Novel biomarkers to identify complicated course of febrile neutropenia in hematological patients receiving intensive chemotherapy.

Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a common consequence of intensive chemotherapy in hematological patients. More than 90% of the patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) develop FN, and 5%-10% of them die from subsequent sepsis. FN is very common also in autologous stem cell transplant recipients, but the risk of death is lower than in AML patients. In this review, we discuss biomarkers that have been evaluated for diagnostic and prognostic purposes in hematological patients with FN. In general, novel biomarkers have provided little benefit over traditional inflammatory biomarkers, such as C-reactive protein and procalcitonin. The utility of most biomarkers in hematological patients with FN has been evaluated in only a few small studies. Although some of them appear promising, much more data is needed before they can be implemented in the clinical evaluation of FN patients. Currently, close patient follow-up is key to detect complicated course of FN and the need for further interventions such as intensive care unit admission. Scoring systems such as q-SOFA (Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment) or NEWS (National Early Warning Sign) combined with traditional and/or novel biomarkers may provide added value in the clinical evaluation of FN patients.

Validation of National Early Warning Score and Quick Sequential (sepsis-related) Organ Failure Assessment in acute myeloid leukaemia patients treated with intensive chemotherapy.

OBJECTIVES: Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) is a risk factor for life-threatening infections. Early diagnosis and prompt interventions are associated with better outcomes, but the prediction of infection severity remains an open question. Recently, National Early Warning Score (NEWS) and quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) scores were proposed as warning clinical instruments predicting in-hospital mortality, but their role in the haematological context is still unknown. METHODS: We retrospectively assess the predictive role of NEWS and qSOFA in a large and homogeneous cohort of adult AML patients treated with intensive chemotherapy. In a total of 1048 neutropenic episodes recorded in 334 consecutive patients, the scores were applied to predict outcomes on the same day of fever onset, and after 24 and 48 h from score calculation. RESULTS: Both NEWS and qSOFA significantly predicted death, with more accuracy on the same day (NEWS AUROC 0.984 and qSOFA AUROC 0.969) and after 24 h (NEWS AUROC 0.928 and qSOFA AUROC 0.887), while remained moderately accurate after 48 h. Furthermore, also ICU admission was accurately predicted at fever onset and after 24 h. CONCLUSIONS: Both scores were useful tools in the management of post chemotherapy neutropenic febrile AML patients.

Role of Neutrophil Gelatinase-associated Lipocalin (NGAL) and Other Clinical Parameters as Predictors of Bacterial Sepsis in Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department with Fever.

Background: Bacterial sepsis is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. However, to date, there is no single test that predicts sepsis with reproducible results. We proposed that using a combination of clinical and laboratory parameters and a novel biomarker, plasma neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) may aid in early diagnosis. Method: A prospective cohort study was conducted at a tertiary care center in South India (June 2017 to April 2018) on patients with acute febrile episodes fulfilling the Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) criteria. Plasma NGAL and standard clinical and laboratory parameters were collected at the admission. Bacterial sepsis was diagnosed based on blood culture positivity or clinical diagnosis. Clinically relevant plasma NGAL cut-off values were identified using the receive operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Clinically relevant clinical parameters along with plasma NGAL's risk ratios estimated from the multivariable Poisson regression model were rounded and used as weights to create a new scoring tool. Results: Of 100 patients enrolled, 37 had bacterial sepsis. The optimal plasma NGAL cut-off value to predict sepsis was 570 ng/mL [area under the curve (AUC): 0.69]. The NGAL sepsis screening tool consists of the following clinical parameter: diabetes mellitus, the presence of rigors, quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) >2, a clear focus of infection, and the plasma NGAL >570 ng/mL. A score of <3 ruled out bacterial sepsis and a score >7 were highly suggestive of bacterial sepsis with an interval likelihood ratio (LR) of 7.77. Conclusion: The NGAL sepsis screening tool with a score >7 can be used in the emergency department (ED) to identify bacterial sepsis. How to cite this article: Paul A, Newbigging NS, Lenin A, Gowri M, Varghese JS, Nell AJ, et al. Role of Neutrophil Gelatinase-associated Lipocalin (NGAL) and Other Clinical Parameters as Predictors of Bacterial Sepsis in Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department with Fever. Indian J Crit Care Med 2023;27(3):176-182.

Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, and Procalcitonin for Early Diagnosis and Prediction of Death in Elderly Patients with Suspicion of Sepsis in the Emergency Department, Based on Sepsis-3 Definition.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is a disease with a high mortality rate without prompt treatment. However, this entity is difficult to diagnose in the elderly population in the emergency room; for this reason, it is necessary to have diagnostic tools for early detection. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to determine the highest diagnostic yield of procalcitonin (PCT), Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) for sepsis (based on the sepsis-3 consensus), on admission at the emergency department, in those older than 65 years. METHODS: This is a diagnostic test study of a historical cohort of 65-year-old patients with suspected sepsis. RESULTS: In the sample of 179 patients, 53.6% had confirmed sepsis. Significant differences were found (p < 0.0001), with a greater diagnostic and predictive capacity of PCT for the diagnosis of sepsis (receiver operating characteristics curve area [area under the curve (AUC) = 0.883, 95% CI: 0.835-0.931] than qSOFA (AUC = 0.559, 95% CI: 0.485-0.663) and SOFA (AUC = 0.662, 95% CI: 0.584-0.739); these results were similar in the cohort of patients ≥75 years. In positive PCT(≥0.5 ng/mL), the sensitivity was 71.8% (95% CI: 62.36-81.39), specificity of 89.1% (95% CI: 81.87-96.45%), V+ 88.4% (95% CI: 80.73-96.19%), V- of 73.2% (95% CI: 64.14-82.39%), positive likelihood ratio of 6.63 (95% CI: 3.53-12.44), and negative likelihood ratio of 0.32 (95% CI: 0.23-0.44); these results were similar in the cohort of patients ≥75 years. Lactate ≥2 mmol/L (RR = 1.659 [95% CI: 1.002-2.747]) and PCT ≥0.5 ng/mL (RR = 1.942 [95% CI: 1.157-3.261]) showed a significant association with in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSION: In the elderly population with suspicion of infection on admission to the emergency department, qSOFA presents a low diagnostic performance of confirmed sepsis and in-hospital mortality, for which other tools with higher diagnostic and prognostic performance should be added, such as PCT and lactate.

Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score and the Modified Early Warning Score for Predicting Clinical Deterioration in General Ward Patients Regardless of Suspected Infection.

BACKGROUND: The quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score is suggested to use for screening patients with a high risk of clinical deterioration in the general wards, which could simply be regarded as a general early warning score. However, comparison of unselected admissions to highlight the benefits of introducing qSOFA in hospitals already using Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) remains unclear. We sought to compare qSOFA with MEWS for predicting clinical deterioration in general ward patients regardless of suspected infection. METHODS: The predictive performance of qSOFA and MEWS for in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) or unexpected intensive care unit (ICU) transfer was compared with the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) analysis using the databases of vital signs collected from consecutive hospitalized adult patients over 12 months in five participating hospitals in Korea. RESULTS: Of 173,057 hospitalized patients included for analysis, 668 (0.39%) experienced the composite outcome. The discrimination for the composite outcome for MEWS (AUC, 0.777; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.770-0.781) was higher than that for qSOFA (AUC, 0.684; 95% CI, 0.676-0.686; P < 0.001). In addition, MEWS was better for prediction of IHCA (AUC, 0.792; 95% CI, 0.781-0.795 vs. AUC, 0.640; 95% CI, 0.625-0.645; P < 0.001) and unexpected ICU transfer (AUC, 0.767; 95% CI, 0.760-0.773 vs. AUC, 0.716; 95% CI, 0.707-0.718; P < 0.001) than qSOFA. Using the MEWS at a cutoff of ≥ 5 would correctly reclassify 3.7% of patients from qSOFA score ≥ 2. Most patients met MEWS ≥ 5 criteria 13 hours before the composite outcome compared with 11 hours for qSOFA score ≥ 2. CONCLUSION: MEWS is more accurate that qSOFA score for predicting IHCA or unexpected ICU transfer in patients outside the ICU. Our study suggests that qSOFA should not replace MEWS for identifying patients in the general wards at risk of poor outcome.

Lactate enhanced-quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment 2 (LqSOFA2): A new score for bedside prognostication of patients with sepsis.

Background & objectives: Early diagnosis and prompt treatment remain a challenge in sepsis. To study the role of quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), blood lactate levels and a new score Lactate - Enhanced-qSOFA 2 (LqSOFA2) in predicting outcome in patients with sepsis and their association with established severity scores. Methods: This was a prospective, observational study in patients admitted to ICU of a tertiary care hospital in north India. qSOFA, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II), SOFA score and LqSOFA2 were calculated in 150 patients with sepsis. Measurements of lactate and SOFA score was done on days one, three and seven. Results: The mean arterial pressure (MAP) was significantly higher in survivors (70.14±19.54 vs. 48.53±26.86). The mean qSOFA significantly predicted mortality (1.81 vs. 2.63; P<0.0001). The mean lactate on days one, three and seven in survivors were 2.27±0.91, 1.72±0.77 and 1.14±0.48, respectively, while it was 4.32±2.35, 3.57±2.28 and 2.13±1.22, respectively, in the non-survivor group (P<0.001). The new score LqSOFA2 also significantly predicted mortality between non survivors and survivors (3.52±0.71 vs. 2.37±0.91). There was a significant correlation of qSOFA with SOFA and APACHE II on day one. Lactate levels and SOFA correlated on all three days. Interpretation & conclusions: qSOFA, a novel score and lactate can independently predict mortality in patients with sepsis. They correlate with APACHE II and SOFA but fail to equilibrate with either. The combination score LqSOFA2 showed marginal (statistically insignificant) increase in predictive accuracy and specificity when compared to lactate or qSOFA alone. Early diagnosis by LqSOFA2 makes it a good standalone bedside prognostic marker.

Diagnostic Accuracy and Prognostic Value of Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte and Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratios in Septic Patients outside the Intensive Care Unit.

Background and Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and prognostic value of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte (NLR) and platelet-to-lymphocyte (PLR) ratios and to compare them with other biomarkers and clinical scores of sepsis outside the intensive care unit. Materials and methods: In this retrospective study, 251 patients with sepsis and 126 patients with infection other than sepsis were enrolled. NLR and PLR were calculated as the ratio between absolute values of neutrophils, lymphocytes, and platelets by complete blood counts performed on whole blood by Sysmex XE-9000 (Dasit, Italy) following the manufacturer's instruction. Results: The best NLR value in diagnosis of sepsis was 7.97 with sensibility, specificity, AUC, PPV, and NPV of 64.26%, 80.16%, 0.74 (p < 0.001), 86.49%, and 53.18%, respectively. The diagnostic role of NLR significantly increases when PLR, C-reactive protein (PCR), procalcitonin (PCT), and mid-regional pro-adrenomedullin (MR-proADM) values, as well as systemic inflammatory re-sponse syndrome (SIRS), sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA), and quick-sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) scores, were added to the model. The best value of NLR in predicting 90-day mortality was 9.05 with sensibility, specificity, AUC, PPV, and NPV of 69.57%, 61.44%, 0.66 (p < 0.0001), 28.9%, and 89.9%, respectively. Sensibility, specificity, AUC, PPV, and NPV of NLR increase if PLR, PCR, PCT, MR-proADM, SIRS, qSOFA, and SOFA scores are added to NLR. Conclusions: NLR and PLR represent a widely useful and cheap tool in diagnosis and in predict-ing 90-day mortality in patients with sepsis.

Efficacy of the quick sequential organ failure assessment for predicting clinical outcomes among community-acquired pneumonia patients presenting in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: The study aimed to investigate the predictive value of the quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) for clinical outcomes in emergency patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). METHODS: A total of 742 CAP cases from the emergency department (ED) were enrolled in this study. The scoring systems including the qSOFA, SOFA and CURB-65 (confusion, urea, respiratory rate, blood pressure and age) were used to predict the prognostic outcomes of CAP in ICU-admission, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and 28-day mortality. According to the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, the accuracies of prediction of the scoring systems were analyzed among CAP patients. RESULTS: The AUC values of the qSOFA, SOFA and CURB-65 scores for ICU-admission among CAP patients were 0.712 (95%CI: 0.678-0.745, P < 0.001), 0.744 (95%CI: 0.711-0.775, P < 0.001) and 0.705 (95%CI: 0.671-0.738, P < 0.001), respectively. For ARDS, the AUC values of the qSOFA, SOFA and CURB-65 scores were 0.730 (95%CI: 0.697-0.762, P < 0.001), 0.724 (95%CI: 0.690-0.756, P < 0.001) and 0.749 (95%CI: 0.716-0.780, P < 0.001), respectively. After 28 days of follow-up, the AUC values of the qSOFA, SOFA and CURB-65 scores for 28-day mortality were 0.602 (95%CI: 0.566-0.638, P < 0.001), 0.587 (95%CI: 0.551-0.623, P < 0.001) and 0.614 (95%CI: 0.577-0.649, P < 0.001) in turn. There were no statistical differences between qSOFA and SOFA scores for predicting ICU-admission (Z = 1.482, P = 0.138), ARDS (Z = 0.321, P = 0.748) and 28-day mortality (Z = 0.573, P = 0.567). Moreover, we found no differences to predict the ICU-admission (Z = 0.370, P = 0.712), ARDS (Z = 0.900, P = 0.368) and 28-day mortality (Z = 0.768, P = 0.442) using qSOFA or CURB-65 scores. CONCLUSION: qSOFA was not inferior to SOFA or CURB-65 scores in predicting the ICU-admission, ARDS and 28-day mortality of patients presenting in the ED with CAP.

Thrombo-inflammatory prognostic score improves qSOFA for risk stratification in patients with sepsis: a retrospective cohort study.

Background Both the thrombo-inflammatory prognostic score (TIPS) and the quick sequential (sepsis-related) organ failure assessment (qSOFA) are quick prognostic scores for sepsis during the early phase, while either of two scores has limited prognostic value for sepsis patients. This study aimed to evaluate whether TIPS adds more information of sepsis risk stratification for qSOFA. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with sepsis in the emergency department (ED). We performed a receiver-operating characteristic curve, integrated discrimination improvement (IDI), net reclassification improvement (NRI) and decision-curve analysis (DCA) analyses to investigate whether TIPS can improve qSOFA for risk prediction in patients with sepsis. The primary endpoint was mortality and the secondary endpoints were mechanical ventilation and admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) during the 28-day follow-up. Results We identified 821 patients with sepsis. We randomly assigned the patients' data to a derivation group (n = 498; n = 112 died during the 28-days follow-up) or to a validation group (n = 323; n = 61). The addition of TIPS to qSOFA (T-qSOFA) improved the area under the curve (AUC) from 0.724 to 0.824 (p < 0.001) for predicting 28-day mortality. The discrimination improvement was confirmed by an IDI of 0.092 (p < 0.001). Addition of TIPS to the qSOFA resulted in a NRI of 0.247 (p < 0.001). The DCA showed that the net benefit of T-qSOFA was higher than that of TIPS or qSOFA for any threshold probabilities. Conclusions The prognostic value of qSOFA for patients with sepsis was enhanced by adding the TIPS score on admission for risk prediction in patients with sepsis during early phases in the ED.

Predictive performance of SOFA and qSOFA for in-hospital mortality in severe novel coronavirus disease.

OBJECTIVES: The assessment of illness severity at admission can contribute to decreased mortality in patients with the coronavirus disease (COVID-19). This study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) and Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) scoring systems at admission for the prediction of mortality risk in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We included 140 critically ill COVID-19 patients. Data on demographics, clinical characteristics, and laboratory findings at admission were used to calculate SOFA and qSOFA against the in-hospital outcomes (survival or death) that were ascertained from the medical records. The predictive accuracy of both scoring systems was evaluated by the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. RESULTS: The area under the ROC curve for SOFA in predicting mortality was 0.890 (95% CI: 0.826-0.955), which was higher than that of qSOFA (0.742, 95% CI 0.657-0.816). An optimal cutoff of ≥3 for SOFA had sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 90.00%, 83.18%, 50.00%, and 97.80%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This novel report indicates that SOFA could function as an effective adjunctive risk-stratification tool at admission for critical COVID-19 patients. The performance of qSOFA is accepted but inferior to that of SOFA.

Validation of prognostic accuracy of the SOFA score, SIRS criteria, and qSOFA score for in-hospital mortality among cardiac-, thoracic-, and vascular-surgery patients admitted to a cardiothoracic intensive care unit.

SEPSIS-3 DEFINITION: Sepsis is defined as life-threatening organ dysfunction due to a dysregulated host response to infection. The clinical criteria of sepsis include organ dysfunction, which is defined as an increase of two points or more on the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA). For patients with infection, an increase of 2 SOFA points yields an overall mortality rate of 10%. Patients with suspected infection who are likely to have a prolonged intensive care unit (ICU) stay or to have in-hospital mortality can be promptly identified at the bedside with a quick SOFA (qSOFA) score of 2 or higher. IMPORTANCE: The sepsis-3 criteria have emphasized the value of a change of two or more points on the SOFA, introduced the qSOFA, and removed the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria from the sepsis definition. OBJECTIVE: To externally validate and assess the discriminatory capacities of an increase in the SOFA score by two or more points, the presence of two or more SIRS criteria, or a qSOFA score of 2 or more points for outcomes in 5109 patients, the vast majority of whom were postcardiac surgery patients who were admitted to a Cardiothoracic Surgical ICU in Singapore. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective cohort analysis of 5109 patients with an infection-related primary admission diagnosis in the cardiothoracic intensive care unit (CTICU) at the National University Hospital (NUH) in Singapore from 2010 to 2016. EXPOSURES: The SOFA, qSOFA, and SIRS criteria were applied to the data representing the worst condition within 24 hours of ICU admission. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Discrimination was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). RESULTS: In 5109 patients, the average mortality of patients with an increase in the SOFA scores of less than 2 points was 3.5% (n = 64), and it was 6% (n = 199) for those with an increase in the SOFA scores of 2 or more points. The mortality of patients with an increase in the qSOFA scores of less than 2 points was 2.6% (n = 7), and it was 5.3% (n = 256) for those with an increase in the qSOFA scores of 2 or more points. The mortality of patients with an increase in the SIRS criteria of less than 2 points was 3.6% (n = 30), and it was 5.4% (n = 233) for those with an increase in the SIRS criteria of 2 or more points. The AUROC of in-hospital mortality of patients with an increase in the SOFA, qSOFA, and SIRS criteria of 2 or more points was 0.96, 0.95, and 0.95, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In adults with suspected infection admitted to the CTICU in NUH, the change in in-hospital mortality between patients with an increase in SOFA scores of less than 2 and those with an increase of 2 or more was 2.5 percentage points. In contrast to other studies, the absolute change in mortality was nearly the same compared to the qSOFA and SIRS criteria, and the qSOFA score had the greatest percentage increase of 104%, compared to 71% for the SOFA score and 50% for the SIRS criteria. Besides, from the perspective of discriminatory capacities, an increase in SOFA scores of 2 or more did not demonstrate significantly greater prognostic accuracy for in-hospital mortality than equivalent increases in qSOFA scores or SIRS criteria. These findings suggest distinctive characteristics of the study population in the CTICU that are different from the general population.

qSOFA score for prediction of sepsis outcome in emergency department.

OBJECTIVE: The third international consensus definition for sepsis and septic shock (sepsis 3) task force recently introduced qSOFA (quick sequential organ failure assessment) as a score for detection of patients at risk of sepsis outside of intensive care units. We performed this study to evaluate the validity of qSOFA for early detection and risk stratification of septic patients in emergency department. METHODS: We conducted this study in an emergency department of the largest university affiliated hospital in northwest of Iran from Sept 2015 to Sept 2016. One hundred and forty patients who were SIRS positive with a suspected infection without alternative diagnosis and a microbiological proven infection were enrolled in this study. qSOFA was calculated for each patient and correlated with sepsis grades and mortality. RESULTS: From 140 patients 84 (60%) had positive qSOFA score and 56 (40%) patients had negative qSOFA score. Our results showed that near half of patients with positive qSOFA expired during their stay in hospital while this was about 5% for patients with negative qSOFA. ROC curve of study regarding prediction of outcome with qSOFA showed an area under curve of 0.59. (P value: 0.04). Time spent to sepsis detection was 16 minutes shorter with qSOFA score compared to SIRS criteria in this study. CONCLUSION: In patients with suspected sepsis, qSOFA has acceptable value for risk stratification of severity, multi organ failure and mortality. It seems that education of medical staff and frequent screening of patients for warning signs can help to increase the value of qSOFA in prediction of mortality in critically ill septic patients.

Prehospital quick sequential organ failure assessment score to predict in-hospital mortality among patients with trauma.

OBJECTIVE: The quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score is calculated from three variables measured at the scene of trauma-systolic blood pressure, respiratory rate and consciousness. This study aimed to evaluate the discriminative ability of the prehospital qSOFA score for in-hospital mortality in patients with trauma. METHODS: This retrospective multicenter study used data from 42,722 patients with trauma included in a Japanese nationwide trauma registry. All included patients were aged ≥18 years old and transferred to hospitals from the scenes of injury. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: The included patients had a mean age of 59.4 ±â€¯21.5 years and a male predominance (63%). In-hospital mortality occurred in 2612 patients (6%), while 2-day mortality occurred in 1189 of 42,339 patients (3%). When patients were stratified by qSOFA scores, in-hospital mortality rates of 0.9% (105/11783), 5% (941/17839), 12% (1280/11132) and 15% (286/1968) were associated with qSOFA scores of 0, 1, 2 and 3, respectively (P < 0.0001 for trend). The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of the qSOFA score for in-hospital mortality was 0.70 (95% confidence interval: 0.69-0.71). A qSOFA score cutoff value ≥1 yielded a sensitivity and specificity of 0.96 and 0.29, respectively, overall, and a sensitivity of 0.99 in patients younger than 65 years. CONCLUSIONS: The prehospital qSOFA score was strongly associated with in-hospital mortality in patients with trauma. A prehospital qSOFA score cutoff of ≥1 can be used to identify patients at a very low risk of death, especially in younger age groups.

Prehospital quick sequential organ failure assessment as a tool to predict in-hospital mortality.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the predictive ability of quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score for in-hospital mortality among patients transported by physician-staffed helicopters. METHODS: We conducted a single-center, retrospective observational study using the physician-staffed helicopter registry data between 2003 and 2016. We calculated the qSOFA scores based on the patients' vital signs, which were measured on the scene. The tool's discriminatory ability was determined using the area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic. RESULTS: A total of 1849 patients with a mean age of 63.0 (standard deviation [SD], 18.4) years were included in this study. The diagnostic categories included were trauma and nontrauma cases (1038 [56%] and 811 [44%], respectively). In-hospital mortality was documented in 169 (9%) patients. Meanwhile, the in-hospital mortality rates among patients with qSOFA scores of 0, 1, 2, and 3 were 5/411 (1%), 69/797 (9%), 71/541 (13%), and 24/100 (24%), respectively (P<0.0001 for trend). If the cutoff point is ≥1, the sensitivity and specificity of the qSOFA scores were 0.97 and 0.24, respectively. The area under the curve of the qSOFA scores was 0.67 for all patients, whereas that for trauma patients was 0.75. CONCLUSION: An increase in the qSOFA score is associated with a gradual increase in the in-hospital mortality rate among all patients. In particular, a very low mortality rate was observed among patients with a qSOFA score of 0. The qSOFA score predicted the in-hospital mortality of patients with trauma well.

[Clinical value of Oxford acute severity of illness score in identifying quick sequential organ failure assessment-negative patients with sepsis].

Objective: The quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score has been proposed as part of diagnostic criteria for sepsis, but there might be an underestimation of the incidence of qSOFA-negative sepsis according to a few recent studies. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the value of Oxford acute severity of illness score (OASIS) in identifying qSOFA-negative (qSOFA<2) patients with sepsis. Methods: Sepsis patients with negative qSOFA scores were selected from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care Ⅲ(MIMIC-Ⅲ), a database comprising de-identified health-related data from patients staying in the critical care units of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center between 2001 and 2012. Non-infectious patients with both qSOFA and SOFA scores less than 2 were enrolled as controls. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was used to reduce the effects of selection bias. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to assess the value of OASIS in discriminating qSOFA-negative patients with sepsis and to determine its optimal cut-off. Associations of OASIS with 28-day mortality after intensive care unit (ICU) admission, ICU mortality, and hospital mortality were further examined using multivariate Cox regression and multivariate logistic regression analysis. Results: 2 273 qSOFA-negative patients with sepsis and 3 342 non-sepsis controls were included finally with a PSM cohort consisted of 1 677 sepsis patients and 1 677 controls. Results of ROC analysis showed that the area under ROC curve was 0.753 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.741-0.765] and the optimal OASIS threshold according to the Youden index was 26.5 and yielded a 67.2% sensitivity and 70.8% specificity. Multivariate regression analysis indicated that OASIS>26 was an independent risk factor for 28-day mortality (hazard ratio 2.80, 95% CI 2.15-3.65, P<0.01), ICU mortality (odds ratio 4.69, 95% CI 2.60-8.49, P<0.01), and hospital mortality (odds ratio 4.48, 95% CI 3.13-6.42, P<0.01). Analysis of the PSM cohort presented consistent results. Conclusions: OASIS had a good discriminative value to differentiate qSOFA-negative patients with sepsis from those without sepsis.

Critical Illness Scoring Systems: Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, and Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment to Predict the Clinical Outcomes in Scrub Typhus Patients with Organ Dysfunctions.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Scrub typhus (ST) is an acute infectious disease of variable severity caused by Orientia (formerly Rickettsia) tsutsugamushi. The disease can be complicated by organ dysfunctions and the case fatality rate (CFR) is approximately 15%, which further rises with the development of severe complications. We studied the clinical features of the ST and the performance of critical illness scoring systems (CISSs) - Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II, sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA), and quick SOFA (qSOFA) in predicting the clinical outcomes in complicated ST (cST) patients admitted to the emergency department. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A prospective observational study was done in 50 patients diagnosed to have cST with one or more organ dysfunctions. Clinical features and laboratory parameters were recorded and the patients were followed up until the end of their stay in the hospital. APACHE II, SOFA, and qSOFA scores at admission were calculated and were analyzed in predicting the clinical outcomes. RESULTS: The median SOFA, APACHE II, and qSOFA scores of the cohort were 7 (interquartile range [IQR] = 13-22), 8 (IQR = 5-11), and 2 (IQR = 1-3), respectively. The median duration of in-hospital stay was 9 (IQR 5-11) days and overall CFR was 8%. On bivariate analysis, both SOFA (P = 0.031) and qSOFA (P = 0.001) predicted mortality. However, only SOFA score correlated with the in-hospital stay duration (Pearson's correlation = 0.311, P = 0.028). CONCLUSION: Among the three CISSs studied, the SOFA score correlated with in-hospital stay duration and mortality, whereas the qSOFA score formed a simple as well as a convenient tool in predicting the mortality in patients of cST with organ dysfunction.

Supplementary Contribution of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-Performance Status to Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment in the Detection of Bacteremia Among Older Patients With Suspected Infections.

Background The Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) is a simple method for identifying patients with bacteremia; however, it is not accurate for predicting it. Performance status assessment involves the evaluation of daily activities and could be beneficial in predicting bacteremia. We aimed to evaluate whether adding Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-Performance Status (ECOG-PS) to qSOFA could improve the prediction of bacteremia diagnosis in older patients admitted with suspected infections. Methods Data were gathered from individuals aged ≥65 years who were hospitalized with suspected bacteremia from 2018 to 2019. Two prediction models were contrasted employing logistic regression. The initial model exclusively incorporated the qSOFA score, while the second model integrated the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-Performance Status (ECOG-PS) alongside the qSOFA score. Results Among 1,114 enrolled patients, 221 (19.8%) had true bacteremia. The area under the curve of the qSOFA+ECOG-PS model did not show a statistically significant improvement in predictive capacity compared with that of the qSOFA model (0.544 vs. 0.554, p=0.162). Conclusions Adding the ECOG-PS score did not improve the performance of qSOFA for predicting bacteremia in older patients with suspected infection.

Biomarker-Based Assessment Model for Detecting Sepsis: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

The concept of the quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) simplifies sepsis detection, and the next SOFA should be analyzed subsequently to diagnose sepsis. However, it does not include the concept of suspected infection. Thus, we simply developed a biomarker-based assessment model for detecting sepsis (BADS). We retrospectively reviewed the electronic health records of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) of a 2000-bed university tertiary referral hospital in South Korea. A total of 989 patients were enrolled, with 77.4% (n = 765) of them having sepsis. The patients were divided into a ratio of 8:2 and assigned to a training and a validation set. We used logistic regression analysis and the Hosmer-Lemeshow test to derive the BADS and assess the model. BADS was developed by analyzing the variables and then assigning weights to the selected variables: mean arterial pressure, shock index, lactate, and procalcitonin. The area under the curve was 0.754, 0.615, 0.763, and 0.668 for BADS, qSOFA, SOFA, and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) II, respectively, showing that BADS is not inferior in sepsis prediction compared with SOFA. BADS could be a simple scoring method to detect sepsis in critically ill patients quickly at the bedside.

Modified Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score for predicting mortality in emergency department patients with sepsis.

OBJECTIVE: Several scoring systems have been proposed for EDs to identify patients at increased risk of mortality from sepsis. The modified Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (mSOFA) score, proposed in 2019, demonstrated a high negative predictive value. We aimed to validate mSOFA and compare its accuracy for predicting 30-day mortality to the simple bedside score, quick SOFA (qSOFA). METHODS: Over 1 month in 2018, consecutive patients with suspected sepsis were prospectively identified. A retrospective chart review was conducted to calculate both the mSOFA and qSOFA scores for these patients. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. RESULTS: There were 252 patients with suspected sepsis identified over the study period. Thirty-day mortality was 13/39 (33.3%) for those with a positive mSOFA and 15/211 (7.1%) for those with a negative mSOFA score. Sensitivity was 46.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 27.5-66.1%), specificity 88.3% (95% CI 83.3-92.2%), positive likelihood ratio 3.96 (95% CI 2.32-6.78), negative likelihood ratio 0.61 (95% CI 0.43-0.86). The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.74 (95% CI 0.64-0.85). qSOFA sensitivity was 39.3% (95% CI 21.5-59.4%), specificity 91.9% (95% CI 87.5-95.1%), positive likelihood ratio 4.85 (95% CI 2.56-9.18) and negative likelihood ratio 0.66 (95% CI 0.49-0.89). The AUC for qSOFA was 0.81 (95% CI 0.73-0.88). The difference in the AUC was -0.07 (95% CI -0.18 to 0.05), P = 0.25. CONCLUSIONS: In the present study, neither mSOFA nor qSOFA was adequately sensitive for predicting 30-day mortality, although both scores were highly specific and their overall accuracy was similar. The added complexity of the mSOFA without a significant increase in discriminative ability makes it unlikely to replace qSOFA in the ED setting.

National Early Warning Score 2 is superior to quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment in predicting mortality in sepsis patients presenting to the emergency department in India: A prospective observational study.

Background: High in-hospital mortality in sepsis patients remains challenging for clinicians worldwide. Early recognition, prognostication, and aggressive management are essential for treating septic patients. Many scores have been formulated to guide clinicians to predict the early deterioration of such patients. Our objective was to compare predictive values of quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) and National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) with respect to in-hospital mortality. Methods: This prospective observational study was conducted in a tertiary care center in India. Adults with suspected infection with at least two Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome criteria presenting to the emergency department (ED) were enrolled. NEWS2 and qSOFA scores were calculated, and patients were followed until their primary outcome of mortality or hospital discharge. The diagnostic accuracy of qSOFA and NEWS2 for predicting mortality was analyzed. Results: Three hundred and seventy-three patients were enrolled. Overall mortality was 35.12%. A majority of patients had LOS between 2 and 6 days (43.70%). NEWS2 had higher area under curve at 0.781 (95% confidence interval [CI] (0.59, 0.97)) than qSOFA at 0.729 (95% CI [0.51, 0.94]), with P < 0.001. Sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic efficiency to predict mortality by NEWS2 were 83.21% (95% CI [83.17%, 83.24%]); 57.44% (95% CI [57.39%, 57.49%]); and 66.48% (95% CI [66.43%, 66.53%]), respectively. qSOFA score had sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic efficiency to predict mortality of 77.10% (95% CI [77.06%, 77.14%]); 42.98% (95% CI [42.92%, 43.03%]); and 54.95% (95% CI [54.90%, 55.00%]), respectively. Conclusion: NEWS2 is superior to qSOFA in predicting in-hospital mortality for sepsis patients presenting to the ED in India.