Cerebrovascular Events in Suspected Sepsis: Retrospective Prevalence Study in Critically Ill Patients Undergoing Full-Body Computed Tomography

Purpose

This study aimed at retrospectively evaluating full-body computed tomography (CT) examinations for the prevalence of cerebrovascular events in patients with suspected sepsis treated in the intensive care unit (ICU).

Methods

All full-body CT examinations, i.e., both cranial CT (cCT) and body CT including chest, abdomen and pelvis, for focus search in septic patients over a 12-months period were identified from three ICUs, using full-text search. From this retrospective cohort, we fully analyzed 278 cCT examinations for the occurrence of acute cerebral findings. All acute cerebrovascular events were independently reviewed by two blinded readers. Clinical and laboratory findings were extracted. The data were statistically analyzed using contingency tests.

Results

In our population of patients with suspected sepsis, 10.8% (n = 30/278) were identified to have major cerebral events, including 7.2% (n = 20/278) major cerebrovascular events and 4.3% (n = 12/278) generalized parenchymal damage. 13.4% (n = 22/163) of patients with a severe coma as compared with non-severe coma, 4.4% (n = 3/68), showed a major cerebral event (p = 0.04). Patients referred from the cardiology/nephrology ICU ward showed major cerebral events in 16.3% (n = 22/135), as compared with 4.9% (n = 3/61) in patients from pulmonary ICU and 6.1% (n = 5/82) major cerebral events with surgical referral (p = 0.02).

Conclusion

Our study provides further evidence that septic patients may suffer from cerebral events with relevance to their prognosis. Severe coma and the referring ward were associated with acute cerebral conditions. Full-body CT has the advantage of both detecting of septic foci and possibly identifying ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke in this vulnerable patient population.

Relevance of CT for the detection of septic foci: diagnostic performance in a retrospective cohort of medical intensive care patients

AIM

To analyse the diagnostic yield of computed tomography (CT) in septic patients from a medical intensive care unit (ICU).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A full-text search of the department's radiological information system (RIS) retrieved 227 body CT examinations undertaken to search for a septic focus in 2018 from medical ICU patients. CT reports were categorised according to the identified foci. Clinical and laboratory information was gathered. Data were analysed statistically using descriptive statistics, diagnostic test quality criteria, binomial tests and chi-square test.

RESULTS

A total of 227 CT examinations from 165 septic patients detected 264 foci, which were distributed as follows: 58.3% (n=154/264) chest, 26.5% (n=70/264) abdomen, 5.3% (n=14/264) genitourinary system, and 9.8% (n=26/264) other body regions. In 15.9% (n=36/227) no focus was identified on CT. Based on CT reports, 37.5% (n=99/264) of foci were graded as certain, 18.9% (n=50/264) as likely, and 15.9% (n=42/264) as possible infectious sources. Septic foci were detected using CT with 75.8% sensitivity (95% confidence interval [CI] 69.6-81.9%) and 59.46% specificity (95% CI 42.9-76.1%). The positive predictive value was 90.6% (95% CI 86-95.2%), with a negative predictive value of 32.4% (95% CI 21-43.8%).

CONCLUSION

The present results confirm that body CT is a suitable rule-in test for septic patients in medical intensive care, although it cannot reliably rule out a septic focus. Follow-up CT examinations may reveal a septic source in the further course of a patient's hospital stay.