The six scoring systems' prognostic value in predicting 24-hour mortality in septic patients.

IF 3.3 4区 医学 Q1 Medicine
M Djikic, M Milenkovic, M Stojadinovic, T Miladinovic, D Gujanicic, I Milicevic-Nesic, B Uzelac, M Laban, D Markovic
{"title":"The six scoring systems' prognostic value in predicting 24-hour mortality in septic patients.","authors":"M Djikic, M Milenkovic, M Stojadinovic, T Miladinovic, D Gujanicic, I Milicevic-Nesic, B Uzelac, M Laban, D Markovic","doi":"10.26355/eurrev_202406_36462","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The use of scoring systems contributes to the faster identification of septic patients, especially those at a high risk of a fatal outcome. The best scoring system does not exist, so the search for the optimal one is always current. The aim of this study is to estimate the prognostic value of the six scoring systems in predicting 24-hour mortality among septic patients presented at the emergency department.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>An observational retrospective study was conducted in the Emergency Triage Room (ETR) of the Emergency Center (EC) at the University Clinical Center of Serbia (UCCS) in Belgrade. Consecutive septic patients, according to the Sepsis-3 definition, with or without shock, presented to the ETR and then hospitalized in Intensive Care Units were included in the study. Mortality data within 24 h and on the 28th day were extracted from the Hospital information system or the National mortality database. Scoring systems including sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA), quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA), systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), National early warning score (NEWS), sepsis patient evaluation in the emergency department (SPEED), and mortality in emergency department sepsis (MEDS) were analyzed for all patients utilizing the available data. The primary outcome of this study was death within 24 hours of triage. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to determine the most effective scoring system. Lactate was then added to this system to enhance its predictive accuracy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nineteen out of 120 patients included in the study (15.8%) experienced death within 24 hours of triage. The twenty-eight-day mortality rate was 55%. SOFA score demonstrated the highest predictive value for 24-hour mortality but was only moderately predictive overall, with an area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) of 0.755 (95% CI 0.625-0.885). SPEED, MEDS, and NEVS exhibited modest discriminatory power [0.673 (95% CI 0.543-0.803), 0.665 (95% CI 0.536-0.794), 0.630 (95% CI 0.528-0.724)], while SIRS and qSOFA remained insignificant in predicting 24-hour mortality. The predictive value of the SOFA score was increased by the addition of lactate (AUC 0.865, 95% CI 0.736-0.995; p=0.0081). All scores demonstrated better and satisfactory predictive power for 28-day mortality.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>SOFA, with the addition of lactate, is a complex but reliable tool for the early stratification of septic patients who are presenting at an emergency department.</p>","PeriodicalId":12152,"journal":{"name":"European review for medical and pharmacological sciences","volume":"28 12","pages":"3849-3859"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European review for medical and pharmacological sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26355/eurrev_202406_36462","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The use of scoring systems contributes to the faster identification of septic patients, especially those at a high risk of a fatal outcome. The best scoring system does not exist, so the search for the optimal one is always current. The aim of this study is to estimate the prognostic value of the six scoring systems in predicting 24-hour mortality among septic patients presented at the emergency department.

Patients and methods: An observational retrospective study was conducted in the Emergency Triage Room (ETR) of the Emergency Center (EC) at the University Clinical Center of Serbia (UCCS) in Belgrade. Consecutive septic patients, according to the Sepsis-3 definition, with or without shock, presented to the ETR and then hospitalized in Intensive Care Units were included in the study. Mortality data within 24 h and on the 28th day were extracted from the Hospital information system or the National mortality database. Scoring systems including sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA), quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA), systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), National early warning score (NEWS), sepsis patient evaluation in the emergency department (SPEED), and mortality in emergency department sepsis (MEDS) were analyzed for all patients utilizing the available data. The primary outcome of this study was death within 24 hours of triage. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to determine the most effective scoring system. Lactate was then added to this system to enhance its predictive accuracy.

Results: Nineteen out of 120 patients included in the study (15.8%) experienced death within 24 hours of triage. The twenty-eight-day mortality rate was 55%. SOFA score demonstrated the highest predictive value for 24-hour mortality but was only moderately predictive overall, with an area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) of 0.755 (95% CI 0.625-0.885). SPEED, MEDS, and NEVS exhibited modest discriminatory power [0.673 (95% CI 0.543-0.803), 0.665 (95% CI 0.536-0.794), 0.630 (95% CI 0.528-0.724)], while SIRS and qSOFA remained insignificant in predicting 24-hour mortality. The predictive value of the SOFA score was increased by the addition of lactate (AUC 0.865, 95% CI 0.736-0.995; p=0.0081). All scores demonstrated better and satisfactory predictive power for 28-day mortality.

Conclusions: SOFA, with the addition of lactate, is a complex but reliable tool for the early stratification of septic patients who are presenting at an emergency department.

六种评分系统在预测脓毒症患者 24 小时死亡率方面的预后价值。
目的:使用评分系统有助于更快地识别脓毒症患者,尤其是那些极有可能出现致命结果的患者。目前还不存在最好的评分系统,因此一直在寻找最佳评分系统。本研究旨在估算六种评分系统在预测急诊科脓毒症患者 24 小时死亡率方面的预后价值:在贝尔格莱德塞尔维亚大学临床中心(UCCS)急诊中心(EC)的急诊分诊室(ETR)进行了一项观察性回顾研究。根据败血症-3的定义,研究对象包括在急诊分诊室就诊、随后在重症监护病房住院的连续败血症患者,无论患者是否出现休克。研究人员从医院信息系统或国家死亡率数据库中提取了 24 小时内和 28 天内的死亡率数据。利用现有数据分析了所有患者的评分系统,包括序贯器官衰竭评估(SOFA)、快速序贯器官衰竭评估(qSOFA)、全身炎症反应综合征(SIRS)、国家预警评分(NEWS)、急诊科脓毒症患者评估(SPEED)和急诊科脓毒症死亡率(MEDS)。本研究的主要结果是分诊后 24 小时内的死亡。采用接收者操作特征(ROC)分析来确定最有效的评分系统。然后将乳酸添加到该系统中,以提高其预测准确性:在 120 名参与研究的患者中,有 19 人(15.8%)在分诊后 24 小时内死亡。二十八天的死亡率为 55%。SOFA 评分对 24 小时死亡率的预测价值最高,但总体预测价值一般,接收者操作曲线下面积 (AUC) 为 0.755(95% CI 0.625-0.885)。SPEED、MEDS和NEVS显示出适度的鉴别力[0.673(95% CI 0.543-0.803)、0.665(95% CI 0.536-0.794)、0.630(95% CI 0.528-0.724)],而SIRS和qSOFA在预测24小时死亡率方面仍不显著。加入乳酸后,SOFA 评分的预测价值有所提高(AUC 0.865,95% CI 0.736-0.995;P=0.0081)。所有评分对28天死亡率的预测能力都较好,令人满意:加入乳酸的 SOFA 是一种复杂但可靠的工具,可用于对急诊科就诊的脓毒症患者进行早期分层。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
6.10%
发文量
906
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences, a fortnightly journal, acts as an information exchange tool on several aspects of medical and pharmacological sciences. It publishes reviews, original articles, and results from original research. The purposes of the Journal are to encourage interdisciplinary discussions and to contribute to the advancement of medicine. European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences includes: -Editorials- Reviews- Original articles- Trials- Brief communications- Case reports (only if of particular interest and accompanied by a short review)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信