Assessment of the Choroidal Vascular Structure in Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the choroidal vascular structure in cases of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C). METHODS: This prospective study included 38 eyes of 19 patients with MIS-C and 60 eyes of 30 healthy participants. Optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging was performed at 1 month after diagnosis in the MIS-C group. Using enhanced depth imaging OCT, choroidal thickness was measured in the subfoveal, nasal, and temporal quadrants at 500 and 1,500 µm distances from the fovea (SCT, N500CT, T500CT, N1500CT, and T1500CT, respectively). The luminal, stromal, and total choroidal areas were evaluated with the binarization method in ImageJ software (National Institutes of Health). The ratio of the luminal area to the total choroidal area was determined as the choroidal vascular index (CVI). RESULTS: The age and sex distributions of the two groups without any ophthalmologic pathology were similar (P > .05). The choroidal thickness values in all quadrants except for T1500CT were similar between the two groups (P > .05). T1500CT was significantly lower in the MIS-C group (P = .02). The luminal choroidal area was 1.04 ± 0.10 mm2 in the MIS-C group and 1.26 ± 0.24 mm2 in the healthy control group (P < .001), and the CVI values were 0.52 ± 0.04 and 0.57 ± 0.09, respectively (P = .01). The stromal and total choroidal area values did not significantly differ between the two groups (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to evaluate CVI in patients with MIS-C. It was observed that the choroidal vascular structure could be affected in the early period of MIS-C, as shown by a decrease in the CVI value and luminal vascular area. OCT can be used to monitor ocular vascular changes in these patients. [J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2024;61(2):120-126.].

Clinical usefulness of scoring systems to predict severe acute pancreatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis with pre and post-test probability assessment.

BACKGROUND: Scoring systems for severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) prediction should be used in conjunction with pre-test probability to establish post-test probability of SAP, but data of this kind are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the predictive value of commonly employed scoring systems and their usefulness in modifying the pre-test probability of SAP. METHODS: Following PRISMA statement and MOOSE checklists after PROSPERO registration, PubMed was searched from inception until September 2022. Retrospective, prospective, cross-sectional studies or clinical trials on patients with acute pancreatitis defined as Revised Atlanta Criteria, reporting rate of SAP and using at least one score among Bedside Index for Severity in Acute Pancreatitis (BISAP), Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Examination (APACHE)-II, RANSON, and Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) with their sensitivity and specificity were included. Random effects model meta-analyses were performed. Pre-test probability and likelihood ratio (LR) were combined to estimate post-test probability on Fagan nomograms. Pooled severity rate was used as pre-test probability of SAP and pooled sensitivity and specificity to calculate LR and generate post-test probability. A priori hypotheses for heterogeneity were developed and sensitivity analyses planned. RESULTS: 43 studies yielding 14,116 acute pancreatitis patients were included: 42 with BISAP, 30 with APACHE-II, 27 with Ranson, 8 with SIRS. Pooled pre-test probability of SAP ranged 16.6%-25.3%. The post-test probability of SAP with positive/negative score was 47%/6% for BISAP, 43%/5% for APACHE-II, 48%/5% for Ranson, 40%/12% for SIRS. In 18 studies comparing BISAP, APACHE-II, and Ranson in 6740 patients with pooled pre-test probability of SAP of 18.7%, post-test probability when scores were positive was 48% for BISAP, 46% for APACHE-II, 50% for Ranson. When scores were negative, post-test probability dropped to 7% for BISAP, 6% for Ranson, 5% for APACHE-II. Quality, design, and country of origin of the studies did not explain the observed high heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS: The most commonly used scoring systems to predict SAP perform poorly and do not aid in decision-making.

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.

Comparison of the systematic Inflammatory response syndrome and the quick sequential organ failure assessment for prognostic accuracy in detecting sepsis in the emergency department: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Awareness and prompt recognition of sepsis are essential for nurses working in the emergency department (ED), enabling them to make an initial assessment of patients and then to sort them according to their condition s severity. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate prognostic accuracy in detecting sepsis in the emergency department by comparing the previous sepsis-2 screening tool, the Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) and the current sepsis-3 screening tool, the Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA). METHODS: This systematic review used the guideline by Bettany-Saltikov and McSherry and was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 checklist. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO. A systematic search was conducted using the CINAHL, EMBASE and MEDLINE databases. Study selection and risk of bias was performed independently by pair of authors. RESULTS: Five articles were included. Overall, SIRS showed higher sensitivity than qSOFA, while qSOFA showed higher specificity than SIRS. The positive predictive value for qSOFA was superior, while there was a minor deviation in negative predictive value between qSOFA and SIRS. CONCLUSION: The overall recommendation based on the included studies indicates that qSOFA is the better-suited screening tool for prognostic accuracy in detecting sepsis in the emergency department.

Utilizing predictive machine-learning modelling unveils feature-based risk assessment system for hyperinflammatory patterns and infectious outcomes in polytrauma.

Purpose: Earlier research has identified several potentially predictive features including biomarkers associated with trauma, which can be used to assess the risk for harmful outcomes of polytraumatized patients. These features encompass various aspects such as the nature and severity of the injury, accompanying health conditions, immune and inflammatory markers, and blood parameters linked to organ functioning, however their applicability is limited. Numerous indicators relevant to the patients` outcome are routinely gathered in the intensive care unit (ICU) and recorded in electronic medical records, rendering them suitable predictors for risk assessment of polytraumatized patients. Methods: 317 polytraumatized patients were included, and the influence of 29 clinical and biological features on the complication patterns for systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), pneumonia and sepsis were analyzed with a machine learning workflow including clustering, classification and explainability using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) values. The predictive ability of the analyzed features within three days after admission to the hospital were compared based on patient-specific outcomes using receiver-operating characteristics. Results: A correlation and clustering analysis revealed that distinct patterns of injury and biomarker patterns were observed for the major complication classes. A k-means clustering suggested four different clusters based on the major complications SIRS, pneumonia and sepsis as well as a patient subgroup that developed no complications. For classification of the outcome groups with no complications, pneumonia and sepsis based on boosting ensemble classification, 90% were correctly classified as low-risk group (no complications). For the high-risk groups associated with development of pneumonia and sepsis, 80% of the patients were correctly identified. The explainability analysis with SHAP values identified the top-ranking features that had the largest impact on the development of adverse outcome patterns. For both investigated risk scenarios (infectious complications and long ICU stay) the most important features are SOFA score, Glasgow Coma Scale, lactate, GGT and hemoglobin blood concentration. Conclusion: The machine learning-based identification of prognostic feature patterns in patients with traumatic injuries may improve tailoring personalized treatment modalities to mitigate the adverse outcomes in high-risk patient clusters.

Prognostic value of serial score measurements of the national early warning score, the quick sequential organ failure assessment and the systemic inflammatory response syndrome to predict clinical outcome in early sepsis.

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE: Sepsis is a common and potentially lethal syndrome, and early recognition is critical to prevent deterioration. Yet, currently available scores to facilitate recognition of sepsis lack prognostic accuracy. OBJECTIVE: To identify the optimal time-point to determine NEWS, qSOFA and SIRS for the prediction of clinical deterioration in early sepsis and to determine whether the change in these scores over time improves their prognostic accuracy. DESIGN: Post hoc analysis of prospectively collected data. SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: This study was performed in the emergency department (ED) of a tertiary-care teaching hospital. Adult medical patients with (potential) sepsis were included. OUTCOME MEASURES AND ANALYSIS: The primary outcome was clinical deterioration within 72 h after admission, defined as organ failure development, the composite outcome of ICU-admission and death. Secondary outcomes were the composite of ICU-admission/death and a rise in SOFA at least 2. Scores were calculated at the ED with 30-min intervals. ROC analyses were constructed to compare the prognostic accuracy of the scores. RESULTS: In total, 1750 patients were included, of which 360 (20.6%) deteriorated and 79 (4.5%) went to the ICU or died within 72 h. The NEWS at triage (AUC, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.59-0.65) had a higher accuracy than qSOFA (AUC, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.56-0.63) and SIRS (AUC, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.56-0.63) for predicting deterioration. The AUC of the NEWS at 1 h (0.65; 95% CI, 0.63-0.69) and 150 min after triage (0.64; 95% CI, 0.61-0.68) was higher than the AUC of the NEWS at triage. The qSOFA had the highest AUC at 90 min after triage (0.62; 95% CI, 0.58-0.65), whereas the SIRS had the highest AUC at 60 min after triage (0.60; 95% CI, 0.56-0.63); both are not significantly different from triage. The NEWS had a better accuracy to predict ICU-admission/death <72 h compared with qSOFA (AUC difference, 0.092) and SIRS (AUC difference, 0.137). No differences were found for the prediction of a rise in SOFA at least 2 within 72 h between the scores. Patients with the largest improvement in any of the scores were more prone to deteriorate. CONCLUSION: NEWS had a higher prognostic accuracy to predict deterioration compared with SIRS and qSOFA; the highest accuracy was reached at 1 h after triage.

Comparison of Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, and Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Scores to predict Mortality in Sepsis.

OBJECTIVES: Sepsis-3 criteria define sepsis as ≥2 points rise of Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, either from zero or a known baseline. We compared the efficacies of quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), SOFA, and Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) scores to predict sepsis mortality. METHODS: Prospective, hospital-based study was undertaken to determine the efficacies of various sepsis-scoring systems to predict mortality in sepsis. The "Sepsis-2" criteria of "severe sepsis" and "septic shock" were used as selection criteria as they correspond to "sepsis" and "septic shock" of "Sepsis-3". Statistical analysis was done by SPSS Statistics version-16. Mortality predictions were made using receiver operator characteristic curve testing. RESULTS: We included 122 sepsis patients diagnosed by "Sepsis-2" definition; 78.68% (n = 98) of whom met "Sepsis-3" criteria for sepsis. All-cause mortality was 50%. On univariate analysis, we found age over 60 years [odds ratio (OR) = 4.244, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.309-13.764, p = 0.016], invasive mechanical ventilation (OR = 7.0076, 95% CI = 3.053-16.0809, p<0.0001), and presence of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) (OR = 2.757, 95% CI = 1.0091-7.535, p = 0.048) were significant predictors of mortality. The SOFA score yielded the best result with "area under the curve" (AUC) of "receiver operating characteristic" (ROC) curve of 0.868. On comparing AUCs between these scores difference between both SOFA and qSOFA was highly significant (p < 0.0001) compared to SIRS. However, such statistical difference was not found between AUCs of SOFA and qSOFA. CONCLUSIONS: Both SOFA and qSOFA are superior prognostication tools compared to SIRS to predict sepsis mortality; SOFA being better than qSOFA.

Impact of the Global COVID-19 Pandemic on the Incidence, Presentation, and Management of Pediatric Appendicitis: Lessons Learned from the First Wave.

The fast-evolving nature of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to unprecedented clinical, logistical, and socioeconomical challenges for health-care systems worldwide. While several studies have analyzed the impact on the presentation and management of acute appendicitis (AA) in the adult population, there is a relative paucity of similar research in pediatric patients with AA. To date, there is some evidence that the incidence of simple AA in children may have decreased during the first lockdown period in spring 2020, whereas the number of complicated AA cases remained unchanged or increased slightly. Despite a worrying trend toward delayed presentation, most pediatric patients with AA were treated expediently during this time with comparable outcomes to previous years. Hospitals must consider their individual capacity and medical resources when choosing between operative and non-operative management of children with AA. Testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 is imperative in all pediatric patients presenting with fever and acute abdominal pain with diarrhea or vomiting, to differentiate between multisystem inflammatory syndrome and AA, thus avoiding unnecessary surgery. During the further extension of the COVID-19 crisis, parents should be encouraged to seek medical care with their children early in order that the appropriate treatment for AA can be undertaken in a timely fashion.

Predictive Value of 3 Clinical Criteria for Sepsis (Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome, and National Early Warning Score) With Respect to Short-term Mortality in Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Recipients With Suspected Infections.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis disproportionately affects allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) recipients and is challenging to define. Clinical criteria that predict mortality and intensive care unit end-points in patients with suspected infections (SIs) are used in sepsis definitions, but their predictive value among immunocompromised populations is largely unknown. Here, we evaluate 3 criteria among allogeneic HCT recipients with SIs. METHODS: We evaluated Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS), quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), and National Early Warning Score (NEWS) in relation to short-term mortality among recipients transplanted between September 2010 and July 2017. We used cut-points of ≥ 2 for qSOFA/SIRS and ≥ 7 for NEWS and restricted to first SI per hospital encounter during patients' first 100 days posttransplant. RESULTS: Of the 880 recipients who experienced ≥ 1 SI, 58 (6.6%) died within 28 days and 22 (2.5%) within 10 days of an SI. In relation to 10-day mortality, SIRS was the most sensitive (91.3% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 72.0%-98.9%]) but least specific (35.0% [95% CI, 32.6%-37.5%]), whereas qSOFA was the most specific (90.5% [95% CI, 88.9%-91.9%]) but least sensitive (47.8% [95% CI, 26.8%-69.4%]). NEWS was moderately sensitive (78.3% [95% CI, 56.3%-92.5%]) and specific (70.2% [95% CI, 67.8%-72.4%]). CONCLUSIONS: NEWS outperformed qSOFA and SIRS, but each criterion had low to moderate predictive accuracy, and the magnitude of the known limitations of qSOFA and SIRS was at least as large as in the general population. Our data suggest that population-specific criteria are needed for immunocompromised patients.

Time to Recognition of Sepsis in the Emergency Department Using Electronic Health Record Data: A Comparative Analysis of Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, and Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment.

OBJECTIVES: Early identification of sepsis is critical to improving patient outcomes. Impact of the new sepsis definition (Sepsis-3) on timing of recognition in the emergency department has not been evaluated. Our study objective was to compare time to meeting systemic inflammatory response syndrome (Sepsis-2) criteria, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (Sepsis-3) criteria, and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment criteria using electronic health record data. DESIGN: Retrospective, observational study. SETTING: The emergency department at the University of California, San Francisco. PATIENTS: Emergency department encounters between June 2012 and December 2016 for patients greater than or equal to 18 years old with blood cultures ordered, IV antibiotic receipt, and identification with sepsis via systemic inflammatory response syndrome or Sequential Organ Failure Assessment within 72 hours of emergency department presentation. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We analyzed timestamped electronic health record data from 16,612 encounters identified as sepsis by greater than or equal to 2 systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria or a Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score greater than or equal to 2. The primary outcome was time from emergency department presentation to meeting greater than or equal to 2 systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment greater than or equal to 2, and/or greater than or equal to 2 quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment criteria. There were 9,087 patients (54.7%) that met systemic inflammatory response syndrome-first a median of 26 minutes post-emergency department presentation (interquartile range, 0-109 min), with 83.1% meeting Sequential Organ Failure Assessment criteria a median of 118 minutes later (interquartile range, 44-401 min). There were 7,037 patients (42.3%) that met Sequential Organ Failure Assessment-first, a median of 113 minutes post-emergency department presentation (interquartile range, 60-251 min). Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment was met in 46.4% of patients a median of 351 minutes post-emergency department presentation (interquartile range, 67-1,165 min). Adjusted odds of in-hospital mortality were 39% greater in patients who met systemic inflammatory response syndrome-first compared with those who met Sequential Organ Failure Assessment-first (odds ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.20-1.61). CONCLUSIONS: Systemic inflammatory response syndrome and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment initially identified distinct populations. Using systemic inflammatory response syndrome resulted in earlier electronic health record sepsis identification in greater than 50% of patients. Using Sequential Organ Failure Assessment alone may delay identification. Using systemic inflammatory response syndrome alone may lead to missed sepsis presenting as acute organ dysfunction. Thus, a combination of inflammatory (systemic inflammatory response syndrome) and organ dysfunction (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment) criteria may enhance timely electronic health record-based sepsis identification.

A combination of C-reactive protein and quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score has better prognostic accuracy than qSOFA alone in patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections.

INTRODUCTION: Complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs) remain a serious challenge because of their unacceptably high mortality rates. Among different prognostic scoring systems quick-sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score is the most recent. However, as mortality predictor in surgical patients, qSOFA showed lack of sensitivity. The aim of this study was to find prognostic superiority of our new qSOFA-CRP score in patients with cIAIs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 78 patients presented to ED and admitted to Department of Surgical Diseases between January 2017 and October 2018 with diagnosis cIAIs. CRP levels, qSOFA score and systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) were established at admission. We analyzed area under receiver operating characteristics (AUROC) curves of SIRS, qSOFA and qSOFA-CRP and performed a comparison to explore their prognostic values. RESULTS: The identified in-hospital mortality was 25.6%. qSOFA-CRP score showed the best prognostic performance compared to qSOFA alone (AUROC = 0.818 vs. 0.746, p = .0219) and SIRS (AUROC = 0.818 vs. 0.579, p = .0009). The new qSOFA-CRP score ≥2 points showed excellent specificity (91.4%) and the highest sensitivity in comparison to qSOFA ≥2 and SIRS ≥2 (60% vs. 35% vs. 40%) for mortality prediction. CONCLUSIONS: qSOFA-CRP score showed better prognostic value than quick-SOFA alone in patients with cIAIs.

Performance of a quick sofa-65 score as a rapid sepsis screening tool during initial emergency department assessment: A propensity score matching study.

PURPOSE: We sought to elucidate the performance of a Quick Sequential Organ Function Assessment-65 (qSOFA-65) score in recognizing sepsis and to compare the qSOFA-65 score to systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) and qSOFA scores. METHODS: We performed a matched case-control study using propensity score matching. The number of patients meeting qSOFA-65, qSOFA, and SIRS positive criteria were calculated between the sepsis and non-sepsis groups. We compared the diagnostic performance of the three scoring systems in predicting sepsis. RESULTS: A total of 2441 patients were included in the study. In propensity matched cohorts, the percentage of patients who met qSOFA-65, qSOFA, and SIRS positive criteria were 46.7%, 14.3%, and 55.6%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity scores for the qSOFA-65, qSOFA, and SIRS positive criteria for sepsis were 0.66 and 0.73, 0.28 and 0.97, and 0.66 and 0.55, respectively. The AUC value of qSOFA-65 positive criteria in predicting sepsis was significantly higher than that of qSOFA and SIRS positive criteria (adjusted AUC 0.688 vs. 0.630 vs. 0.596, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: We found that qSOFA-65 was more likely to identify patients with sepsis on the initial ED visit relative to qSOFA or SIRS. This may have quality improvement implications in predicting sepsis.

Quick Sequential (Sepsis Related) Organ Failure Assessment: A high performance rapid prognostication tool in patients having acute pyelonephritis with upper urinary tract calculi.

Purpose: To analyze the utility of quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) in patients with uro-sepsis due to acute pyelonephritis (APN) with upper urinary tract calculi, we conducted this study. The role of qSOFA as a tool for rapid prognostication in patients with sepsis is emerging. But there has been a great debate on its utility. Literature regarding utility of qSOFA in uro-sepsis is scarce. Materials and Methods: Ours was a retrospective study including 162 consecutive patients who were admitted for APN with upper urinary tract calculi over a 3 and half years (total 42 months) period. We evaluated the accuracy of qSOFA in predicting inhospital mortality and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions and compared this with the predictive accuracy of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS). We used the Area Under Curve (AUC) of the Receiver Operator Characteristic curve to calculate it and also calculated the optimum cut off for qSOFA score. Results: The overall mortality and ICU admission rates were 7.4% and 12.9%, respectively. qSOFA had a higher predictive accuracy for in-hospital mortality (AUC, 0.981; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.962-1.000) and ICU admissions (AUC, 0.977; 95% CI, 0.955-0.999) than SIRS. A qSOFA score of ≥2 was an optimum cut off for predicting prognosis. In a multivariate model qSOFA ≥2 was a highly significant predictor of in-hospital mortality and ICU admissions (p<0.001). Conclusions: qSOFA is a reliable and rapid bedside tool in patients with sepsis with accuracy more than SIRS in predicting inhospital mortality and ICU admissions.

Prediction of 28-days mortality with sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA), quick SOFA (qSOFA) and systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) - A retrospective study of medical patients with acute infectious disease.

AIMS: Evaluating the use of sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) ≥ 2 compared to quick SOFA (qSOFA) and to systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) in assessing 28-days mortality in medical patients with acute infection. METHODS: In total, 323 patients with verified infection were stratified in accordance to Sepsis-3. SOFA, qSOFA and SIRS were calculated using registered variables. Adverse outcome was death within 28-days of admission. RESULTS: In total, 190 (59%) patients had a SOFA score≥2 and the overall in-hospital mortality was 21 (6%). Scores of SOFA and qSOFA were both significantly elevated in non-survivors. SOFA showed good accuracy (Area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC)=0.83, 95% CI, 0.76 - 0.90) for 28-days mortality compared with qSOFA (AUROC=0.67, 95% CI, 0.54 - 0.80) and SIRS (AUROC=0.62, 95% Cl 0.49 - 0.74). SOFA was≥2 in all patients who died, while qSOFA and SIRS was≥2 in 8 (38%) and 17 (81%) of the patients who died, respectively. CONCLUSION: SOFA score≥2 was better than SIRS and qSOFA to predict mortality within 28-days of admission among patients with acute infectious disease.

A Prospective Comparison of Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome Criteria, Universal Vital Assessment, and Modified Early Warning Score to Predict Mortality in Patients with Suspected Infection in Gabon.

The quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score has been proposed for risk stratification of emergency room patients with suspected infection. Its use of simple bedside observations makes qSOFA an attractive option for resource-limited regions. We prospectively assessed the predictive ability of qSOFA compared with systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), universal vital assessment (UVA), and modified early warning score (MEWS) in a resource-limited setting in Lambaréné, Gabon. In addition, we evaluated different adaptations of qSOFA and UVA in this cohort and an external validation cohort from Malawi. We included 279 cases, including 183 with an ad hoc (suspected) infectious disease diagnosis. Overall mortality was 5%. In patients with an infection, oxygen saturation, mental status, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) status, and all four risk stratification score results differed significantly between survivors and non-survivors. The UVA score performed best in predicting mortality in patients with suspected infection, with an area under the receiving operator curve (AUROC) of 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.78-1.0, P < 0.0001), outperforming qSOFA (AUROC 0.77; 95% CI: 0.63-0.91, P = 0.0003), MEWS (AUROC 0.72; 95% CI: 0.58-0.87, P = 0.01), and SIRS (AUROC 0.70; 95% CI: 0.52-0.88, P = 0.03). An amalgamated qSOFA score applying the UVA thresholds for blood pressure and respiratory rate improved predictive ability in Gabon (AUROC 0.82; 95% CI: 0.68-0.96) but performed poorly in a different cohort from Malawi (AUROC 0.58; 95% CI: 0.51-0.64). In conclusion, UVA had the best predictive ability, but multicenter studies are needed to validate the qSOFA and UVA scores in various settings and assess their impact on patient outcome.

Quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment predicts 72-h mortality in patients with suspected infection.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) and Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) scores for predicting mortality. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A single-center, retrospective study of adult patients with suspected infection was conducted. Area under the curve (AUC) and multivariate analyses were used to explore associations between the qSOFA and SIRS scores and mortality. RESULTS: Of the 69 115 patients enrolled, 1798 died within 72 h and 5640 within 28 days. The qSOFA scores were better than SIRS scores at predicting 72-h mortality (AUC: 0.77 vs. 0.64). However, the discriminatory power of both scores was low in terms of 28-day mortality (AUC: 0.69 vs. 0.60). Patients with qSOFA score of at least 2 had a higher hazard ratio for 72-h mortality than for 28-day mortality (2.64 vs. 1.91). CONCLUSION: The qSOFA scores are more accurate than SIRS scores for predicting 72-h mortality and are better at predicting 72-h mortality than 28-day mortality.

A Retrospective Review of the Sepsis Definition after Publication of Sepsis-3.

BACKGROUND: Two and a half years after the introduction of Sepsis-3, clinicians continue not to document Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores. There continue to be variations in what standard is accepted by both commercial payers and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) in diagnosing sepsis. The purpose of this review is to determine if the Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3) were being utilized in defining sepsis in the clinical setting. METHODS: One hundred patients between February 2016 and March 2018 who were diagnosed with sepsis were retrospectively reviewed for the presence of criteria for the diagnosis of sepsis. Data points for SOFA criteria were analyzed. RESULTS: None of the septic patients were diagnosed utilizing SOFA scores. Many of the data points were found to not have been collected or measured to complete a SOFA score. CONCLUSIONS: Due to Sepsis-3 criteria not being accepted by CMS or the Infectious Disease Society of America, along with it not being able to be operationalized for use in the clinical setting, it is recommended to continue utilizing systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria plus infection while Sepsis-3 continues to be evaluated. It will also allow for some time to study any effect it may have on patient outcomes. There is also a need for a uniform definition of sepsis.

Development and validation of a modified quick SOFA scale for risk assessment in sepsis syndrome.

Sepsis is a severe clinical syndrome owing to its high mortality. Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score has been proposed for the prediction of fatal outcomes in sepsis syndrome in emergency departments. Due to the low predictive performance of the qSOFA score, we propose a modification to the score by adding age. We conducted a multicenter, retrospective cohort study among regional referral centers from various regions of the country. Participants recruited data of patients admitted to emergency departments and obtained a diagnosis of sepsis syndrome. Crude in-hospital mortality was the primary endpoint. A generalized mixed-effects model with random intercepts produced estimates for adverse outcomes. Model-based recursive partitioning demonstrated the effects and thresholds of significant covariates. Scores were internally validated. The H measure compared performances of scores. A total of 580 patients from 22 centers were included for further analysis. Stages of sepsis, age, time to antibiotics, and administration of carbapenem for empirical treatment were entered the final model. Among these, severe sepsis (OR, 4.40; CIs, 2.35-8.21), septic shock (OR, 8.78; CIs, 4.37-17.66), age (OR, 1.03; CIs, 1.02-1.05) and time to antibiotics (OR, 1.05; CIs, 1.01-1.10) were significantly associated with fatal outcomes. A decision tree demonstrated the thresholds for age. We modified the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (mod-qSOFA) score by adding age (> 50 years old = one point) and compared this to the conventional score. H-measures for qSOFA and mod-qSOFA were found to be 0.11 and 0.14, respectively, whereas AUCs of both scores were 0.64. We propose the use of the modified qSOFA score for early risk assessment among sepsis patients for improved triage and management of this fatal syndrome.

Accuracy of quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score and systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria for predicting mortality in hospitalized patients with suspected infection: a meta-analysis of observational studies.

OBJECTIVE: To identify sensitivity, specificity and predictive accuracy of quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score and systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria to predict in-hospital mortality in hospitalized patients with suspected infection. METHODS: This meta-analysis followed the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group consensus statement for conducting and reporting the results of systematic review. PubMed and EMBASE were searched for the observational studies which reported predictive utility of qSOFA score for predicting mortality in patients with suspected or proven infection with the following search words: 'qSOFA', 'q-SOFA', 'quick-SOFA', 'Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment', 'quick SOFA'. Sensitivity, specificity, area under receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves with 95% confidence interval (CI) of qSOFA and SIRS criteria for predicting in-hospital mortality was collected for each study and a 2 × 2 table was created for each study. RESULTS: Data of 406 802 patients from 45 observational studies were included in this meta-analysis. Pooled sensitivity (95% CI) and specificity (95% CI) of qSOFA ≥2 for predicting mortality in patients who were not in an intensive care unit (ICU) was 0.48 (0.41-0.55) and 0.83 (0.78-0.87), respectively. Pooled sensitivity (95% CI) of qSOFA ≥2 for predicting mortality in patients (both ICU and non-ICU settings) with suspected infection was 0.56 (0.47-0.65) and pooled specificity (95% CI) was 0.78 (0.71-0.83). CONCLUSION: qSOFA has been found to be a poorly sensitive predictive marker for in-hospital mortality in hospitalized patients with suspected infection. It is reasonable to recommend developing another scoring system with higher sensitivity to identify high-risk patients with infection.