Low sensitivity of qSOFA, SIRS criteria and sepsis definition to identify infected patients at risk of complication in the prehospital setting and at the emergency department triage

Utilizing graph neural networks for adverse health detection and personalized decision making in sensor-based remote monitoring for dementia care

BACKGROUND

Sensor-based remote health monitoring is increasingly used to detect adverse health in people living with dementia (PLwD) at home, aiming to prevent hospitalizations and reduce caregiver burden. However, home sensor data is often noisy, overly granular, and suffers from unreliable labeling, data drift and high variability between households. Current anomaly detection methods lack generalizability and personalization, often requiring anomaly-free training data and frequent model updates.

OBJECTIVE

To develop a lightweight, explainable, self-supervised approach with personalized alert thresholds to detect adverse health events in PLwD, using changes in home activity.

METHODS

We hypothesized that health downturns manifest as detectable shifts in household movement patterns. Our approach leverages a Graph Barlow Twins contrastive model, which uses granular activity data and a macroscopic view to extract noise-robust, high-level and low-level discriminative features that represent daily activity patterns. Household-personalized alert thresholds are calculated based on clinician-set target alert rates, and daily anomaly scores are compared against these thresholds, triggering alerts for the clinical monitoring team. Model attention weights support explainability. Data were collected from a real-world dataset by the UK Dementia Research Institute (August 2019-April 2022).

RESULTS

Our model outperformed state-of-the-art temporal graph algorithms in detecting agitation and fall events across three patient cohorts, achieving 81% average recall and 88% generalizability at a target alert rate of 7%.

CONCLUSION

We developed a novel, lightweight, explainable, and personalized Graph Barlow Twins model for real-world remote health monitoring in dementia care, with potential for broader applications in healthcare and sensor-based environments.

The performance of screening tools and use of blood analyses in prehospital identification of sepsis patients and patients suitable for non-conveyance - an observational study

BACKGROUND

Early recognition of sepsis by the EMS (Emergency Medical Services), along with communicating this concern to the emergency department, could improve patient prognosis and outcome. Knowledge is limited about the performance of sepsis identification screening tools in the EMS setting. Research is also limited on the effectiveness of prehospital use of blood tests for sepsis identification. Integrating blood analyses with screening tools could improve sepsis identification, leading to prompt interventions and improved patient outcomes.

AIM

The aim of the present study is firstly to evaluate the performance of various screening tools for sepsis identification in the EMS setting and secondly to assess the potential improvement in accuracy by incorporating blood analyses.

METHODS

This is a retrospective observational cohort study. The data were collected from prehospital and hospital medical records in Region Halland. Data on demographics, vital signs, blood tests, treatment, and outcomes were collected from patients suspected by EMS personnel of having infection. The data were analysed using Student's t-test. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and odds ratio were used to indicate accuracy and predictive value.

RESULTS

In total, 5,405 EMS missions concerning 3,225 unique patients were included. The incidence of sepsis was 9.8%. None of the eleven tools included had both high sensitivity and specificity for sepsis identification. White blood cell (WBC) count was the blood analysis with the highest sensitivity but the lowest specificity for identifying sepsis. Adding WBC, C-reactive protein (CRP) or lactate to the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) increased the specificity to > 80% but substantially lowered the sensitivity.

CONCLUSIONS

Identifying sepsis in EMS settings remains challenging, with existing screening tools offering limited accuracy. CRP, WBC, and lactate blood tests add minimal predictive value in distinguishing sepsis or determining non-conveyance eligibility.

Modified R-GLIM Score Is a Good Prognostic Tool to Predict a Long-Term Prognosis in Poor Conditioned Elderly Patients with Aspiration Pneumonia, a Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

While prognostic guidelines for pneumonia have widely allowed clinicians to treat patients, poor prognostic factors for 1- or 2-year survival times have never been mentioned to our knowledge.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted this retrospective study to evaluate whether malnutrition according to the GLIM criteria is a poor prognostic factor for 1- or 2-year survival among patients with aspiration pneumonia. All patients with community-onset aspiration pneumonia who were admitted to Aichi Medical University and had intervention from our nutrition support team (NST) in 2019 and 2020 were enrolled in this study.

RESULTS

A total of 56 patients were enrolled in the study. The mean age was 86 ± 6.5 and 25 (45%) were male. Thirty-one patients died during this observational period. Comparing the survival and death group, higher respiratory rate (RR) and malnutrition were seen more frequently in the death group than in the survival group. Then, the patients were divided into the following three groups: those with an RR ≥ 22 and malnutrition, those with malnutrition, and a control group [patients who were not malnourished and had a low RR (<22)]. Comparing the three groups, patients with an RR ≥ 22 and malnutrition had significantly shorter overall survival times (OSs) than those in the other groups (p = 0.009 by Log-Rank test) for 1-year prognosis. The result of 2-year prognosis displayed a statistical significance that was the same as that for 1-year prognosis (p = 0.004 by Log-Rank test). The Cox hazard regression model showed that a higher RR was an independent poor prognostic factor for 1- and 2-year survival among aspiration pneumonia patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot study showed that combined scores of higher RR and malnutrition according to the GLIM criteria (modified R-GLIM score) was an independent poor prognostic factor for 1 or 2-year survival among super-elderly patients (aged over 80 years) with aspiration pneumonia.

Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Predicts Sepsis in Adult Patients Meeting Two or More Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome Criteria

Introduction

Determining which patients who meet systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria have bacterial sepsis is a difficult challenge for emergency physicians. We sought to determine whether the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) could be used to exclude bacterial sepsis in adult patients who meet ≥2 SIRS criteria and are being evaluated for sepsis.

Methods

Consenting adult patients meeting ≥2 SIRS criteria and undergoing evaluation for sepsis were enrolled. We recorded patient age, gender, vital signs, and laboratory results. We then later reviewed health records for culture results, end organ dysfunction, survival to discharge, and final diagnoses. Patients were classified as having sepsis if they met ≥2 SIRS criteria and were ultimately diagnosed with a bacterial source. We analyzed data using descriptive statistics and sensitivity and specificity analyses. A receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) was created to determine test characteristics.

Results

A total of 231 patients had complete datasets. Patients' median age was 69 (interquartile range [IQR] 54-81), and 49.6% were male. There were 154 patients (66.7%) ultimately diagnosed with sepsis with an identified bacterial source, while 77 patients with ≥2 SIRS criteria had non-infectious reasons for their presentations (33.3%). Septic patients had a median NLR 12.36 (IQR [interquartile range] 7.29-21.69), compared to those without sepsis (median NLR 5.62, IQR 3.89-9.11, P < 0.001). The NLR value of 3 applied as a cutoff for sepsis had a sensitivity of 96.8 (95% confidence interval [CI] 92.2-98.8), and a specificity of 18.2 (95% CI 10.6-29.0). The ROC for NLR had an area under the curve of 0.74.

Conclusion

The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio is a sensitive tool to help determine which patients with abnormal SIRS screens have bacterial sepsis.

Sepsis incidence, suspicion, prediction and mortality in emergency medical services: a cohort study related to the current international sepsis guideline

PURPOSE

Sepsis suspicion by Emergency Medical Services (EMS) is associated with improved patient outcomes. This study assessed sepsis incidence and recognition by EMS and analyzed which of the screening tools recommended by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign best facilitates sepsis prediction.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of claims data from health insurances (n = 221,429 EMS cases), and paramedics' and emergency physicians' EMS documentation (n = 110,419); analyzed outcomes were: sepsis incidence and case fatality compared to stroke and myocardial infarction, the extent of documentation for screening-relevant variables and sepsis suspicion, tools' intersections for screening positive in identical EMS cases and their predictive ability for an inpatient sepsis diagnosis.

RESULTS

Incidence of sepsis (1.6%) was similar to myocardial infarction (2.6%) and stroke (2.7%); however, 30-day case fatality rate was almost threefold higher (31.7% vs. 13.4%; 11.8%). Complete vital sign documentation was achieved in 8.2% of all cases. Paramedics never, emergency physicians rarely (0.1%) documented a sepsis suspicion, respectively septic shock. NEWS2 had the highest sensitivity (73.1%; Specificity:81.6%) compared to qSOFA (23.1%; Sp:96.6%), SIRS (28.2%; Sp:94.3%) and MEWS (48.7%; Sp:88.1%). Depending on the tool, 3.7% to 19.4% of all cases screened positive; only 0.8% in all tools simultaneously.

CONCLUSION

Incidence and mortality underline the need for better sepsis awareness, documentation of vital signs and use of screening tools. Guidelines may omit MEWS and SIRS as recommendations for prehospital providers since they were inferior in all accuracy measures. Though no tool performed ideally, NEWS2 qualifies as the best tool to predict the highest proportion of septic patients and to rule out cases that are likely non-septic.

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.

SOMANZ position statement for the investigation and management of sepsis in pregnancy 2023

BACKGROUND

The Society of Australia and New Zealand (SOMANZ) published its first sepsis in pregnancy and the postpartum period guideline in 2017 (Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol, 57, 2017, 540). In the intervening 6 years, maternal mortality from sepsis has remained static.

AIMS

To update clinical practice with a review of the subsequent literature. In particular, to review the definition and screening tools for the diagnosis of sepsis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multi-disciplinary group of clinicians with experience in all aspects of the care of pregnant women analysed the clinical evidence according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system following searches of Cochrane, Medline and EMBASE. Where there were conflicting views, the authors reviewed the topic and came to a consensus. All authors reviewed the final position statement.

RESULTS

This position statement has abandoned the use of the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (qSOFA) score to diagnose sepsis due to its poor performance in clinical practice. Whilst New Zealand has a national maternity observation chart, in Australia maternity early warning system charts and vital sign cut-offs differ between states. Rapid recognition, early antimicrobials and involvement of senior staff remain essential factors to improving outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Ongoing research is required to discover and validate tools to recognize and diagnose sepsis in pregnancy. Australia should follow New Zealand and have a single national maternity early warning system observation chart.

Development and validation of a community acquired sepsis-worsening score in the adult emergency department: a prospective cohort: the CASC score

BACKGROUND

Sepsis is a leading cause of death and serious illness that requires early recognition and therapeutic management to improve survival. The quick-SOFA score helps in its recognition, but its diagnostic performance is insufficient. To develop a score that can rapidly identify a community acquired septic situation at risk of clinical complications in patients consulting the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

We conducted a monocentric, prospective cohort study in the emergency department of a university hospital between March 2016 and August 2018 (NCT03280992). All patients admitted to the emergency department for a suspicion of a community-acquired infection were included. Predictor variables of progression to septic shock or death within the first 90 days were selected using backward stepwise multivariable logistic regression to develop a clinical score. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed to determine the discriminating power of the area under the curve (AUC). We also determined the threshold of our score that optimized the performance required for a sepsis-worsening score. We have compared our score with the NEWS-2 and qSOFA scores.

RESULTS

Among the 21,826 patients admitted to the ED, 796 patients were suspected of having community-acquired infection and 461 met the sepsis criteria; therefore, these patients were included in the analysis. The median [interquartile range] age was 72 [54-84] years, 248 (54%) were males, and 244 (53%) had respiratory symptoms. The clinical score ranged from 0 to 90 and included 8 variables with an area under the ROC curve of 0.85 (confidence interval [CI] 95% 0.81-0.89). A cut-off of 26 yields a sensitivity of 88% (CI 95% 0.79-0.93), a specificity of 62% (CI 95% 57-67), and a negative predictive value of 95% (CI 95% 91-97). The area under the ROC curve for our score was 0.85 (95% CI, 0.81-0.89) versus 0.73 (95% CI, 0.68-0.78) for qSOFA and 0.66 (95% CI, 0.60-0.72) for NEWS-2.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides an accurate clinical score for identifying septic patients consulting the ED early at risk of worsening disease. This score could be implemented at admission.

Sepsis death risk factor score based on systemic inflammatory response syndrome, quick sequential organ failure assessment, and comorbidities

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we aimed to evaluate the death risk factors of patients included in the sepsis protocol bundle, using clinical data from qSOFA, SIRS, and comorbidities, as well as development of a mortality risk score.

DESIGN

This retrospective cohort study was conducted between 2016 and 2021.

SETTING

Two university hospitals in Brazil.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with sepsis.

INTERVENTIONS

Several clinical and laboratory data were collected focused on SIRS, qSOFA, and comorbidities.

MAIN VARIABLE OF INTEREST

In-hospital mortality was the primary outcome variable. A mortality risk score was developed after logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 1,808 patients were included with a death rate of 36%. Ten variables remained independent factors related to death in multivariate analysis: temperature ≥38 °C (odds ratio [OR] = 0.65), previous sepsis (OR = 1.42), qSOFA ≥ 2 (OR = 1.43), leukocytes >12,000 or <4,000 cells/mm3 (OR = 1.61), encephalic vascular accident (OR = 1.88), age >60 years (OR = 1.93), cancer (OR = 2.2), length of hospital stay before sepsis >7 days (OR = 2.22,), dialysis (OR = 2.51), and cirrhosis (OR = 3.97). Considering the equation of the binary regression logistic analysis, the score presented an area under curve of 0.668, is not a potential model for death prediction.

CONCLUSIONS

Several risk factors are independently associated with mortality, allowing the development of a prediction score based on qSOFA, SIRS, and comorbidities data, however, the performance of this score is low.

More attention should be paid to Omicron-associated sepsis: a multicenter retrospective study in south China

Background

The Omicron variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is highly transmissible but causes less severe disease compared to other variants. However, its association with sepsis incidence and outcomes is unclear. This study aimed to investigate the incidence of Omicron-associated sepsis, as per the Sepsis 3.0 definition, in hospitalized patients, and to explore its relationship with clinical characteristics and prognosis.

Methods

This multicenter retrospective study included adults hospitalized with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection across six tertiary hospitals in Guangzhou, China from November 2022 to January 2023. The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score and its components were calculated at hospital admission to identify sepsis. Outcomes assessed were need for intensive care unit (ICU) transfer and mortality. Receiver operating characteristic curves evaluated the predictive value of sepsis versus other biomarkers for outcomes.

Results

A total of 299 patients (mean age: 70.1±14.4 years, 42.14% female) with SOFA score were enrolled. Among them, 152 were categorized as non-serious cases while the others were assigned as the serious group. The proportion of male patients, unvaccinated patients, patients with comorbidity such as diabetes, chronic cardiovascular disease, and chronic lung disease was significantly higher in the serious than non-serious group. The median SOFA score of all enrolled patients was 1 (interquartile range, 0-18). In our study, 147 patients (64.19%) were identified as having sepsis upon hospital admission, with the majority of these septic patients (113, representing 76.87%) being in the serious group, the respiratory, coagulation, cardiovascular, central nervous, and renal organ SOFA scores were all significantly higher in the serious compared to the non-serious group. Among septic patients, 20 out of 49 (40.81%) had septic shock as indicated by lactate measurement within 24 hours of admission, and the majority of septic patients were in the serious group (17/20, 76.87%). Sepsis was present in 118 out of 269 (43.9%) patients in the general ward, and among those with sepsis, 34 out of 118 (28.8%) later required ICU care during hospitalization. By contrast, none of the patients without sepsis required ICU care. Moreover, the mortality rate was significantly higher in patients with than without sepsis.

Conclusions

A considerable proportion of patients infected with Omicron present with sepsis upon hospital admission, which is associated with a poorer prognosis. Therefore, early recognition of viral sepsis by evaluation of the SOFA score in hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 patients is crucial.

Validation of SeptiCyte RAPID to Discriminate Sepsis from Non-Infectious Systemic Inflammation

(1) Background: SeptiCyte RAPID is a molecular test for discriminating sepsis from non-infectious systemic inflammation, and for estimating sepsis probabilities. The objective of this study was the clinical validation of SeptiCyte RAPID, based on testing retrospectively banked and prospectively collected patient samples. (2) Methods: The cartridge-based SeptiCyte RAPID test accepts a PAXgene blood RNA sample and provides sample-to-answer processing in ~1 h. The test output (SeptiScore, range 0-15) falls into four interpretation bands, with higher scores indicating higher probabilities of sepsis. Retrospective (N = 356) and prospective (N = 63) samples were tested from adult patients in ICU who either had the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), or were suspected of having/diagnosed with sepsis. Patients were clinically evaluated by a panel of three expert physicians blinded to the SeptiCyte test results. Results were interpreted under either the Sepsis-2 or Sepsis-3 framework. (3) Results: Under the Sepsis-2 framework, SeptiCyte RAPID performance for the combined retrospective and prospective cohorts had Areas Under the ROC Curve (AUCs) ranging from 0.82 to 0.85, a negative predictive value of 0.91 (sensitivity 0.94) for SeptiScore Band 1 (score range 0.1-5.0; lowest risk of sepsis), and a positive predictive value of 0.81 (specificity 0.90) for SeptiScore Band 4 (score range 7.4-15; highest risk of sepsis). Performance estimates for the prospective cohort ranged from AUC 0.86-0.95. For physician-adjudicated sepsis cases that were blood culture (+) or blood, urine culture (+)(+), 43/48 (90%) of SeptiCyte scores fell in Bands 3 or 4. In multivariable analysis with up to 14 additional clinical variables, SeptiScore was the most important variable for sepsis diagnosis. A comparable performance was obtained for the majority of patients reanalyzed under the Sepsis-3 definition, although a subgroup of 16 patients was identified that was called septic under Sepsis-2 but not under Sepsis-3. (4) Conclusions: This study validates SeptiCyte RAPID for estimating sepsis probability, under both the Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 frameworks, for hospitalized patients on their first day of ICU admission.

qSOFA combined with suPAR for early risk detection and guidance of antibiotic treatment in the emergency department: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Sepsis guidelines suggest immediate start of resuscitation for patients with quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) 2 or 3. However, the interpretation of qSOFA 1 remains controversial. We investigated whether measurements of soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) may improve risk detection when qSOFA is 1.

METHODS

The study had two parts. At the first part, the combination of suPAR with qSOFA was analyzed in a prospective cohort for early risk detection. At the second part, the double-blind, randomized controlled trial (RCT) SUPERIOR evaluated the efficacy of the suPAR-guided medical intervention. SUPERIOR took place between November 2018 and December 2020. Multivariate stepwise Cox regression was used for the prospective cohort, while univariate and multivariate logistic regression was used for the RCT. Consecutive admissions at the emergency department (ED) with suspected infection, qSOFA 1 and suPAR ≥ 12 ng/mL were allocated to single infusion of placebo or meropenem. The primary endpoint was early deterioration, defined as at least one-point increase of admission Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score the first 24 h.

RESULTS

Most of the mortality risk was for patients with qSOFA 2 and 3. Taking the hazard ratio (HR) for death of patients with qSOFA = 1 and suPAR < 12 ng/mL as reference, the HR of qSOFA = 1 and suPAR ≥ 12 ng/mL for 28-day mortality was 2.98 (95% CI 2.11-3.96). The prospective RCT was prematurely ended due to pandemia-related ED re-allocations, with 91 patients enrolled: 47 in the placebo and 44 in the meropenem arm. The primary endpoint was met in 40.4% (n = 19) and 15.9% (n = 7), respectively (difference 24.5% [5.9-40.8]; odds ratio 0.14 [0.04-0.50]). One post hoc analysis showed significant median changes of SOFA score after 72 and 96 h equal to 0 and - 1, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Combining qSOFA 1 with the biomarker suPAR improves its prognostic performance for unfavorable outcome and can help decision for earlier treatment. Trial registration EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT, 2018-001008-13) and Clinical-Trials.gov (NCT03717350). Registered 24 October 2018.

Understanding health care pathways of patients with sepsis: protocol of a mixed-methods analysis of health care utilization, experiences, and needs of patients with and after sepsis

BACKGROUND

Sepsis is associated with about 20% of deaths worldwide. It often presents with non-specific initial symptoms, making its emergency treatment an interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral challenge. Three in four sepsis survivors suffers from new cognitive, psychological, or physical sequelae for which specific treatment concepts are scarce. The AVENIR project aims to improve the understanding of patient pathways, and subjective care experiences and needs along the entire healthcare pathway before, with and after sepsis. Based on this, concrete recommendations for the organization of care and patient information materials will be developed with close patient participation.

METHODS

Mixed-methods study including (1) analysis of anonymized nationwide health claims data from Germany, (2) linkage of health claims data with patient care reports (PCR) of emergency medical services from study regions in two federal states within Germany, and (3) qualitative exploration of the patient, relative, and care provider perspective on sepsis care. In (1), we analyze inpatient and outpatient health care utilization until 30 days pre-sepsis; clinical sepsis care including intra- and inter-hospital transfers; and rehabilitation, inpatient and outpatient aftercare of sepsis survivors as well as costs for health care utilization until 24 months post-sepsis. We attempt to identify survivor classes with similar health care utilization by Latent Class Analyses. In (2), PCR are linked with health claims data to establish a comprehensive database outlining care pathways for sepsis patients from pre-hospital to follow-up. We investigate e.g., whether correct initial assessment is associated with acute (e.g., same-day lethality) and long-term (e.g., new need for care, long-term mortality) outcomes of patients. We compare the performance of sepsis-specific screening tools such as qSOFA, NEWS-2 or PRESEP in the pre-clinical setting. In (3), semi-structured interviews as well as synchronous and asynchronous online focus groups are conducted and analyzed using qualitative content analyses techniques.

DISCUSSION

The results of the AVENIR study will contribute to a deeper understanding of sepsis care pathways in Germany. They may serve as a base for improvements and innovations in sepsis care, that in the long-term can contribute to reduce the personal, medical, and societal burden of sepsis and its sepsis sequelae.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered at German Clinical Trial Register (ID: DRKS00031302, date of registration: 5th May 2023).

[Preclinical early detection and diagnosis of sepsis - step by step]

Because of very unspecific sepsis symptoms, early recognition of the emergency sepsis is difficult. If the disease is recognized in time it is possible to initiate diagnosis and treatment quickly. Rapid treatment of sepsis leads to lower mortality and less severe long-term consequences. Early detection is therefore of central importance in the diagnostic and therapeutic process, also in the outpatient setting.

Association Between Endothelial Activation and Stress Index and 28-Day Mortality in Septic ICU patients: a Retrospective Cohort Study

Background: Endothelial Activation and Stress Index (EASIX) is a reliable alternative biomarker of endothelial dysfunction. Because endothelial activation is involved in sepsis pathophysiology, we aimed to investigate the association between EASIX and prognosis in septic patients. Methods: Data were extracted from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC) IV database. EASIX scores were calculated using the formula: lactate dehydrogenase (U/L) × creatinine (mg/dL)/platelet count (109/L). Patients were grouped into tertiles according to log2 transformed EASIX. The primary and secondary outcomes were 28-day and 90-day mortality. Cox proportional hazards models, Kaplan-Meier curves, restricted cubic spline curves, and subgroup analyses were conducted to evaluate the association between EASIX and prognosis in septic patients. Results: A total of 7504 patients were included. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards analyses showed that higher log2-EASIX was associated with increased risk of 28-day mortality (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.07-1.13; P < 0.001). Compared with tertile 1, the tertile 2 and 3 groups had higher risk of 28-day mortality [HR (95% CI) 1.24 (1.09-1.41); HR (95% CI) 1.51 (1.31-1.74)]; P for trend < 0.001). Similar results were found for 90-day mortality. Kaplan-Meier curves showed that patients with higher EASIX had lower 28-day and 90-day survival rates. A linear relationship was found between log2-EASIX and 28-day and 90-day mortality. Conclusion: High EASIX was significantly associated with an increased risk of 28-day and 90-day all-cause mortality in patients with sepsis.

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.

Evidence for Use of Validated Sepsis Screening Tools in the Prehospital Population: A Scoping Review

INTRODUCTION

Early detection and treatment of sepsis improves chances of survival; however, sepsis is often difficult to diagnose initially. This is especially true in the prehospital setting, where resources are scarce, yet time is of great significance. Early warning scores (EWS) based on vital signs were originally developed to guide medical practitioners in determining the degree of illness of a patient in the in-patient setting. These EWS were adapted for use in the prehospital setting to predict critical illness and sepsis. We performed a scoping review to evaluate the existing evidence for use of validated EWS to identify prehospital sepsis.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search using the CINAHL, Embase, Ovid-MEDLINE, and PubMed databases on September 1, 2022. Articles that examined the use of EWS to identify prehospital sepsis were included and assessed.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies were included in this review: one validation study, two prospective studies, two systematic reviews, and 18 retrospective studies. Study characteristics, classification statistics, and primary conclusions of each article were extracted and tabulated. Classification statistics varied markedly for prehospital sepsis identification across all included EWS: sensitivities ranged from 0.02-1.00, specificities from 0.07-1.00, and PPV and NPV from 0.19-0.98 and 0.32-1.00, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

All studies demonstrated inconsistency for the identification of prehospital sepsis. The variety of available EWS and study design heterogeneity suggest it is unlikely that new research can identify a single gold standard score. Based on our findings in this scoping review, we recommend future efforts focus on combining standardized prehospital care with clinical judgment to provide timely interventions for unstable patients where infection is considered a likely etiology, in addition to improving sepsis education for prehospital clinicians. At most, EWS can be used as an adjunct to these efforts, but they should not be relied on alone for prehospital sepsis identification.

Sepsis awareness and knowledge amongst nurses, physicians and paramedics of a tertiary care center in Switzerland: A survey-based cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Sepsis is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Prompt recognition and management are critical to improve outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a survey among nurses and physicians of all adult departments of the Lausanne University Hospital (LUH) and paramedics transporting patients to our hospital. Measured outcomes included professionals' demographics (age, profession, seniority, unit of activity), quantification of prior sepsis education, self-evaluation, and knowledge of sepsis epidemiology, definition, recognition, and management. Correlation between surveyed personnel and sepsis perceptions and knowledge were assessed with univariable and multivariable logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Between January and October 2020, we contacted 1'216 of the 4'417 professionals (27.5%) of the LUH, of whom 1'116 (91.8%) completed the survey, including 619 of 2'463 (25.1%) nurses, 348 of 1'664 (20.9%) physicians and 149 of 290 (51.4%) paramedics. While 98.5% of the participants were familiar with the word "sepsis" (97.4% of nurses, 100% of physicians and 99.3% of paramedics), only 13% of them (physicians: 28.4%, nurses: 5.9%, paramedics: 6.8%) correctly identified the Sepsis-3 consensus definition. Similarly, only 48% and 49.3% of the physicians and 10.1% an 11.9% of the nurses knew that SOFA was a sepsis defining score and that the qSOFA score was a predictor of increased mortality, respectively. Furthermore, 15.8% of the physicians and 1.0% of the nurses knew the three components of the qSOFA score. For patients with suspected sepsis, 96.1%, 91.6% and 75.8% of physicians respectively chose blood cultures, broad-spectrum antibiotics and fluid resuscitation as therapeutic interventions to be initiated within 1 (76.4%) to 3 (18.2%) hours. For nurses and physicians, recent training correlated with knowledge of SOFA score (ORs [95%CI]: 3.956 [2.018-7.752] and 2.617 [1.527-4.485]) and qSOFA (ORs [95%CI]: 5.804 [2.653-9.742] and 2.291 [1.342-3.910]) scores purposes. Furthermore, recent training also correlated with adequate sepsis definition (ORs [95%CI]: 1.839 [1.026-3.295]) and the components of qSOFA (ORs [95%CI]: 2.388 [1.110-5.136]) in physicians.

CONCLUSIONS

This sepsis survey conducted among physicians, nurses and paramedics of a tertiary Swiss medical center identified a deficit of sepsis awareness and knowledge reflecting a lack of sepsis-specific continuing education requiring immediate corrective measures.

Serum Anion Gap Level Predicts All-Cause Mortality in Septic Patients: A Retrospective Study Based on the MIMIC III Database

PURPOSE

Sepsis is a significant threat in the intensive care unit (ICU) worldwide because it has high morbidity and mortality rates. Early recognition and diagnosis of sepsis are essential for the prevention of adverse outcomes. The present study aimed to quantitatively assess the association between serum anion gap (AG) levels and 30- and 90-day all-cause mortality among sepsis patients.

METHODS

Clinical data of patients diagnosed with sepsis were extracted from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care III (MIMIC III) database. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the association between serum AG levels and all-cause mortality. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was drawn to quantify the efficacy of using the serum AG level to predict all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 3811 patients were included in the study. The Kaplan-Meier curves showed that patients with higher serum AG levels had a shorter survival time than those with lower levels. Serum AG levels were found to be highly effective in predicting all-cause mortality secondary to sepsis (30-day: AUROC = 0.703; 90-day: AUROC = 0.696). The Cox regression model further indicated that the serum AG level was an independent risk factor for 30- and 90-day mortality in sepsis (HR 3.44, 95% CI 2.97-3.99 for 30-day; HR 3.17, 95% CI 2.76-3.65 for 90-day, P < 0.001 for both).

CONCLUSIONS

High serum AG may be considered as an alternative parameter for predicting the death risk in sepsis when other variables are not immediately available. Prospective large-scale studies are needed to support its predictive value in the clinic.

The prognostic utility of prehospital qSOFA in addition to emergency department qSOFA for sepsis in patients with suspected infection: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) was widely used to estimate the risks of sepsis in patients with suspected infection in the prehospital and emergency department (ED) settings. Due to the insufficient sensitivity of qSOFA on arrival at the ED (ED qSOFA), the Surviving Sepsis Campaign 2021 recommended against using qSOFA as a single screening tool for sepsis. However, it remains unclear whether the combined use of prehospital and ED qSOFA improves its sensitivity for identifying patients at a higher risk of sepsis at the ED.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the data from the ED of a tertiary medical center in Japan from April 2018 through March 2021. Among all adult patients (aged ≥18 years) transported by ambulance to the ED with suspected infection, we identified patients who were subsequently diagnosed with sepsis based on the Sepsis-3 criteria. We compared the predictive abilities of prehospital qSOFA, ED qSOFA, and the sum of prehospital and ED qSOFA (combined qSOFA) for sepsis in patients with suspected infection at the ED.

RESULTS

Among 2,407 patients with suspected infection transported to the ED by ambulance, 369 (15%) patients were subsequently diagnosed with sepsis, and 217 (9%) died during hospitalization. The sensitivity of prehospital qSOFA ≥2 and ED qSOFA ≥2 were comparable (c-statistics for sepsis [95%CI], 0.57 [0.52-0.62] vs. 0.55 [0.50-0.60]). However, combined qSOFA (cutoff, ≥3 [max 6]) was more sensitive than ED qSOFA (cutoff, ≥2) for identifying sepsis (0.67 [95%CI, 0.62-0.72] vs. 0.55 [95%CI, 0.50-0.60]). Using combined qSOFA, we identified 44 (12%) out of 369 patients who were subsequently diagnosed with sepsis, which would have been missed using ED qSOFA alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Using both prehospital and ED qSOFA could improve the screening ability of sepsis among patients with suspected infection at the ED.

National Early Warning Score (NEWS) Outperforms Quick Sepsis-Related Organ Failure (qSOFA) Score for Early Detection of Sepsis in the Emergency Department

Background: Prompt recognition of sepsis is critical to improving patients’ outcomes. We compared the performance of NEWS and qSOFA scores as sepsis detection tools in patients admitted to the emergency department (ED) with suspicion of sepsis. Methodology: A single-center 12-month retrospective study comparing NEWS using the recommended cut-off of ≥5 and qSOFA as sepsis screening tools in a cohort of patients transported by emergency medical services (EMS) to the Lausanne University Hospital (LUH). We used the Sepsis-3 consensus definition. The primary study endpoint was the detection of sepsis. Secondary endpoints were ICU admission and 28-day all-cause mortality. Results: Among 886 patients admitted to ED by EMS for suspected infection, 556 (63%) had a complete set of vital parameters panel enabling the calculation of NEWS and qSOFA scores, of whom 300 (54%) had sepsis. For the detection of sepsis, the sensitivity of NEWS > 5 was 86% and that of qSOFA ≥ 2 was 34%. Likewise, the sensitivities of NEWS ≥ 5 for predicting ICU admission and 28-day mortality were higher than those of qSOFA ≥ 2 (82% versus 33% and 88% versus 37%). Conversely, the specificity of qSOFA ≥ 2 for sepsis detection was higher than that of NEWS ≥ 5 (90% versus 55%). The negative predictive value of NEWS > 5 was higher than that of qSOFA ≥ 2 (77% versus 54%), while the positive predictive value of qSOFA ≥ 2 was higher than that of NEWS ≥ 5 (80% versus 69%). Finally, the accuracy of NEWS ≥ 5 was higher than that of qSOFA ≥ 2 (72% versus 60%). Conclusions: The sensitivity of NEWS ≥ 5 was superior to that of qSOFA ≥ 2 to identify patients with sepsis in the ED and predict ICU admission and 28-day mortality. In contrast, qSOFA ≥ 2 had higher specificity and positive predictive values than NEWS ≥ 5 for these three endpoints.

Sepsis Team Organizational Model to Decrease Mortality for Intra-Abdominal Infections: Is Antibiotic Stewardship Enough?

Introduction. Sepsis is an overwhelming reaction to infection with significant morbidity, requiring urgent interventions in order to improve outcomes. The 2016 Sepsis-3 guidelines modified the previous definitions of sepsis and septic shock, and proposed some specific diagnostic and therapeutic measures to define the use of fluid resuscitation and antibiotics. However, some open issues still exist. Methods. A literature research was performed on PubMed and Cochrane using the terms "sepsis" AND "intra-abdominal infections" AND ("antibiotic therapy" OR "antibiotic treatment"). The inclusion criteria were management of intra-abdominal infection (IAI) and effects of antibiotic stewardships programs (ASP) on the outcome of the patients. Discussion. Sepsis-3 definitions represent an added value in the understanding of sepsis mechanisms and in the management of the disease. However, some questions are still open, such as the need for an early identification of sepsis. Sepsis management in the context of IAI is particularly challenging and a prompt diagnosis is essential in order to perform a quick treatment (source control and antibiotic treatment). Antibiotic empirical therapy should be based on the kind of infection (community or hospital acquired), local resistances, and patient's characteristic and comorbidities, and should be adjusted or de-escalated as soon as microbiological information is available. Antibiotic Stewardship Programs (ASP) have demonstrated to improve antimicrobial utilization with reduction of infections, emergence of multi-drug resistant bacteria, and costs. Surgeons should not be alone in the management of IAI but ideally inserted in a sepsis team together with anaesthesiologists, medical physicians, pharmacists, and infectious diseases specialists, meeting periodically to reassess the response to the treatment. Conclusion. The cornerstones of sepsis management are accurate diagnosis, early resuscitation, effective source control, and timely initiation of appropriate antimicrobial therapy. Current evidence shows that optimizing antibiotic use across surgical specialities is imperative to improve outcomes. Ideally every hospital and every emergency surgery department should aim to provide a sepsis team in order to manage IAI.

Septic shock 3.0 criteria application in severe COVID-19 patients: An unattended sepsis population with high mortality risk

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can be associated with life-threatening organ dysfunction due to septic shock, frequently requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission, respiratory and vasopressor support. Therefore, clear clinical criteria are pivotal for early recognition of patients more likely to need prompt organ support. Although most patients with severe COVID-19 meet the Sepsis-3.0 criteria for septic shock, it has been increasingly recognized that hyperlactatemia is frequently absent, possibly leading to an underestimation of illness severity and mortality risk.

AIM

To identify the proportion of severe COVID-19 patients with vasopressor support requirements, with and without hyperlactatemia, and describe their clinical outcomes and mortality.

METHODS

We performed a single-center prospective cohort study. All adult patients admitted to the ICU with COVID-19 were included in the analysis and were further divided into three groups: Sepsis group, without both criteria; Vasoplegic Shock group, with persistent hypotension and vasopressor support without hyperlactatemia; and Septic Shock 3.0 group, with both criteria. COVID-19 was diagnosed using clinical and radiologic criteria with a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) positive RT-PCR test.

RESULTS

118 patients (mean age 63 years, 87% males) were included in the analysis (n = 51 Sepsis group, n = 26 Vasoplegic Shock group, and n = 41 Septic Shock 3.0 group). SOFA score at ICU admission and ICU length of stay were different between the groups (P < 0.001). Mortality was significantly higher in the Vasoplegic Shock and Septic Shock 3.0 groups when compared with the Sepsis group (P < 0.001) without a significant difference between the former two groups (P = 0.713). The log rank tests of Kaplan-Meier survival curves were also different (P = 0.007). Ventilator-free days and vasopressor-free days were different between the Sepsis vs Vasoplegic Shock and Septic Shock 3.0 groups (both P < 0.001), and similar in the last two groups (P = 0.128 and P = 0.133, respectively). Logistic regression identified the maximum dose of vasopressor therapy used (AOR 1.046; 95%CI: 1.012-1.082, P = 0.008) and serum lactate level (AOR 1.542; 95%CI: 1.055-2.255, P = 0.02) as the major explanatory variables of mortality rates (R² 0.79).

CONCLUSION

In severe COVID-19 patients, the Sepsis 3.0 criteria of septic shock may exclude approximately one third of patients with a similarly high risk of a poor outcome and mortality rate, which should be equally addressed.

A quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment-negative result at triage is associated with low compliance with sepsis bundles: a retrospective analysis of a multicenter prospective registry

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the effects of a quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA)-negative result (qSOFA score <2 points) at triage on the compliance with sepsis bundles among patients with sepsis who presented to the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

Prospective sepsis registry data from 11 urban tertiary hospital EDs between October 2015 and April 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who met the Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock criteria were included. Primary exposure was defined as a qSOFA score ≥2 points at ED triage. The primary outcome was defined as 3-hour bundle compliance, including lactate measurement, blood culture, broad-spectrum antibiotics administration, and 30 mL/kg crystalloid administration. Multivariate logistic regression analysis to predict 3-hour bundle compliance was performed.

RESULTS

Among the 2,250 patients enrolled in the registry, 2,087 fulfilled the sepsis criteria. Only 31.4% (656/2,087) of the sepsis patients had qSOFA scores ≥2 points at triage. Patients with qSOFA scores <2 points had lower lactate levels, lower SOFA scores, and a lower 28-day mortality rate. Rates of compliance with lactate measurement (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.29-0.75), antibiotics administration (aOR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.52-0.78), and 30 mL/kg crystalloid administration (aOR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.49-0.77) within 3 hours from triage were significantly lower in patients with qSOFA scores <2 points. However, the rate of compliance with blood culture within 3 hours from triage (aOR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.33-2.08) was higher in patients with qSOFA scores <2 points.

CONCLUSION

A qSOFA-negative result at ED triage is associated with low compliance with lactate measurement, broad-spectrum antibiotics administration, and 30 mL/kg crystalloid administration within 3 hours in sepsis patients.

'Diagnostic downshift': clinical and system consequences of extrapolating secondary care testing tactics to primary care

Numerous drivers push specialist diagnostic approaches down to primary care ('diagnostic downshift'), intuitively welcomed by clinicians and patients. However, primary care's different population and processes result in under-recognised, unintended consequences. Testing performs poorer in primary care, with indication creep due to earlier, more undifferentiated presentation and reduced accuracy due to spectrum bias and the 'false-positive paradox'. In low-prevalence settings, tests without near-100% specificity have their useful yield eclipsed by greater incidental or false-positive findings. Ensuing cascades and multiplier effects can generate clinician workload, patient anxiety, further low-value tests, referrals, treatments and a potentially nocebic population 'disease' burden of unclear benefit. Increased diagnostics earlier in pathways can burden patients and stretch general practice (GP) workloads, inducing downstream service utilisation and unintended 'market failure' effects. Evidence is tenuous for reducing secondary care referrals, providing patient reassurance or meaningfully improving clinical outcomes. Subsequently, inflated investment in per capita testing, at a lower level in a healthcare system, may deliver diminishing or even negative economic returns. Test cost poorly represents 'value', neglecting under-recognised downstream consequences, which must be balanced against therapeutic yield. With lower positive predictive values, more tests are required per true diagnosis and cost-effectiveness is rarely robust. With fixed secondary care capacity, novel primary care testing is an added cost pressure, rarely reducing hospital activity. GP testing strategies require real-world evaluation, in primary care populations, of all downstream consequences. Test formularies should be scrutinised in view of the setting of care, with interventions to focus rational testing towards those with higher pretest probabilities, while improving interpretation and communication of results.

Accuracy of prehospital clinicians' perceived prognostication of long-term survival in critically ill patients: a nationwide retrospective cohort study on helicopter emergency service patients

OBJECTIVES

Prehospital critical care physicians regularly attend to patients with poor prognosis and may limit the advanced therapies. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of poor prognosis given by prehospital critical care clinicians.

DESIGN

Cohort study.

SETTING

We performed a retrospective cohort study using the national helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) quality database.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients classified by the HEMS clinician to have survived until hospital admission solely because of prehospital interventions but evaluated as having no long-term survival by prehospital clinician, were included.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME

The survival of the study patients was examined at 30 days, 1 year and 3 years.

RESULTS

Of 36 715 patients encountered by the HEMS during the study period, 2053 patients were classified as having no long-term survival and included. At 30 days, 713 (35%, 95% CI 33% to 37%) were still alive and 69 were lost to follow-up. Furthermore, at 1 year 524 (26%) and at 3 years 267 (13%) of the patients were still alive. The deceased patients received more often prehospital rapid sequence intubation and vasoactives, compared with patients alive at 30 days. Patients deceased at 30 days were older and had lower initial Glasgow Coma Scores. Otherwise, no clinically relevant difference was found in the prehospital vital parameters between the survivors and non-survivors.

CONCLUSIONS

The prognostication of long-term survival for critically ill patients by a prehospital critical care clinician seems to fulfil only moderately. A prognosis based on clinical judgement must be handled with a great degree of caution and decision on limitation of advanced care should be made cautiously.

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

Purpose

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Comparison of different sepsis scoring systems and pathways: qSOFA, SIRS, Shapiro criteria and CEC SEPSIS KILLS pathway in bacteraemic and non-bacteraemic patients presenting to the emergency department

Background

Bacteraemia is associated with high morbidity and mortality, with delayed antibiotic treatment associated with poorer outcomes. Early identification is challenging, but clinically important. Multiple scoring systems have been developed to identify individuals in the broader categories of sepsis. We designed this study to assess the performance of existing scoring systems and pathways—CEC SEPSIS KILLS pathway (an Australian sepsis care package), quick sequential organ failure score (qSOFA), systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) and the Shapiro criteria.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study performed in two metropolitan hospitals in NSW, consisting of adult patients (> 18 years) with positive blood cultures containing a true pathogen and patients matched by age without positive blood cultures. Performance (sensitivity, specificity, and mortality prediction) of recognised sepsis and bacteraemia criteria and pathways—qSOFA, SIRS, Shapiro criteria and CEC SEPSIS KILLS pathway in the first 4 h following ED triage was assessed.

Results

There were 251 patients in each cohort. Sepsis-related mortality was higher in the bacteraemic group (OR 0.4, p = 0.03). Of the criteria studied, the modified Shapiro criteria had the highest sensitivity (88%) with modest specificity (37.85%), and qSOFA had the highest specificity (83.67%) with poor sensitivity (19.82%). SIRS had reasonable sensitivity (82.07%), with poor sensitivity (20.72%). The CEC SEPSIS pathway sensitivity of 70.1% and specificity of 71.1%. The SEPSIS KILLS was activated on only 14% of bacteraemic patients.

Conclusion

The performance of all scoring systems and pathways was suboptimal in the identification of patients at risk of bacteraemia presenting to the emergency department.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12879-022-07070-6.

Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment: Modifications for Identifying Maternal Morbidity and Mortality in Obstetrical Patients

OBJECTIVE

Screening tools, including the Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) criteria and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) criteria, have not been validated in the pregnant population. We aimed to determine if pregnancy-specific modifications to the quick SOFA (qSOFA) can improve prediction of severe maternal morbidity in pregnant women with serious infections.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a retrospective cohort study of pregnant patients with severe infections admitted to a single institution from January 1, 2011, through December 31, 2017. The primary outcome was severe maternal morbidity, defined as a composite of adverse maternal outcomes: intensive care unit (ICU) admission for >48 hours, need for invasive monitoring (central line or arterial line), intubation, pharmacologic hemodynamic support (intravenous vasopressors or inotropes), and/or maternal death. A logistic regression was then applied and the resulting predictors were analyzed individually and in combination with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves to modify qSOFA for pregnancy, that is, qSOFA-P.

RESULTS

Analysis of 104 pregnant patients with severe infections found that the standard qSOFA did not accurately predict severe maternal morbidity (ROC area under the curve [AUC] = 0.54, p = 0.49, sensitivity = 0.38, and specificity = 0.70). Pregnancy-specific modifications or "qSOFA-P" (respiratory rate [RR] ≥ 35 breaths/minute and systolic blood pressure [SBP] ≤ 85 mm Hg) significantly improved prediction of severe maternal morbidity (AUC = 0.77, p < 0.001, sensitivity = 0.79, and specificity = 0.74).

CONCLUSION

The standard qSOFA is a poor screening tool in the prediction of severe maternal morbidity in pregnant patients with infections. A pregnancy-specific screening system, qSOFA-P, improved prediction of severe maternal morbidity in pregnant women with severe infections. Further prospective and large multicenter studies are needed to validate this scoring system in pregnant women.

KEY POINTS

· Validated scoring systems for evaluating pregnant patients with sepsis are needed.. · Modifications to existing systems may improve the evaluation of pregnant patients with sepsis.. · The qSOFA-P (RR ≥ 35 breaths/minute and SBP ≤ 85 mm Hg) includes modifications to qSOFA, and improves the detection of patients who would develop severe maternal morbidity...

Prognostic value of diagnostic scales in community-acquired sepsis mortality at an emergency service. Prognosis in community-adquired sepsis

Objectives

To asses the prognostic value of diagnostic scales in mortality of community-adquired sepsis and added value of additional parameters.

Methods

Prospective observational study of patients with community-adquired sepsis in the Emergency Room of University Hospital. The study population were patients presented in the Emergency Room with confirmed infection and practicians sepsis diagnosis. Demographics, triage vital signs, inhaled oxygen fraction, inflammatory markers, biochemistry, all-cause mortality during hospitalization and three months after were recorded. Prognostic value of qSOFA, NEWS, SOFA, SIRS, and amplified scales were calculated by using logistic regression and ROC curves.

Results

201 patients, 54% male, average age 77±11,2 years were included. Sixty-three (31.5%) died during hospitalization and 24 (12%) three months after discharge. At the time of admission vital signs related with in-hospital mortality were Glasgow Coma Scale <13, respiratory rate ≥22 bpm, temperature, oxygen desaturation, high flow oxygen therapy and heart rate. Patients dead in-hospital had lower PaCO2, higher lactate, glucose and creatinine. Greater predictive capacity of the scales, from higher to lower, was: qSOFA, NEWS2, SOFA and SIRS. Amplified scales with lactate >2mg/dl, glucose, blood level >190mg/dl and PaCO2 <35mmHg improved predictive value.

Conclusion

Amplified-qSOFA and amplified-NEWS2 scales at Emergency Department may offer a better prognostic of septic patients mortality.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12873-021-00532-1.

Prognostic Accuracy of the qSOFA Score for In-Hospital Mortality in Elderly Patients with Obstructive Acute Pyelonephritis: A Multi-Institutional Study

Prognostic accuracy of the quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score for mortality may be limited in elderly patients. Using our multi-institutional database, we classified obstructive acute pyelonephritis (OAPN) patients into young and elderly groups, and evaluated predictive performance of the qSOFA score for in-hospital mortality. qSOFA score ≥ 2 was an independent predictor for in-hospital mortality, as was higher age, and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) ≥ 2. In young patients, the area under the curve (AUC) of the qSOFA score for in-hospital mortality was 0.85, whereas it was 0.61 in elderly patients. The sensitivity and specificity of qSOFA score ≥ 2 for in-hospital mortality was 80% and 80% in young patients, and 50% and 68% in elderly patients, respectively. For elderly patients, we developed the CCI-incorporated qSOFA score, which showed higher prognostic accuracy compared with the qSOFA score (AUC, 0.66 vs. 0.61, p < 0.001). Therefore, the prognostic accuracy of the qSOFA score for in-hospital mortality was high in young OAPN patients, but modest in elderly patients. Although it can work as a screening tool to determine therapeutic management in young patients, for elderly patients, the presence of comorbidities should be considered at the initial assessment.

Frequency of alterations in qSOFA, SIRS, MEWS and NEWS scores during the emergency department stay in infectious patients: a prospective study

BACKGROUND

For emergency department (ED) patients with suspected infection, a vital sign-based clinical rule is often calculated shortly after the patient arrives. The clinical rule score (normal or abnormal) provides information about diagnosis and/or prognosis. Since vital signs vary over time, the clinical rule scores can change as well. In this prospective multicentre study, we investigate how often the scores of four frequently used clinical rules change during the ED stay of patients with suspected infection.

METHODS

Adult (≥ 18 years) patients with suspected infection were prospectively included in three Dutch EDs between March 2016 and December 2019. Vital signs were measured in 30-min intervals and the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score, the Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) criteria, the Modified Early Warning Score and the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) score were calculated. Using the established cut-off points, we analysed how often alterations in clinical rule scores occurred (i.e. switched from normal to abnormal or vice versa). In addition, we investigated which vital signs caused most alterations.

RESULTS

We included 1433 patients, of whom a clinical rule score changed once or more in 637 (44.5%) patients. In 6.7-17.5% (depending on the clinical rule) of patients with an initial negative clinical rule score, a positive score occurred later during ED stay. In over half (54.3-65.0%) of patients with an initial positive clinical rule score, the score became negative later on. The respiratory rate caused most (51.2%) alterations.

CONCLUSION

After ED arrival, alterations in qSOFA, SIRS, MEWS and/or NEWS score are present in almost half of patients with suspected infection. The most contributing vital sign to these alterations was the respiratory rate. One in 6-15 patients displayed an abnormal clinical rule score after a normal initial score. Clinicians should be aware of the frequency of these alterations in clinical rule scores, as clinical rules are widely used for diagnosis and/or prognosis and the optimal moment of assessing them is unknown.

[Sepsis in out-of-hospital emergency medicine]

Background

Sepsis is a challenge in emergency medicine, as this life-threatening organ dysfunction, caused by a dysregulated host response to an infection, presents manifold and therefore is often recognized too late.

Objectives

Recently published surviving sepsis campaign and German S3 guidelines provide recommendations for diagnosis and therapy of sepsis in an in-hospital or intensive care setting, but do not particularly address out-of-hospital emergency medical care. We aim to work out the evidence base with regard to the out-of-hospital care of patients with suspected sepsis and to derive treatment recommendations for emergency medical services.

Conclusions

Therapy of sepsis and septic shock is summarized in bundles, whereby the first bundle should ideally be completed within the first hour-in analogy to "golden hour" concepts in other emergency medical entities, such as trauma care. In the out-of-hospital setting, therapy focuses on securing vital parameters, according to the ABCDE scheme, with a particular focus on volume therapy. Further procedures within the 1 h bundle, such as lactate measurement, obtaining microbiological samples, and starting an anti-infective therapy, are broadly available in hospital only. The aim is to control the site of infection as soon as possible. Therefore, an appropriate designated hospital should be chosen carefully and informed in advance, in order to initiate and pave the way for further clinical diagnostic and treatment paths. Moreover, structured and target-oriented handovers, as well as regular training, are required.

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.

Class-Modeling of Septic Shock With Hyperdimensional Computing

Sepsis arises when a patient's immune system has an extreme reaction to an infection. This is followed by septic shock if damage to organ tissue is so extensive that it causes a total systemic failure. Early detection of septic shock among septic patients could save critical time for preparation and prevention treatment. Due to the high variance in symptoms and patient state before shock, it is challenging to create a protocol that would be effective across patients. However, since septic shock is an acute change in patient state, modeling patient stability could be more effective in detecting a condition that departs from it. In this paper we present a one-class classification approach to septic shock using hyperdimensional computing. We built various models that consider different contexts and can be adapted according to a target priority. Among septic patients, the models can detect septic shock accurately with 90% sensitivity and overall accuracy of 60% of the cases up to three hours before the onset of septic shock, with the ability to adjust predictions according to incoming data. Additionally, the models can be easily adapted to prioritize sensitivity (increase true positives) or specificity (decrease false positives).

Relationship between the prehospital quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment and prognosis in patients with sepsis or suspected sepsis: a population-based ORION registry

Aim

The quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) was proposed for use as a simple screening tool for sepsis. In this study, we evaluated the relationship between the prehospital use of qSOFA and prognosis in patients with sepsis or suspected sepsis using the population‐based Osaka Emergency Information Research Intelligent Operation Network (ORION) registry, which compiles prehospital ambulance data and in‐hospital information.

Methods

The study enrolled 437,974 patients in the ORION registry from January 1 to December 31, 2016. We selected hospitalized patients with sepsis or suspected sepsis using the appropriate codes from the International Classification of Diseases revision 10. We excluded patients with: (i) missing data (outcome, Japan Coma Scale, respiratory rate, and blood pressure); (ii) respiratory rate ≥60/min; and (iii) blood pressure ≥250 mmHg. These measures were evaluated by ambulance personnel when they first contacted the patient in the prehospital setting. The primary end‐point was discharge to death.

Results

In total, 12,646 patients (median age, 78 [interquartile range, 65–85] years; male, n = 6,760 [53.5%]) were eligible for our analysis. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis adjusted for confounding factors, the proportion of patients discharged to death was significantly higher for those evaluated as qSOFA positive (≥2 points) than qSOFA negative (≤1 point) (265/2,250 [11.78%] vs. 415/10,396 [3.99%]; adjusted odds ratio 2.91; 95% confidence interval, 2.47–3.43; P < 0.0001). The specificity and sensitivity were 83.4% and 39.0%, respectively, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for qSOFA positive was 0.61.

Conclusions

The qSOFA evaluated by ambulance personnel in the prehospital setting was significantly associated with prognosis in patients with sepsis or suspected sepsis.

Recognition in Emergency Department of Septic Patients at Higher Risk of Death: Beware of Patients without Fever

Background and Objectives: Chances of surviving sepsis increase markedly upon prompt diagnosis and treatment. As most sepsis cases initially show-up in the Emergency Department (ED), early recognition of a septic patient has a pivotal role in sepsis management, despite the lack of precise guidelines. The aim of this study was to identify the most accurate predictors of in-hospital mortality outcome in septic patients admitted to the ED. Materials and Methods: We compared 651 patients admitted to ED for sepsis (cases) with 363 controls (non-septic patients). A Bayesian mean multivariate logistic regression model was performed in order to identify the most accurate predictors of in-hospital mortality outcomes in septic patients. Results: Septic shock and positive qSOFA were identified as risk factors for in-hospital mortality among septic patients admitted to the ED. Hyperthermia was a protective factor for in-hospital mortality. Conclusions: Physicians should bear in mind that fever is not a criterium for defining sepsis; according to our results, absence of fever upon presentation might be indicative of greater severity and diagnosis of sepsis should not be delayed.

Two-stage prediction model for in-hospital mortality of patients with influenza infection

BACKGROUND

Infleunza is a challenging issue in public health. The mortality and morbidity associated with epidemic and pandemic influenza puts a heavy burden on health care system. Most patients with influenza can be treated on an outpatient basis but some required critical care. It is crucial for frontline physicians to stratify influenza patients by level of risk. Therefore, this study aimed to create a prediction model for critical care and in-hospital mortality.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study extracted data from the Chang Gung Research Database. This study included the patients who were diagnosed with influenza between 2010 and 2016. The primary outcome of this study was critical illness. The secondary analysis was to predict in-hospital mortality. A two-stage-modeling method was developed to predict hospital mortality. We constructed a multiple logistic regression model to predict the outcome of critical illness in the first stage, then S1 score were calculated. In the second stage, we used the S1 score and other data to construct a backward multiple logistic regression model. The area under the receiver operating curve was used to assess the predictive value of the model.

RESULTS

In the present study, 1680 patients met the inclusion criteria. The overall ICU admission and in-hospital mortality was 10.36% (174 patients) and 4.29% (72 patients), respectively. In stage I analysis, hypothermia (OR = 1.92), tachypnea (OR = 4.94), lower systolic blood pressure (OR = 2.35), diabetes mellitus (OR = 1.87), leukocytosis (OR = 2.22), leukopenia (OR = 2.70), and a high percentage of segmented neutrophils (OR = 2.10) were associated with ICU admission. Bandemia had the highest odds ratio in the Stage I model (OR = 5.43). In stage II analysis, C-reactive protein (OR = 1.01), blood urea nitrogen (OR = 1.02) and stage I model's S1 score were assocaited with in-hospital mortality. The area under the curve for the stage I and II model was 0.889 and 0.766, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The two-stage model is a efficient risk-stratification tool for predicting critical illness and mortailty. The model may be an optional tool other than qSOFA and SIRS criteria.

Vital signs of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome in adult patients with acute infections presenting in out-of-hours primary care: A cross-sectional study

Background

Signs of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) – fever (or hypothermia), tachycardia and tachypnoea – are used in the hospital setting to identify patients with possible sepsis.

Objectives

To determine how frequently abnormalities in the vital signs of SIRS are present in adult out-of-hours (OOH) primary care patients with suspected infections and assess the association with acute hospital referral.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional study at the OOH GP cooperative in Nijmegen, the Netherlands, between August and October 2015. GPs were instructed to record the body temperature, heart rate and respiratory rate of all patients with suspected acute infections. Vital signs of SIRS, other relevant signs and symptoms, and referral state were extracted from the electronic registration system of the OOH GP cooperative retrospectively. Logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the association between clinical signs and hospital referral.

Results

A total of 558 patients with suspected infections were included. At least two SIRS vital signs were abnormal in 35/409 (8.6%) of the clinic consultations and 60/149 (40.3%) of the home visits. Referral rate increased from 13% when no SIRS vital sign was abnormal to 68% when all three SIRS vital signs were abnormal. Independent associations for referral were found for decreased oxygen saturation, hypotension and rapid illness progression, but not for individual SIRS vital signs.

Conclusion

Although patients with abnormal vital signs of SIRS were referred more often, decreased oxygen saturation, hypotension and rapid illness progression seem to be most important for GPs to guide further management.

Current Utility of Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score: A Literature Review and Future Directions

The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score is commonly used in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) to evaluate, prognosticate and assess patients. Since its validation, the SOFA score has served in various settings, including medical, trauma, surgical, cardiac, and neurological ICUs. It has been a strong mortality predictor and literature over the years has documented the ability of the SOFA score to accurately distinguish survivors from non-survivors on admission. Over the years, multiple variations have been proposed to the SOFA score, which have led to the evolution of alternate validated scoring models replacing one or more components of the SOFA scoring system. Various SOFA based models have been used to evaluate specific clinical populations, such as patients with cardiac dysfunction, hepatic failure, renal failure, different races and public health illnesses, etc. This study is aimed to conduct a review of modifications in SOFA score in the past several years. We review the literature evaluating various modifications to the SOFA score such as modified SOFA, Modified SOFA, modified Cardiovascular SOFA, Extra-renal SOFA, Chronic Liver Failure SOFA, Mexican SOFA, quick SOFA, Lactic acid quick SOFA (LqSOFA), SOFA in hematological malignancies, SOFA with Richmond Agitation-Sedation scale and Pediatric SOFA. Various organ systems, their relevant scoring and the proposed modifications in each of these systems are presented in detail. There is a need to incorporate the most recent literature into the SOFA scoring system to make it more relevant and accurate in this rapidly evolving critical care environment. For future directions, we plan to put together most if not all updates in SOFA score and probably validate it in a large database a single institution and validate it in multisite data base.

Differentiating sepsis from similar groups of symptoms at triage level in emergency care

OBJECTIVES

Conditions that have similar initial presentations as sepsis may make early recognition of sepsis in an emergency room (ER) difficult. We investigated whether selected physiologic and metabolic parameters can be reliably used in the emergency department to differentiate sepsis from other disease states that mimic it, such as dehydration and stroke.

METHODS

Loess regression on retrospective follow-up chart data of patients with sepsis-like symptoms (N = 664) aged 18+ in a large ER in Hungary was used to visualize/identify cutoff points for sepsis risk. A multivariate logistic regression model based on standard triage data was constructed with its corresponding receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and compared with another model constructed based on current sepsis guidelines.

RESULTS

Age, bicarbonate, HR, lactate, pH, and body temperature had U, V, W, or reverse U-shaped associations with identifiable inflexion points, but the cutoff values we identified were slightly different from guideline cutoff values. In contrast to the guidelines, no inflexion points could be observed for the association of sepsis with SBP, DPB, MAP, and RR and therefore were treated as continuous variables. Compared to the guidelines-based model, the triage data-driven final model contained additional variables (age, pH, bicarbonate) and did not include lactate. The data-driven model identified about 85% of sepsis cases correctly, while the guidelines-based model identified only about 70% of sepsis cases correctly.

CONCLUSION

Our findings contribute to the growing body of evidence for the necessity of finding improved tools to identify sepsis at early time points, such as in the ER.

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).

The use of soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) as a marker of sepsis in the emergency department setting. A current review

Aim: The purpose of this review is to summarize all relevant publications regarding the use and validity of the soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) when used by clinicians in the emergency department (ED) for the detection and monitoring of patients with sepsis syndrome. Methods: A PubMed search was conducted in order to identify all publications related to the use of suPAR in sepsis patients in the ED setting. Results: Although suPAR is actively involved in the pathophysiology of sepsis, over the last 15 years, only a few studies have been published referring to its predictive validity in the ED. Conclusions: SuPAR can be easily and rapidly measured in an ED setting, and its role in the exclusion of an infection and the management of sepsis, alone or in combination to other biomarkers, should be further evaluated. The optimal cut-off value, the timing of the measurement and the role of the suPAR in an ED setting should be further investigated.

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.

Risk Factors for Mortality, Intensive Care Unit Admission, and Bacteremia in Patients Suspected of Sepsis at the Emergency Department: A Prospective Cohort Study

Background

There is a clear need for a better assessment of independent risk factors for in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit admission, and bacteremia in patients presenting with suspected sepsis at the emergency department.

Methods

A prospective observational cohort study including 1690 patients was performed. Two multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify independent risk factors.

Results

Sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score of ≥2 and serum lactate of ≥2mmol/L were associated with all outcomes. Other independent risk factors were individual SOFA variables and systemic inflammatory response syndrome variables but varied per outcome. Mean arterial pressure <70 mmHg negatively impacted all outcomes.

Conclusions

These readily available measurements can help with early risk stratification and prediction of prognosis.

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.

Comparison of qSOFA score, SOFA score, and SIRS criteria for the prediction of infection and mortality among surgical intermediate and intensive care patients

BACKGROUND

It is crucial to rapidly identify sepsis so that adequate treatment may be initiated. Accordingly, the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) and the quick SOFA (qSOFA) scores are used to evaluate intensive care unit (ICU) and non-ICU patients, respectively. As demand for ICU beds rises, the intermediate care unit (IMCU) carries greater importance as a bridge between the ICU and the regular ward. This study aimed to examine the ability of SOFA and qSOFA scores to predict suspected infection and mortality in IMCU patients.

METHODS

Retrospective data analysis included 13,780 surgical patients treated at the IMCU, ICU, or both between January 01, 2012, and September 30, 2018. Patients were screened for suspected infection (i.e., the commencement of broad-spectrum antibiotics) and then evaluated for the SOFA score, qSOFA score, and the 1992 defined systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria.

RESULTS

Suspected infection was detected in 1306 (18.3%) of IMCU, 1365 (35.5%) of ICU, and 1734 (62.0%) of IMCU/ICU encounters. Overall, 458 (3.3%) patients died (IMCU 45 [0.6%]; ICU 250 [6.5%]; IMCU/ICU 163 [5.8%]). All investigated scores failed to predict suspected infection independently of the analyzed subgroup. Regarding mortality prediction, the qSOFA score performed sufficiently within the IMCU cohort (AUCROC SIRS 0.72 [0.71-0.72]; SOFA 0.52 [0.51-0.53]; qSOFA 0.82 [0.79-0.84]), while the SOFA score was predictive in patients of the IMCU/ICU cohort (AUCROC SIRS 0.54 [0.53-0.54]; SOFA 0.73 [0.70-0.77]; qSOFA 0.59 [0.58-0.59]).

CONCLUSIONS

None of the assessed scores was sufficiently able to predict suspected infection in surgical ICU or IMCU patients. While the qSOFA score is appropriate for mortality prediction in IMCU patients, SOFA score prediction quality is increased in critically ill patients.

NEWS and qSIRS superior to qSOFA in the prediction of 30-day mortality in emergency department patients in Hong Kong

BACKGROUND

We aim to compare the prognostic value of Quick Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) and the previous Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) criteria, the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) and along with their combinations in the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

This single-centre prospective study recruited a convenience sample of unselected ED patients triaged as category 2 (Emergency) and 3 (Urgent). Receiver Operating Characteristic analyses were performed to determine the Area Under the Curve (AUC), along with sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, positive and negative likelihood ratios for the various scores.

RESULTS

Of 1253 patients recruited, overall 30-day mortality was 5.7%. The prognostic value for prediction of 30-day mortality, with AUCs for qSOFA ≥2, SIRS ≥2, NEWS ≥5, qSIRS (qSOFA + SIRS) ≥2 and NSIRS (NEWS + SIRS) ≥5 of 0.56 (95%CI 0.53-0.58), 0.61 (95%CI 0.58-0.64), 0.61 (95%CI 0.58-0.64), 0.64 (95%CI 0.62-0.67) and 0.61 (95%CI 0.58-0.63), respectively. Using pairwise comparisons of ROC curves, NEWS ≥5 and qSIRS ≥2 were better than qSOFA ≥2 at predicting 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Among unselected emergency and urgent ED patients, the prognostic value for NEWS and qSIRS were greater than qSOFA, Combinations of qSOFA and SIRS could improve the predictive value for 30-day mortality for ED patients. Key messages NEWS ≥5 and qSIRS ≥2 were better than qSOFA ≥2 at predicting 30-day mortality in ED patients. Combinations of qSOFA and SIRS could improve the predictive value for 30-day mortality for ED patients.

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

Sepsis is a life-threating organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection. This study proposed a new tool, i.e. modified qSOFA, for the early prognostic assessment of septic patients. All cases of sepsis/septic shock consecutively observed in 2 years (January 2017–December 2018), at St. Anna University Hospital of Ferrara, Italy, were included. Each patient was evaluated with qSOFA and a modified qSOFA (MqSOFA), i.e. adding a SpO2/FiO2 ratio to qSOFA. Logistic regression and survival analyses were applied to compare the two scores. A total number of 1137 consecutive cases of sepsis and septic shock were considered. Among them 136 were excluded for incomplete report of vital parameters. A total number of 668 patients (66.7%) were discharged, whereas 333 (33.3%) died because of sepsis-related complications. Data analysis showed that MqSOFA (AUC 0.805, 95% C.I. 0.776–0.833) had a greater ability to detect in-hospital mortality than qSOFA (AUC 0.712, 95% C.I. 0.678–0.746) (p < 0.001). Eighty-five patients (8.5%) were reclassified as high-risk (qSOFA< 2 and MqSOFA≥ 2) resulting in an improvement of sensitivity with a minor reduction in specificity. A significant difference of in-hospital mortality was observed between low-risk and reclassified high-risk (p < 0.001) and low-risk vs. high-risk groups (p < 0.001). We demonstrated that MqSOFA provided a better predictive score than qSOFA regarding patient’s outcome. Since sepsis is an underhanded and time-dependent disease, physicians may rely upon the herein proposed simple score, i.e. MqSOFA, to establish patients’ severity and outcome.