Oxygen Debt as Predictor of Mortality and Multiple Organ Dysfunction Syndrome in Severe COVID-19 Patients: A Retrospective Study.

Background: Oxygen debt (DEOx) represents the disparity between resting and shock oxygen consumption (VO2) and is associated with metabolic insufficiency, acidosis, severity, and mortality. This study aimed to assess the reliability of DEOx as an indirect quantitative measure for predicting multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) and 28-day mortality in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with respiratory syndrome severe acute coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, in comparison to the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II), sepsis-related organ failure assessment (SOFA), and 4C scores. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted, including ICU patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection between 2020 and 2021. Clinical data were extracted from the EPIMED Monitor Database®. APACHE II, SOFA, and 4C scores were calculated upon ICU admission, and their accuracy in predicting 28-day mortality and MODS was compared to DEOx. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to analyze the outcome variables. Results: 708 patients were included, with a mortality rate of 44.4%. DEOx value was 11.16 ml O2/kg. The mean age was 58.7 years. Multivariate analysis showed that DEOx was independently associated with mortality, intubation, and renal injury. Each point increase in creatinine was associated with a higher risk of MODS. To determine the precision of the scores, area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROC) analysis was performed with weak discrimination and similar behavior for the primary outcomes. The most accurate scale for mortality and MODS was 4C with an AUC of 0.683 and APACHE II with an AUC of 0.814, while that of the AUROC of DEOx was 0.612 and 0.646, respectively. Conclusions: DEOx showed similar predictive value to established scoring systems in critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. The correlation of DEOx with these scores may facilitate early intervention in critically ill patients.

Predicting mortality of elderly patients undergoing open heart surgery with delirium using sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA), multi-organ dysfunction (MODS), and logistic organ dysfunction system (LODS) scores.

PURPOSE: This study aims to assess the predictive accuracy of SOFA, MODS, and LODS scores in determining the mortality of elderly undergoing open heart surgery with delirium. METHODS: A prospective study involved 111 elderly patients who met the inclusion criteria. Data were collected using scoring systems: SOFA, MODS, and LODS. RESULTS: Upon final follow-up, 86.5 % of the patients had recovered, 13.5 % had died. Sensitivity, specificity, negative, and positive predictive values for predicting mortality in elderly patients were calculated for the SOFA score as 99 %, 73 %, 98 %, and 76 %, respectively. For the MODS score, these values were 95 %, 60 %, 95 %, and 67 %; for the LODS score, they were 92 %, 73 %, 92 %, and 75 %, respectively. The overall accuracy of the three scores-SOFA, MODS, and LODS-was 84 %, 76 %, and 82 %, respectively. CONCLUSION: The results indicated that the SOFA score exhibited the highest sensitivity and specificity in predicting mortality among elderly individuals.

Factors associated with intubation in patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure treated with high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy: A prospective, observational study.

BACKGROUND: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen is an alternative to conventional oxygen in acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure. Some patients require intubation, with a risk of delay; thus, early predictors may identify those requiring earlier intubation. The "ROX" index (ratio of pulse oximetry/fraction of inspired oxygen to respiratory rate) predicts intubation in patients with pneumonia treated with HFNC therapy, but this index has not been validated in non-pneumonia causes of acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure. AIM/OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify factors associated with intubation in a heterogeneous group of patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure treated with HFNC oxygen. METHODS: This prospective observational study was undertaken in an Australian tertiary intensive care unit and included patients over 18 y of age with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure who were treated with oxygen via HFNC. Vital signs and arterial blood gases were recorded prospectively at baseline and regular prespecified intervals for 48 h after HFNC initiation. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify the factors associated with intubation. RESULTS: Forty-three patients were included (N = 43). The multivariate factors associated with intubation were admission Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (odds ratio [OR]: 1.94 [95% confidence interval {CI}: 1.06-3.57]; p = 0.032) and Pneumonia Severity Index (OR: 0.95 [95% CI: 0.90-0.99]; p = 0.034). The ROX index was not independently associated with intubation when adjusted for Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (OR: 0.71 [95% CI: 0.47-1.06]; p = 0.09). There was no difference in mortality between patients intubated early (<24 h) compared to those intubated late. CONCLUSIONS: Intubation was associated with admission Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score and Pneumonia Severity Index. The ROX index was not associated with intubation when adjusted for admission Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score. Outcomes were similar irrespective of whether patients were intubated late rather than early.

Application of organ dysfunction assessment scores following pediatric lung transplantation.

OBJECTIVE: Organ dysfunction (OD) after lung transplantation can reflect preoperative organ failure, intraoperative acute organ damage and post-operative complications. We assessed two OD scoring systems, both the PEdiatric Logistic Organ Dysfunction (PELOD) and the pediatric Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (pSOFA) scores, in recognizing risk factors for morbidity as well as recipients with prolonged post-transplant morbidity. DESIGN: Medical records of recipients from January 2009 to March 2016 were reviewed. PELOD and pSOFA scores were calculated on post-transplant days 1-3. Risk factors assessed included cystic fibrosis (CF), prolonged surgical time and worst primary graft dysfunction (PGD) score amongst others. Patients were classified into three groups based on their initial scores (group A) and subsequent trends either uptrending (group B) or downtrending (group C). Morbidity outcomes were compared between these groups. RESULTS: Total 98 patients were enrolled aged 0-20 years. Risk factors for higher pSOFA scores ≥ 5 on day 1 included non-CF diagnosis and worst PGD scores (p = .0006 and p = .03, respectively). Kruskal Wallis analysis comparing pSOFA group A versus B versus C scores showed significantly prolonged ventilatory days (median 1 vs. 4 vs. 2, p = .0028) and ICU days (median 4 vs. 10 vs. 6, p = .007). Similarly, PELOD group A versus B versus C scores showed significantly prolonged ventilatory days (1 vs. 5 vs. 2, p = < .0001). CONCLUSION: Implementing pSOFA scores bedside is a more effective tool compared to PELOD in identifying risk factors for worsened OD post-lung transplant and can be valuable in providing direction on morbidity outcomes in the ICU.

Modified Cardiovascular Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score in Sepsis: External Validation in Intensive Care Unit Patients.

BACKGROUND: There is a need to update the cardiovascular (CV) Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score to reflect the current practice in sepsis. We previously proposed the modified CV SOFA score from data on blood pressure, norepinephrine equivalent dose, and lactate as gathered from emergency departments. In this study, we externally validated the modified CV SOFA score in multicenter intensive care unit (ICU) patients. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective observational study was conducted on ICU patients at six hospitals in Korea. We included adult patients with sepsis who were admitted to ICUs. We compared the prognostic performance of the modified CV/total SOFA score and the original CV/total SOFA score in predicting 28-day mortality. Discrimination and calibration were evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and the calibration curve, respectively. RESULTS: We analyzed 1,015 ICU patients with sepsis. In overall patients, the 28-day mortality rate was 31.2%. The predictive validity of the modified CV SOFA (AUROC, 0.712; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.677-0.746; P < 0.001) was significantly higher than that of the original CV SOFA (AUROC, 0.644; 95% CI, 0.611-0.677). The predictive validity of modified total SOFA score for 28-day mortality was significantly higher than that of the original total SOFA (AUROC, 0.747 vs. 0.730; 95% CI, 0.715-0.779; P = 0.002). The calibration curve of the original CV SOFA for 28-day mortality showed poor calibration. In contrast, the calibration curve of the modified CV SOFA for 28-day mortality showed good calibration. CONCLUSION: In patients with sepsis in the ICU, the modified SOFA score performed better than the original SOFA score in predicting 28-day mortality.

Modified cardiovascular SOFA score in sepsis: development and internal and external validation.

BACKGROUND: The Sepsis-3 criteria introduced the system that uses the Sequential Organ-Failure Assessment (SOFA) score to define sepsis. The cardiovascular SOFA (CV SOFA) scoring system needs modification due to the change in guideline-recommended vasopressors. In this study, we aimed to develop and to validate the modified CV SOFA score. METHODS: We developed, internally validated, and externally validated the modified CV SOFA score using the suspected infection cohort, sepsis cohort, and septic shock cohort. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. The modified CV SOFA score system was constructed with consideration of the recently recommended use of the vasopressor norepinephrine with or without lactate level. The predictive validity of the modified SOFA score was evaluated by the discrimination for the primary outcome. Discrimination was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC). Calibration was assessed using the calibration curve. We compared the prognostic performance of the original CV/total SOFA score and the modified CV/total SOFA score to detect mortality in patients with suspected infection, sepsis, or septic shock. RESULTS: We identified 7,393 patients in the suspected cohort, 4038 patients in the sepsis cohort, and 3,107 patients in the septic shock cohort in seven Korean emergency departments (EDs). The 28-day mortality rates were 7.9%, 21.4%, and 20.5%, respectively, in the suspected infection, sepsis, and septic shock cohorts. The model performance is higher when vasopressor and lactate were used in combination than the vasopressor only used model. The modified CV/total SOFA score was well-developed and internally and externally validated in terms of discrimination and calibration. Predictive validity of the modified CV SOFA was significantly higher than that of the original CV SOFA in the development set (0.682 vs 0.624, p < 0.001), test set (0.716 vs 0.638), and all other cohorts (0.648 vs 0.557, 0.674 vs 0.589). Calibration was modest. In the suspected infection cohort, the modified model classified more patients to sepsis (66.0 vs 62.5%) and identified more patients at risk of septic mortality than the SOFA score (92.6 vs 89.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Among ED patients with suspected infection, sepsis, and septic shock, the newly-developed modified CV/total SOFA score had higher predictive validity and identified more patients at risk of septic mortality.

Neonatal Sequential Organ Failure Assessment as a late-onset sepsis mortality predictor in very low birth weight newborns: a Brazilian cohort study.

Death is a frequent occurrence in late-onset neonatal sepsis (LOS). We aimed to evaluate if the Neonatal Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (nSOFA) is associated with mortality due to LOS in very low birth weight (VLBW) infants. This is a single-center Brazilian cohort study including VLBW infants admitted between 2006 and 2020 who were diagnosed with LOS caused by Staphylococcus aureus, Enterococcus sp or Gram-negative bacteria. The primary outcome was mortality associated with sepsis. Two groups of patients-survivors and non-survivors-were compared regarding descriptive maternal and neonatal variables and the nSOFA score, evaluated at nine moments, from 48 hours before the diagnosis of sepsis to 48 hours later (T-48, T-24, T-12, T-6, T0, T+6, T+12, T+24, T+48). Diagnostic accuracy was expressed as the area under the curve (AUC). Among the 1574 VLBW infants hospitalized in the period, 114 episodes of culture-confirmed LOS occurred. There were 21 sepsis-related deaths (18.4%), mostly from Gram-negative bacteria and Enterococcus sp. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups regarding maternal and neonatal variables. Median nSOFA was significantly higher in the non-survivor group at all time points (range 2 to 13 versus 1 to 3). In the logistic regression analysis, each increment of one point in the score significantly increases the risk of death in eight of the nine moments, but no difference was found in T-24. Time T-6 had the best accuracy (88.1%).   Conclusion: The nSOFA score was significantly associated with the risk of death from LOS in VLBW infants. What is Known: • The neonatal sepsis may result in organ dysfunction and death, and it is important to find indicators that could identify this clinical progression. • The nSOFA score was proposed in 2020 to predict mortality from LOS, but since it is recent and still in the research phase, further studies are important to improve it before being widely used in clinical practice. What is New: • We showed a significative association between higher nSOFA scores and mortality. Our results corroborate the validity and the importance of the nSOFA score and highlight its high NPV.

Impact of extended emergency department stay on antibiotic re-dosing delays and outcomes in sepsis.

BACKGROUND: For patients with sepsis and septic shock, the initial administration of antibiotics should occur as soon as possible, preferably within one hour of sepsis recognition. While clinicians are focused on providing first-doses of antibiotics quickly upon presentation, re-dosing issues may arise in patients who have an extended emergency department (ED) length of stay (LOS). Limited studies have been conducted that assess the impact of re-dosing delays. The purpose of this study was to assess the association of an extended ED LOS ≥ 6 h with antibiotic re-dosing delays in patients with sepsis and examine outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study comparing patients with sepsis with an ED LOS of <6 h to those with an ED LOS of ≥6 h was performed between March 2018 and February 2020. Patients ≥18 years old admitted from the ED with sepsis or septic shock were included. The primary outcome was incidence of delay to the second dose of antibiotics in those with an extended ED LOS compared to those without. Secondary outcomes included intensive care unit (ICU) LOS, hospital LOS, rate of transfer from non-ICU to ICU settings, incidence and duration of mechanical ventilation, and in-hospital mortality. An exploratory analysis compared outcomes in patients with and without a re-dosing delay. RESULTS: Of the 128 patients included, 99 patients had an ED LOS < 6 h and 29 patients had an ED LOS ≥ 6 h. A delay to second dose of antibiotics occurred in 30 (30.3%) patients in the ED LOS < 6 h group versus 7 (24.1%) patients in the ED LOS ≥ 6 h group (p = 0.52). Secondary outcomes did not significantly differ between the two groups. In-hospital mortality was numerically higher in those with a re-dosing delay when compared to those without in the exploratory analysis (18.9% vs. 8.8%, p = 0.11). CONCLUSION: There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of delays to the second dose of antibiotics among patients with sepsis with an ED LOS of <6 h versus those with an ED LOS of ≥6 h. The high incidence of antibiotic re-dosing delays in both groups, indicates an overall need for improved transitions of care in the ED sepsis population.

qSOFA score poorly predicts critical progression in COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: In December 2019, the new virus infection coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged. Simple clinical risk scores may improve the management of COVID-19 patients. Therefore, the aim of this pilot study was to evaluate the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score, which is well established for other diseases, as an early risk assessment tool predicting a severe course of COVID-19. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from adult COVID-19 patients hospitalized between March and July 2020. A critical disease progress was defined as admission to intensive care unit (ICU) or death. RESULTS: Of 64 COVID-19 patients, 33% (21/64) had a critical disease progression from which 13 patients had to be transferred to ICU. The COVID-19-associated mortality rate was 20%, increasing to 39% after ICU admission. All patients without a critical progress had a qSOFA score ≤ 1 at admission. Patients with a critical progress had in only 14% (3/21) and in 20% (3/15) of cases a qSOFA score ≥ 2 at admission (p = 0.023) or when measured directly before critical progression, respectively, while 95% (20/21) of patients with critical progress had an impairment oxygen saturation (SO2) at admission time requiring oxygen supplementation. CONCLUSION: A low qSOFA score cannot be used to assume short-term stable or noncritical disease status in COVID-19.

Variation in SOFA (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment) Score Performance in Different Infectious States.

INTRODUCTION: In this study, we investigated whether the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score performance differs based on the type of infection among patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with infection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Single-center, retrospective study of adult ICU patients admitted with infection between January 2008 and April 2018 at an urban tertiary care center. Patients were uniquely classified into different infection types based on International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) and ICD-10 codes. Infection types included were pneumonia, meningitis, bacteremia, cellulitis, cholangitis/cholecystitis, intestinal and diarrheal disease, endocarditis, urinary tract infection (UTI), and peritonitis. The SOFA score performance and mortality in relation to SOFA score were compared across infection types. RESULTS: A total of 12 283 patients were included. Of these, 50.6% were female and the median age was 70 years (interquartile range: 57-82). The most common infection types were pneumonia (32.2%) and UTI (31.0%). Overall, 1703 (13.9%) patients died prior to hospital discharge. The median baseline SOFA score (within 24 hours of ICU admission) for the cohort was 5 (3-8). Patients with peritonitis had the highest median SOFA score, 7 (4-9), and patients with cellulitis and UTI had the lowest median SOFA score, 4 (2-7). The SOFA score discrimination to predict mortality was highest among patients with endocarditis (area under the receiver operating characteristic [AUC]: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.69-0.90) and lowest for patients with isolated bacteremia (AUC: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.49-0.70). Observed mortality by quartile of SOFA score differed substantially across infection types. CONCLUSIONS: Type of infection is an important consideration when interpreting the SOFA score. This is relevant as SOFA emerges as an important tool in the definition and prognostication of sepsis.

Use of sepsis-related diagnostic criteria in primary care: a survey among general practitioners.

BACKGROUND: Use of sepsis-criteria in hospital settings is effective in realizing early recognition, adequate treatment and reduction of sepsis-associated morbidity and mortality. Whether general practitioners (GPs) use these diagnostic criteria is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To gauge the knowledge and use of various diagnostic criteria. To determine which parameters GPs associate with an increased likelihood of sepsis. METHODS: Two thousand five hundred and sixty GPs were invited and 229 agreed to participate in a survey, reached out to through e-mail and WhatsApp groups. The survey consisted of two parts: the first part aimed to obtain information about the GP, training and knowledge about sepsis recognition, and the second part tested specific knowledge using six realistic cases. RESULTS: Two hundred and six questionnaires, representing a response rate of 8.1%, were eligible for analysis. Gut feeling (98.1%) was the most used diagnostic method, while systemic inflammatory response syndrome (37.9%), quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) (7.8%) and UK Sepsis Trust criteria (UKSTc) (1.5%) were used by the minority of the GPs. Few of the responding GPs had heard of either the qSOFA (27.7%) or the UKSTc (11.7%). Recognition of sepsis varied greatly between GPs. GPs most strongly associated the individual signs of the qSOFA (mental status, systolic blood pressure, capillary refill time and respiratory rate) with diagnosing sepsis in the test cases. CONCLUSIONS: GPs mostly use gut feeling to diagnose sepsis and are frequently not familiar with the 'sepsis-criteria' used in hospital settings, although clinical reasoning was mostly in line with the qSOFA score. In order to improve sepsis recognition in primary care, GPs should be educated in the use of available screening tools.

Time for a prehospital-modified sequential organ failure assessment score: An ambulance-Based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: To adapt the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score to fit the prehospital care needs; to do that, the SOFA was modified by replacing platelets and bilirubin, by lactate, and tested this modified SOFA (mSOFA) score in its prognostic capacity to assess the mortality-risk at 2 days since the first Emergency Medical Service (EMS) contact. METHODS: Prospective, multicentric, EMS-delivery, ambulance-based, pragmatic cohort study of adults with acute diseases, referred to two tertiary care hospitals (Spain), between January 1st and December 31st, 2020. The discriminative power of the predictive variable was assessed through a prediction model trained using the derivation cohort and evaluated by the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) on the validation cohort. RESULTS: A total of 1114 participants comprised two separated cohorts recruited from 15 ambulance stations. The 2-day mortality rate (from any cause) was 5.9% (66 cases). The predictive validity of the mSOFA score was assessed by the calculation of the AUC of ROC in the validation cohort, resulting in an AUC of 0.946 (95% CI, 0.913-0.978, p < .001), with a positive likelihood ratio was 23.3 (95% CI, 0.32-46.2). CONCLUSIONS: Scoring systems are now a reality in prehospital care, and the mSOFA score assesses multiorgan dysfunction in a simple and agile manner either bedside or en route. Patients with acute disease and an mSOFA score greater than 6 points transferred with high priority by EMS represent a high early mortality group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN48326533, Registered Octuber 312,019, Prospectively registered (doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN48326533).

Comprehensive Prognostication in Critically Ill Pediatric Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Patients: Results from Merging the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) and Virtual Pediatric Systems (VPS) Registries.

Critically ill pediatric allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) patients may benefit from early and aggressive interventions aimed at reversing the progression of multiorgan dysfunction. Therefore, we evaluated 25 early risk factors for pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) mortality to improve mortality prognostication. We merged the Virtual Pediatric Systems and Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research databases and analyzed 936 critically ill patients ≤21 years of age who had undergone allogeneic HCT and subsequently required PICU admission between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2014. Of 1532 PICU admissions, the overall PICU mortality rate was 17.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 15.6% to 19.4%) but was significantly higher for patients requiring mechanical ventilation (44.0%), renal replacement therapy (56.1%), or extracorporeal life support (77.8%). Mortality estimates increased significantly the longer that patients remained in the PICU. Of 25 HCT- and PICU-specific characteristics available at or near the time of PICU admission, moderate/severe pre-HCT renal injury, pre-HCT recipient cytomegalovirus seropositivity, <100-day interval between HCT and PICU admission, HCT for underlying acute myeloid leukemia, and greater admission organ dysfunction as approximated by the Pediatric Risk of Mortality 3 score were each independently associated with PICU mortality. A multivariable model using these components identified that patients in the top quartile of risk had 3 times greater mortality than other patients (35.1% versus 11.5%, P < .001, classification accuracy 75.2%; 95% CI, 73.0% to 77.4%). These data improve our working knowledge of the factors influencing the progression of critical illness in pediatric allogeneic HCT patients. Future investigation aimed at mitigating the effect of these risk factors is warranted.

Describing organ dysfunction in the intensive care unit: a cohort study of 20,000 patients.

BACKGROUND: Multiple organ dysfunction is a common cause of morbidity and mortality in intensive care units (ICUs). Original development of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score was not to predict outcome, but to describe temporal changes in organ dysfunction in critically ill patients. Organ dysfunction scoring may be a reasonable surrogate outcome in clinical trials but further exploration of the impact of case mix on the temporal sequence of organ dysfunction is required. Our aim was to compare temporal changes in SOFA scores between hospital survivors and non-survivors. METHODS: We performed a population-based observational retrospective cohort study of critically ill patients admitted from January 1, 2004, to December 31, 2013, to 4 multisystem adult intensive care units (ICUs) in Calgary, Canada. The primary outcome was temporal changes in daily SOFA scores during the first 14 days of ICU admission. SOFA scores were modeled between hospital survivors and non-survivors using generalized estimating equations (GEE) and were also stratified by admission SOFA (≤ 11 versus > 11). RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 20,007 patients with at least one SOFA score and was mostly male (58.2%) with a median age of 59 (interquartile range [IQR] 44-72). Median ICU length of stay was 3.5 (IQR 1.7-7.5) days. ICU and hospital mortality were 18.5% and 25.5%, respectively. Temporal change in SOFA scores varied by survival and admission SOFA score in a complicated relationship. Area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve using admission SOFA as a predictor of hospital mortality was 0.77. The hospital mortality rate was 5.6% for patients with an admission SOFA of 0-2 and 94.4% with an admission SOFA of 20-24. There was an approximately linear increase in hospital mortality for SOFA scores of 3-19 (range 8.7-84.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Examining the clinical course of organ dysfunction in a large non-selective cohort of patients provides insight into the utility of SOFA. We have demonstrated that hospital outcome is associated with both admission SOFA and the temporal rate of change in SOFA after admission. It is necessary to further explore the impact of additional clinical factors on the clinical course of SOFA with large datasets.

Prognostic Accuracy of Quick SOFA is different according to the severity of illness in infectious patients.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis-3 proposed the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) to identify sepsis patients likely to have poor outcome. The clinical utility of qSOFA still remains controversial because its predictive accuracy for mortality is quite different across the validation studies. We hypothesized that one of the major causes for these controversial findings was the heterogeneity in severity across the studies, and evaluated the association between severity of illness and the prognostic accuracy of qSOFA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of a prospective nationwide cohort of consecutive adult patients with sepsis in 59 intensive care units in Japan. Regression trees analysis for survival was used to classify patients according to severity of illness as determined by SOFA score on registration. We conducted receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses and evaluated the differences in the area under the ROC curve (AUROC). As a subgroup analysis, we conducted the above evaluations in emergency department (ED) and non-ED patients separately. RESULTS: We included 1114 patients fulfilling the criteria and classified them into three subsets according to severity. The AUROC for mortality was significantly different according to the severity of illness (p = 0.007), with the highest AUROC being in the low-severity subset (patients with SOFA score ≤ 7). Interestingly, our subgroup analysis revealed that a significant difference in the AUROC of qSOFA was observed only in ED patients. CONCLUSION: This study suggested that lower severity of illness was associated with the relatively higher prognostic accuracy of qSOFA, especially in ED patients.

Quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment, Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome, and Early Warning Scores for Detecting Clinical Deterioration in Infected Patients outside the Intensive Care Unit.

RATIONALE: The 2016 definitions of sepsis included the quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score to identify high-risk patients outside the intensive care unit (ICU). OBJECTIVES: We sought to compare qSOFA with other commonly used early warning scores. METHODS: All admitted patients who first met the criteria for suspicion of infection in the emergency department (ED) or hospital wards from November 2008 until January 2016 were included. The qSOFA, Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS), Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), and the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) were compared for predicting death and ICU transfer. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of the 30,677 included patients, 1,649 (5.4%) died and 7,385 (24%) experienced the composite outcome (death or ICU transfer). Sixty percent (n = 18,523) first met the suspicion criteria in the ED. Discrimination for in-hospital mortality was highest for NEWS (area under the curve [AUC], 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76-0.79), followed by MEWS (AUC, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.71-0.74), qSOFA (AUC, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.67-0.70), and SIRS (AUC, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.63-0.66) (P < 0.01 for all pairwise comparisons). Using the highest non-ICU score of patients, ≥2 SIRS had a sensitivity of 91% and specificity of 13% for the composite outcome compared with 54% and 67% for qSOFA ≥2, 59% and 70% for MEWS ≥5, and 67% and 66% for NEWS ≥8, respectively. Most patients met ≥2 SIRS criteria 17 hours before the combined outcome compared with 5 hours for ≥2 and 17 hours for ≥1 qSOFA criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Commonly used early warning scores are more accurate than the qSOFA score for predicting death and ICU transfer in non-ICU patients. These results suggest that the qSOFA score should not replace general early warning scores when risk-stratifying patients with suspected infection.

Assessment of mortality by qSOFA in patients with sepsis outside ICU: A post hoc subgroup analysis by the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine Sepsis Registry Study Group.

Quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) was proposed in the new sepsis definition (Sepsis-3). Although qSOFA was created to identify patients with suspected infection and likely to have poor outcomes, the clinical utility of qSOFA to screen sepsis has not been fully evaluated. We investigated the number of patients diagnosed as having severe sepsis who could not be identified by the qSOFA criteria and what clinical signs could complement the qSOFA score. This retrospective analysis of a multicenter prospective registry included adult patients with severe sepsis diagnosed outside the intensive care unit (ICU) by conventional criteria proposed in 2003. We conducted receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses to assess the predictive value for in-hospital mortality and compared clinical characteristics between survivors and non-survivors with qSOFA score ≤ 1 point (qSOFA-negative). Among 387 eligible patients, 63 (16.3%) patients were categorized as qSOFA-negative, and 10 (15.9%) of these patients died. The area under the ROC curve for the qSOFA score was 0.615, which was superior to that for the systemic inflammatory response syndrome score (0.531, P = 0.019) but inferior to that for the SOFA score (0.702, P = 0.005). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that hypothermia might be associated with poor outcome independently of qSOFA criteria. Our findings suggested that qSOFA had a suboptimal level of predictive value outside the ICU and could not identify 16.3% of patients who were once actually diagnosed with sepsis. Hypothermia might be associated with an increased risk of death that cannot be identified by qSOFA.

[Sepsis-3 : What has been confirmed in therapy?] / Sepsis-3 : Was ist gesichert in der Therapie?

Hugo Schottmüller realized already over 100 years ago that sepsis is a syndrome that occurs as a consequence of an infection defined by a systemic overreaction to a periodic invasion of bacilli. Consistent with this old concept, the term "systemic inflammatory response syndrome" (SIRS) was coined about 25 years ago and has been regularly used ever since. In 2016, a sepsis task force was formed to re-evaluate the current definition on a scientific basis. The task force suggested a third definition (sepsis-3) of the disease that now focuses both on the pathological host response and on organ dysfunction as obligatory key features to diagnose sepsis. In this review article, the definition is explained in detail and we summarize the novel international sepsis guideline from 2017 with personal commentaries.