Comparing the Prognostic Value of Lactate to the Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio Among Sepsis Patients: A Prospective Cohort Study.

IF 1.5 Q3 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Open Access Emergency Medicine Pub Date : 2025-01-20 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/OAEM.S486966
Ralphe Bou Chebl, Saadeddine Haidar, Nadim Kattouf, Mohamad Assaf, Joudie Sahar Alwan, Mohamad Moustafa Khamis, Karim Abdeldaem, Maha Makki, Hani Tamim, Gilbert Abou Dagher
{"title":"Comparing the Prognostic Value of Lactate to the Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio Among Sepsis Patients: A Prospective Cohort Study.","authors":"Ralphe Bou Chebl, Saadeddine Haidar, Nadim Kattouf, Mohamad Assaf, Joudie Sahar Alwan, Mohamad Moustafa Khamis, Karim Abdeldaem, Maha Makki, Hani Tamim, Gilbert Abou Dagher","doi":"10.2147/OAEM.S486966","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Lactate has long been recognized as a key prognostic biomarker in sepsis. Similarly, the prognostic role of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) has been investigated in various conditions, including sepsis. Previous studies have explored the optimal NLR cutoff to differentiate sepsis survivors from nonsurvivors, predict bacteremia, diagnose sepsis, and assess mortality. This study compares the prognostic value of lactate and NLR in septic patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective cohort study included 874 adult septic or septic shock patients presenting to a tertiary care center's Emergency Department between September 2018 and February 2021. The primary outcome was to compare the prognostic value of NLR and lactate regarding in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes compared their prognostic value in different septic subgroups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Stepwise logistic regression showed NLR was not associated with in-hospital mortality (OR=1.003, p=0.544), while lactate was significantly associated with in-hospital mortality (OR=1.188, p<0.0001). There was no significant difference in the AUCs of NLR and lactate (0.552 vs 0.591, p=0.22). Lactate outperformed NLR in patients with albumin <30, those <65 years old, and those with sepsis from a urinary tract infection. No significant differences were found in AUCs between lactate and NLR in patients with septic shock, Lactate<2, Lactate≥2, diabetes, malignancy, chronic kidney diseases, other sources of infection, albumin ≥30 and age ≥ 65.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this study, lactate but not NLR was associated with in-hospital mortality. There was no significant difference in the AUCs between lactate and NLR among sepsis patients and among most of the subgroups. However, lactate outperformed NLR in the following subgroups: albumin<30 g/L, patients <65 years old and patients with sepsis due to a urinary tract infection. Our results advocate for the continued use of serum lactate rather than NLR, despite its limitations, as a predictor of mortality among septic patients and the different subgroups in this study.</p>","PeriodicalId":45096,"journal":{"name":"Open Access Emergency Medicine","volume":"17 ","pages":"3-13"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11759577/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Access Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/OAEM.S486966","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Lactate has long been recognized as a key prognostic biomarker in sepsis. Similarly, the prognostic role of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) has been investigated in various conditions, including sepsis. Previous studies have explored the optimal NLR cutoff to differentiate sepsis survivors from nonsurvivors, predict bacteremia, diagnose sepsis, and assess mortality. This study compares the prognostic value of lactate and NLR in septic patients.

Methods: This prospective cohort study included 874 adult septic or septic shock patients presenting to a tertiary care center's Emergency Department between September 2018 and February 2021. The primary outcome was to compare the prognostic value of NLR and lactate regarding in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes compared their prognostic value in different septic subgroups.

Results: Stepwise logistic regression showed NLR was not associated with in-hospital mortality (OR=1.003, p=0.544), while lactate was significantly associated with in-hospital mortality (OR=1.188, p<0.0001). There was no significant difference in the AUCs of NLR and lactate (0.552 vs 0.591, p=0.22). Lactate outperformed NLR in patients with albumin <30, those <65 years old, and those with sepsis from a urinary tract infection. No significant differences were found in AUCs between lactate and NLR in patients with septic shock, Lactate<2, Lactate≥2, diabetes, malignancy, chronic kidney diseases, other sources of infection, albumin ≥30 and age ≥ 65.

Conclusion: In this study, lactate but not NLR was associated with in-hospital mortality. There was no significant difference in the AUCs between lactate and NLR among sepsis patients and among most of the subgroups. However, lactate outperformed NLR in the following subgroups: albumin<30 g/L, patients <65 years old and patients with sepsis due to a urinary tract infection. Our results advocate for the continued use of serum lactate rather than NLR, despite its limitations, as a predictor of mortality among septic patients and the different subgroups in this study.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Open Access Emergency Medicine
Open Access Emergency Medicine EMERGENCY MEDICINE-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
6.70%
发文量
85
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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