Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score Is a Better Predictor of Septic Shock After Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Secondary Analysis of Two Multicenter Prospective Trials.

Introduction: Recent retrospective literature suggests that the quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) scoring tool is a potentially superior tool over use of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria to predict septic shock after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) surgery. Here we examine use of qSOFA and SIRS to predict septic shock within data series collected prospectively on PCNL patients as part of a greater study of infectious complications. Materials and Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of two prospective multicenter studies including PCNL patients across nine institutions. Clinical signs informing SIRS and qSOFA scores were collected no later than postoperative day 1. The primary outcome was sensitivity and specificity of SIRS and qSOFA (high-risk score of greater-or-equal to two points) in predicting admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) for vasopressor support. Results: A total of 218 cases at 9 institutions were analyzed. One patient required vasopressor support in the ICU. The sensitivity/specificity was 100%/72.4% (McNemar's test p < 0.001) for SIRS and was 100%/90.8% (McNemar's test p < 0.001) for qSOFA. Conclusion: Although positive predictive value for both qSOFA and SIRS in prediction of post-PCNL septic shock is low, prospectively collected data demonstrate use of qSOFA may offer greater specificity than SIRS criteria when predicting post-PCNL septic shock.

Use of the Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score for Prediction of Intensive Care Unit Admission Due to Septic Shock after Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Multicenter Study.

PURPOSE: Recent studies have demonstrated that quick sequential organ failure assessment criteria may be more accurate than systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria to predict postoperative sepsis. In this study we evaluated the ability of these 2 criteria to predict septic shock after percutaneous nephrolithotomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective multicenter study in 320 patients who underwent percutaneous nephrolithotomy at a total of 8 institutions. The criteria for quick sequential organ failure assessment and systemic inflammatory response syndrome were collected 24 hours postoperatively. The study primary outcome was postoperative septic shock. Secondary outcomes included 30 and 90-day emergency department visits, and the hospital readmission rate. RESULTS: Three of the 320 patients (0.9%) met the criteria for postoperative septic shock. These 3 patients had positive criteria for quick sequential organ failure assessment and systemic inflammatory response syndrome. Of the entire cohort 23 patients (7%) met quick sequential organ failure assessment criteria and 103 (32%) met systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria. Specificity for postoperative sepsis was significantly higher for quick sequential organ failure assessment than for systemic inflammatory response syndrome (93.3% vs 68.4%, McNemar test p <0.001). The positive predictive value was 13% for quick sequential organ failure assessment criteria and 2.9% for systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria. On multivariate logistic regression systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria significantly predicted an increased probability of the patient receiving a transfusion (ß = 1.234, p <0.001). Positive quick sequential organ failure assessment criteria significantly predicted an increased probability of an emergency department visit within 30 days (ß = 1.495, p <0.05), operative complications (ß = 1.811, p <0.001) and transfusions (p <0.001). The main limitation of the study is that it was retrospective. CONCLUSIONS: Quick sequential organ failure assessment criteria were superior to systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria to predict infectious complications after percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

A Decision Analysis of Observation vs Immediate Reintervention for Asymptomatic Residual Fragments Less than 4 mm Following Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy.

INTRODUCTION: We performed a decision analysis model of the cost-effectiveness of observation vs intervention for asymptomatic residual fragments less than 4 mm in diameter following ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy. METHODS: Outcomes data from a retrospective analysis evaluating the natural history, complications and reintervention rates of asymptomatic residual stone fragments performed by the EDGE (Endourology Disease Group for Excellence) Research Consortium were used. A decision analysis model was constructed to compare the cost-effectiveness of initial observation of residual fragments to immediate intervention. Cost of observation included emergency room visits, hospitalizations and reinterventions. The cost analysis model extended to 3 years to account for delayed reintervention rates for fragments less than 4 mm. Costs of emergency department visits, readmissions and reinterventions were calculated based on published figures from the literature. RESULTS: Decision analysis modeling demonstrated that when comparing initial observation to immediate reintervention, the cost was $2,183 vs $4,424. The difference in cost was largely driven by the fact that over 3 years, approximately 55% of all patients remained asymptomatic and did not incur additional costs. This represents an approximate annual per patient savings of $747, and $2,241 over 3 years when observation is selected over immediate reintervention. CONCLUSIONS: Our decision analysis model demonstrates superior cost-effectiveness for observation over immediate reintervention for asymptomatic residual stones less than 4 mm following ureteroscopic lithotripsy. Based on these findings careful stratification and selection of patients may enable surgeons to improve cost-effectiveness of managing small, asymptomatic residual fragments following ureteroscopic lithotripsy.