Score performance of SAPS 2 and SAPS 3 in combination with biomarkers IL-6, PCT or CRP

Enhancing SAPS-3 Predictive Accuracy with Initial, Peak, and Last Lactate Measurements in Septic Shock

Background/Objectives: Septic shock is a severe condition with high mortality necessitating precise prognostic tools for improved patient outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the collective predictive value of the Simplified Acute Physiology Score 3 (SAPS-3) and lactate measurements (initial, peak, last, and clearance rates within the first 24 h) in patients with septic shock. Specifically, it sought to determine how these markers enhance predictive accuracy for 28-day mortality beyond SAPS-3 alone. Methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzed data from 66 septic shock patients at two ICUs of Vienna General Hospital (2017-2019). SAPS-3 and lactate levels (initial, peak, last measurement within 24 h, and 24 h clearance) were obtained from electronic health records. Logistic regression models were constructed to identify predictors of 28-day mortality, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves assessed predictive accuracy. Results: Among 66 patients, 36 (55%) died within 28 days. SAPS-3 scores significantly differed between survivors and non-survivors (76 vs. 85 points; p = 0.016). First, last, and peak lactate were significantly higher in non-survivors compared to survivors (all p < 0.001). The combination of SAPS-3 and first lactate produced the highest predictive accuracy (AUC = 80.6%). However, 24 h lactate clearance was not predictive of mortality. Conclusions: Integrating SAPS-3 with lactate measurements, particularly first lactate, improves predictive accuracy for 28-day mortality in septic shock patients. First lactate serves as an early, robust prognostic marker, providing crucial information for clinical decision-making and care prioritization. Further large-scale studies are needed to refine these predictive tools and validate their efficacy in guiding treatment strategies.

Are patient volume and care level in teaching hospitals variables affecting clinical outcomes in adult intensive care units?

Teixeira et al. showed that patients admitted to the intensive care unit of a teaching hospital in a non-metropolitan region needed more support, had worse prognostic indices, and had a higher nursing workload in the first 24 hours of admission. In addition, worse outcomes, including mortality, need for dialysis, pressure injury, infection, prolonged mechanical ventilation, and prolonged hospital stay, were observed in the teaching hospital. Worse outcomes were more prevalent in the teaching hospital. Understanding the importance of teaching hospitals to implement well-established care protocols is critical.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical outcomes of patients admitted to the intensive care unit of teaching (HI) and nonteaching (without an academic affiliation; H2) hospitals.

METHODS

In this prospective cohort study, adult patients hospitalized between August 2018 and July 2019, with a minimum length of stay of 24 hours in the intensive care unit, were included. Patients with no essential information in their medical records to evaluate the study outcomes were excluded. Resuslts: Overall, 219 patients participated in this study. The clinical and demographic characteristics of patients in H1 and H2 were similar. The most prevalent clinical outcomes were death, need for dialysis, pressure injury, length of hospital stay, mechanical ventilation >48 hours, and infection, all of which were more prevalent in the teaching hospital.

CONCLUSION

Worse outcomes were more prevalent in the teaching hospital. There was no difference between the institutions concerning the survival rate of patients as a function of length of hospital stay; however, a difference was observed in intensive care unit admissions.

Comparison of Mortality Prediction Scores in Intermediate-Care Patients with Liver Cirrhosis at a German University Transplant Centre: A Prospective Study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Mortality prediction models help to extract and relate patient data upon admission to intensive or intermediate care units (ImCUs). Considering technical and economic healthcare developments, re-evaluations of score performances are required to warrant their validity. This study validates and compares established scoring systems in cirrhotic ImCU patients.

METHODS

Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II, Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) 2 and 3, Sepsis Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), Mortality Probability Model at ICU admission (MPMo) II and III, Model for End stage Liver Disease (MELD), CLIF-Consortium Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure (CLIF-C ACLF), CLIF-Consortium Acute Decompensation (CLIF-C AD), and Intermediate Care Unit Severity Score (ImCUSS) were calculated in patients with cirrhosis (n = 98) at ImCU admission. Discrimination performances were evaluated by area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs), calibration performances with calibration belt plots, and their corresponding p values.

RESULTS

Overall, SAPS 3 and CLIF-C ACLF have shown the best 90-day mortality prediction outcomes with AUROCs of 0.825 and 0.783 along with calibration belt p values of 0.128 and 0.061, respectively. In a subgroup analysis of patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF), expanded SAPS 2, SOFA, and SAPS 3 reached the best AUROCs, i.e., 0.760, 0.750, and 0.714, but none of the tested scores reached an acceptable calibration.

CONCLUSION

Ninety-day mortality risk prediction of the SAPS 3 and CLIF-C ACLF was accurate in our cohort of patients with liver cirrhosis admitted to ImCUs. A particular challenge remains that is the mortality prediction in patients with ACLF requiring ImCU-level care; here, further developments are needed to generate scores with acceptable predictive performances.