DERIVATION OF A MORTALITY PREDICTION MODEL IN CRITICAL CARE PATIENTS WITH CIRRHOSIS AND SEPSIS.

ABSTRACT: Objective : The aim of the study is to develop a predictive model for in-hospital mortality in critically ill patients with cirrhosis and sepsis, using clinical and laboratory data. Design : This is a retrospective cohort study. Setting: Medical and mixed intensive care units (ICUs) of a tertiary medical center. Patients : Cirrhotic adults were admitted with sepsis to the ICUs from January of 2007 to May of 2017. Interventions : None. Measurements and Main Results : Of 2,595 ICU admissions of patients with cirrhosis, 277 with first ICU admission for sepsis were included in the analysis, and 37% died in the hospital. Patients who stayed in the ICU for at least 6 h (n = 275) were considered for the multivariate model. Ten-fold cross-validation was used to estimate best parameter values and model performance, and the final model was chosen as the model maximizing area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve. Variables in order of impact were Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) III score, initial serum lactate, conjugated bilirubin, serum creatinine, model for end-stage liver disease score, age, body mass index, and serum hemoglobin. The final best model from cross-validation presented an area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.75, using a cut-point of 50% estimated probability, sensitivity and specificity were 0.46 and 0.90, respectively, with positive predictive value of 0.72 and negative predictive value of 0.74. These results were similar to the APACHE III only model (AUC = 0.74, sensitivity = 0.43, specificity = 0.89, positive predictive value = 0.69, negative predictive value = 0.73). Conclusion : The combination of initial serum lactate level, conjugated bilirubin, initial serum creatinine, model for end-stage liver disease score, age, body mass index, and serum hemoglobin did not yield meaningful improvement in the AUC and did not provide advantage over the APACHE III score for the prediction of in-hospital mortality in critically ill patients with cirrhosis and sepsis.

Serum lactate and mean arterial pressure thresholds in patients with cirrhosis and septic shock.

BACKGROUND: The Sepsis-3 guidelines have incorporated serum lactate levels of >2 mmol/L in septic shock definition to account for higher observed mortality. Further evidence is needed to support this threshold in cirrhosis, as well as target mean arterial pressure (MAP) during resuscitation. METHODS: This observational cohort study investigated the association between initial serum lactate and resuscitation MAP levels on in-hospital mortality in patients with and without cirrhosis. Patients admitted to the intensive care unit for the treatment of septic shock between 2006 and 2021 in a quaternary academic center were included. Patients with cirrhosis documented on imaging and International Classification of Disease codes (n=595) were compared to patients without cirrhosis (n=575). The association of intensive care unit admission lactate levels and median 2-hour MAP with in-hospital mortality and the need for continuous renal replacement therapy was assessed. The association between median 24-hour MAP and in-hospital mortality was analyzed post hoc. RESULTS: Within the cirrhosis group, admission lactate levels of 2-4 and >4 mmol/L were associated with increased in-hospital mortality compared to lactate <2 mmol/L [adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.69, CI: 1.03-2.81, aOR: 4.02, CI: 2.53-6.52]. Median 24-hour MAP 60-65 and <60 mm Hg were also associated with increased in-hospital mortality compared with MAP >65 mm Hg (aOR: 2.84, CI: 1.64-4.92 and aOR: 7.34, CI: 3.17-18.76). In the noncirrhosis group, associations with in-hospital mortality were weaker for lactate 2-4 and >4 mmol/L (aOR: 1.32, CI: 0.77-2.27 and aOR: 2.25, CI: 1.40-3.67) and median 24-hour MAP 60-65 and <60 mm Hg (aOR: 1.70, CI: 0.65-4.14 and aOR: 4.41, CI: 0.79-29.38). CONCLUSIONS: These findings support utilizing lactate >2 mmol/L in the definition of septic shock, as well as a target MAP of >65 mm Hg during resuscitation in patients with cirrhosis.

Clinical Effect of Systemic Steroids in Patients with Cirrhosis and Septic Shock.

PURPOSE: Evidence regarding the utility of systemic steroids in treating patients with cirrhosis and septic shock remains equivocal. This study aimed to evaluate and elucidate the association of steroid use with outcomes and adverse effects in a cohort of patients with cirrhosis and septic shock. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of patients with cirrhosis and septic shock admitted to a tertiary hospital intensive care unit (ICU) from January 2007 to May 2017, using a validated ICU Datamart. Patients who received vasopressors within 6 h of ICU admission were included in the multivariate analysis. The effect of steroids on outcomes was evaluated using multivariable regression, adjusting for confounding variables. RESULTS: Out of 179 admissions of patients with cirrhosis and septic shock, 56 received steroids during the ICU admission. Patients who received steroids received a higher total dose of vasopressors (91.2 mg vs. 39.1 mg, P = 0.04) and had a lower initial lactate level (1.8 mmol/L vs. 2.6 mmol/L, P = 0.007). The multivariate analysis included 117 patients and showed no significant differences in mortality, length of ICU admission, or length of hospital stay. Bleeding events, delirium, and renal-replacement therapy requirements were also not associated with the use of steroids. CONCLUSION: The use of systemic steroids was more prevalent in cirrhotic patients with higher vasopressor requirements. It was not associated with decreased mortality or increased ICU- and hospital-free days, or to adverse effects.

Management of Sepsis in Patients With Cirrhosis: Current Evidence and Practical Approach.

Sepsis in patients with cirrhosis is associated with high mortality. An impaired immune response accounts for the increased infection risk observed in these patients. Hemodynamic and systemic changes suggestive of sepsis may be observed in patients with cirrhosis in the absence of infection; therefore, diagnosis and treatment of sepsis may be delayed. The optimal management of the critically ill patient with sepsis and cirrhosis has not been well established and is generally extrapolated from consensus guidelines and expert recommendations made for management of patients without cirrhosis with sepsis. Despite the lack of strong evidence, we propose a contemporary pragmatic approach to sepsis management in patients with cirrhosis, including the choice of fluids, vasopressors, and antibiotics.