Clinical Outcome and Prognostic Factors of Sepsis, Septic Shock and Prolonged Hospitalization, of Patients Presented with Acute Obstructive Pyelonephritis

Long non‑coding RNAs MALAT1, NEAT1 and DSCR4 can be serum biomarkers in predicting urosepsis occurrence and reflect disease severity

Sepsis commonly occurs in patients with serious infections. It severely threatens the health of patients and has very high mortality rates. Urosepsis is a type of sepsis in which the serious infection originates from the urinary system. Early diagnosis of the occurrence and severity of urogenital sepsis is crucial for improving patient prognosis. Long noncoding RNAs (LncRNAs) play important roles in the occurrence of a number of diseases, including sepsis, and can be potential biomarkers that predict disease development. The present study aimed to discover potential LncRNAs that can predict the occurrence of urosepsis. RNA-sequence data from patients with sepsis from the GEO database was analyzed and LncRNAs associated with sepsis were identified. The expression of LncRNAs associated with sepsis was tested in clinical urosepsis samples. Finally, the value of these LncRNAs in predicting urosepsis was verified using clinical samples. From the GEO database a total of nine LncRNAs (MALAT1, NEAT1, RMRP, LncIRX5, LINC01742, DSCR4, C22ORF34, LINC00381, and LINC01102) were identified that had expression changes corresponding with the occurrence of sepsis. Specifically, MALAT1, NEAT1 and DSCR4 revealed differential expression in patients with urosepsis. Moreover, MALAT1, and DSCR4 were shown to be significant risk indicators for urosepsis, and NEAT1 was shown to reflect disease severity. Therefore, the present study indicated that the LncRNAs, MALAT1, NEAT1 and DSCR4 can reflect the occurrence and severity of urosepsis and may act as potential biomarkers.

Urosepsis 30-day mortality, morbidity, and their risk factors: SERPENS study, a prospective, observational multi-center study

PURPOSE

To provide a descriptive report of mortality and morbidity in the first 30 days of diagnosis of urosepsis. Secondary aim is to identify risk factors of unfavourable outcomes.

METHODS

Prospective observational multicentre cohort study conducted from September 2014 to November 2018 in European hospitals. Adult patients (≥ 18 years) diagnosed with acute urosepsis according to Sepsis-2 criteria with confirmed microbiological infection were included. Outcomes were classified in one of four health states: death, multiple organ failure, single organ failure, and recovery at day 30 from onset of urosepsis. Descriptive statistics and ordinal logistic regression analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Three hundred and fifty four patients were recruited, and 30-day mortality rate was 2.8%, rising to 4.6% for severe sepsis. All patients who died had a SOFA score of ≥ 2 at diagnosis. Upon initial diagnosis, 79% (n = 281) of patients presented with OF. Within 30 days, an additional 5% developed OF, resulting in a total of 84% affected. Charlson score (OR 1.14 CI 1.01-1.28), patients with respiratory failure at baseline (OR 2.35, CI 1.32-4.21), ICU admission within the past 12 months (OR 2.05, CI 1.00-4.19), obstruction causative of urosepsis (OR 1.76, CI 1.02-3.05), urosepsis with multi-drug-resistant(MDR) pathogens (OR 2.01, CI 1.15-3.53), and SOFA baseline score ≥ 2 (OR 2.74, CI 1.49-5.07) are significantly associated with day 30 outcomes (OF and death).

CONCLUSIONS

Impact of comorbidities and MDR pathogens on outcomes highlights the existence of a distinct group of patients who are prone to mortality and morbidity. These findings underscore the need for the development of pragmatic classifications to better assess the severity of UTIs and guide management strategies.

STUDY REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov registration number NCT02380170.

Emergency decompression for patients with ureteral stones and SIRS: a prospective randomized clinical study

OBJECTIVE

Patients with ureteral calculi and systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) often require emergency drainage, and percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN) and retrograde ureteral stent insertion (RUSI) are the most commonly used methods. Our study aimed to identify the best choice (PCN or RUSI) for these patients and to examine the risk factors for progression to urosepsis after decompression.

METHODS

A prospective, randomized clinical study was performed at our hospital from March 2017 to March 2022. Patients with ureteral stones and SIRS were enrolled and randomized to the PCN or RUSI group. Demographic information, clinical features and examination results were collected.

RESULTS

Patients (n = 150) with ureteral stones and SIRS were enrolled into our study, with 78 (52%) patients in the PCN group and 72 (48%) patients in the RUSI group. Demographic information was not significantly different between the groups. The final treatment of calculi was significantly different between the two groups (p < .001). After emergency decompression, urosepsis developed in 28 patients. Patients with urosepsis had a higher procalcitonin (p = .012) and blood culture positivity rate (p < .001) and more pyogenic fluids during primary drainage (p < .001) than patients without urosepsis.

CONCLUSION

PCN and RUSI were effective methods of emergency decompression in patients with ureteral stone and SIRS. Patients with pyonephrosis and a higher PCT should be carefully treated to prevent the progression to urosepsis after decompression.Key messageIn this study, we evaluate the best choice (PCN or RUSI) for patients who have ureteral stones and SIRS and to examine the risk factors for progression to urosepsis after decompression. This study found that PCN and RUSI were effective methods of emergency decompression. Pyonephrosis and higher PCT were risk factors for patients to develop to urosepsis after decompression.

Clinical and time-related predictors of sepsis in patients with obstructive uropathy due to ureteral stones in the emergency setting

PURPOSE

Well-defined clinical predictors of sepsis after upper tract drainage for obstructive uropathy due to ureteral stones are needed. We aim to determine whether sepsis after decompression of the upper urinary tract may be predicted by clinical and time-related factors, specifically delay time from symptom onset to hospital presentation (StH) and from hospital presentation to surgical decompression (HtD).

METHODS

In this single-center retrospective study, data from 196 consecutive patients presenting to the emergency department for obstructive uropathy due to ureteral stones and submitted to surgical decompression were evaluated. Postoperative sepsis was defined as an acute increase in ≥ 2 SOFA points and documented blood or urine cultures.

RESULTS

Median StH and HtD were 24 (6-48) and 17 (10-30) hours, respectively. Thirty-three (16.8%) patients developed sepsis. Septic patients were more frequently female (75.8% vs. 37.4%, p < 0.001), had higher preoperative max body temperature (p < 0.001), white blood cells (WBC) count (p < 0.01), C-reactive protein (CRP) values (p < 0.001) and larger stone diameter (7.2 vs. 6 mm, p = 0.02). StH and HtD did not differ according to sepsis status. Time for WBC normalization and CRP halving were longer for septic patients (all p < 0.02). At multivariable logistic regression analysis, max body temperature ≥ 38 °C (OR 21.5; p < 0.001), female gender (OR 3.6; p = 0.02) and higher CRP (OR 1.1; p < 0.001) were independently associated with sepsis status.

CONCLUSION

Clinical and laboratory parameters are associated with an increased risk of sepsis after decompression. StH and HtD timing are not associated with higher sepsis rates. In selected patients, urinary decompression could be delayed or primary ureteroscopy could be considered.

Predicting Septic Shock After Emergent Ureteral Stenting in Stone-Related Obstruction and Presumed Infections

Introduction: Systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria have long been used to predict septic shock. The sequential organ failure assessment and quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) scores have been suggested to be more accurate predictors. This study aims to compare SIRS and qSOFA for predicting of septic shock in the setting of retrograde ureteral stenting for obstructing stones and concomitant urinary tract infection. Methods: A retrospective review of records at two centers of consecutive patients was performed. Patients with unilateral ureteral obstruction by a stone who underwent ureteral stent placement and suspicion of urinary tract infection were identified. Primary endpoints were SIRS and qSOFA positive scores, intensive care unit admission, and vasopressor requirements. Results: A total of 187 patients were included. SIRS criteria were met in 103 patients (55.1%) and in 30 patients who experienced septic shock. qSOFA criteria were met for 24 patients (12.8%) and in 18 patients who experienced septic shock. Specificity for postoperative septic shock was significantly higher for qSOFA than for SIRS criteria (75 vs 29.1%, McNemar test p < 0.001). Both SIRS and qSOFA had significant areas under the curve (AUC), qSOFA had a fair AUC of 0.750, p = 0.001, whereas SIRS had a poor AUC of 0.659, p = 0.008. Univariate logistic regression of SIRS and qSOFA for septic shock showed: qSOFA (odds ratio [OR] 46 [0.25-228], p = 0.001) and SIRS (OR 2.29 [0.716-7.37], p = 0.162). Conclusion: Although SIRS offers higher sensitivity, qSOFA score may offer advantages over SIRS criteria in evaluation of risk for septic shock for patients who present with obstructing ureteral stone and urinary tract infection.

Choosing the best way for urinary decompression and developing a novel predictive model for septic shock using SOFA in these patients

OBJECTIVES

To identify predictive factors for the development of sepsis/septic shock postdecompression of calculi-related ureteric obstruction using the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score and to compare clinical outcomes and odd risk ratios of patients developing sepsis/septic shock following the insertion of percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN) versus insertion of retrograde ureteral stenting (RUS).

METHODS

Clinico-epidemiological data of patients who underwent PCN and/or RUS in two institutions for calculi-related ureteric obstruction were retrospectively collected from January 2014 to December 2020.

RESULTS

537 patients (244 patients in PCN group, 293 patients in RUS group) from both institutions were eligible for analysis based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. Patients with PCN were generally older, had poorer Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status, and larger obstructive ureteral calculi compared to patients with RUS. Patients with PCN had longer durations of fever, the persistence of elevated total white cell and creatinine, and longer hospitalization stays compared with patients who had undergone RUS. RUS up-front has more unsuccessful interventions compared with PCN. There were no significant differences in the change in SOFA score postintervention between the two interventions. In multivariate analysis, the higher temperature just prior to the intervention (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 2.039, p = 0.003) and Cardiovascular SOFA score of 1 (adjusted OR:4.037, p = 0.012) were significant independent prognostic factors for the development of septic shock postdecompression of ureteral obstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study reveals that both interventions have similar overall risk of urosepsis, septic shock and mortality rate. Despite a marginally higher risk of failure, RUS should be considered in patients with lower procedural risk. Patients going for PCN should be counseled for a longer stay. Post-HDU/-ICU monitoring, inotrope support postdecompression should be considered for patients with elevated temperature within 1 h preintervention and cardiovascular SOFA score of 1.

Comparison of Percutaneous Nephrostomy and Ureteral DJ Stent in Patients with Obstructive Pyelonephritis: A Retrospective Cohort Study

PURPOSE

Comparing the two different drainage methods of percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN) versus retrograde ureteral double - J (DJ) stent insertion in patients with obstructive pyelonephritis cases.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this retrospective study, patients with obstructive pyelonephritis secondary to urolithiasis who underwent PCN or DJ insertion were included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups according to drainage method. After exclusion criteria, the study included 105 patients. The groups were compared for intraoperative outcomes, duration of fluoroscopy usage, the time needed for normalization of infection parameters (white blood cells (WBC), C - reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin), and complications were observed.

RESULTS

From 105 patients, 56 patients were in DJ stent group and 49 patients were in PCN group. According to intraoperative data, operative time and fluoroscopy duration were significantly shorter in the DJ ureteral stent group (P < .001). WBC returned to normal range in mean 3.5 ± 1.3 days in the DJ stent group and 3.2 ± 1.1 days in the PCN group (95% CI: -0.76-0.21, P = .268). There were no statistically significant differences identified for the duration for CRP, PCT and fever to return to normal range between the drainage methods. The complication rates was 51.8% for DJ stent group and, 30.6% in PCN group (P = .028).

CONCLUSION

Both methods are effective and safe in obstructive pyelonephritis. Despite the higher complication rate in DJ stent group, these complications were minor.

Association Between Different DVT Prevention Methods and Outcomes of Septic Shock Caused by Intestinal Perforation in China: A Cross-Sectional Study

Introduction

Septic shock, largely caused by intestinal perforation, is the most common critical illness in intensive care unit (ICU). As an important quality control strategy in ICU, deep vein thrombosis (DVT) prevention is routinely used in the treatment of septic shock. Nevertheless, the effects of DVT prevention on septic shock are not fully revealed. This study was thus designed to investigate the effects of DVT prevention on septic shock caused by intestinal perforation in China.

Methods

A total of 463 hospitals were enrolled in a survey, led by the China National Critical Care Quality Control Center (China NCCQC) from January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2018. The association between DVT prevention, including pharmacological prophylaxis and mechanical prophylaxis, and outcomes, such as prognosis, complications, hospital stays, and hospitalization costs, was determined in the present study.

Main Results

Notably, the increased rates of DVT prevention were not associated with the onset of complications in patients with septic shock caused by intestinal perforation (p > 0.05). In addition, even though increased DVT prevention did not affect hospital stays, it significantly decreased the discharge rates without doctor's order in patients with septic shock caused by intestinal perforation (p < 0.05). Nevertheless, it should be noted that the rates of pharmacological prophylaxis but not mechanical prophylaxis were significantly associated with the costs of septic shock caused by intestinal perforation (p < 0.05). Although increased total rates of DVT prevention and the rates of mechanical prophylaxis did not reduce the mortality in patients with septic shock caused by intestinal perforation, the higher frequent intervention using pharmacological prophylaxis indicated the lower mortality of these patients (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

DVT prevention by any means is a safe therapeutic strategy for treating septic shock caused by intestinal perforation, and pharmacological prophylaxis reduced the mortality of patients with septic shock caused by intestinal perforation.

Development of a novel clinical and radiological risk score to predict septic complications after urinary decompression in patients with obstructive uropathy

BACKGROUND

Well-defined clinical predictors of sepsis after upper tract drainage for obstructive uropathy are lacking. The study aim is to develop a data driven score to predict risk of sepsis after decompression of the upper urinary tract.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Complete clinical and radiological data from 271 patients entering the emergency department for obstructive uropathy and submitted to stent/nephrostomy tube decompression were evaluated. The Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) was used to score comorbidities. The definition of sepsis was an increase in ≥2 SOFA points (or postoperative persistently elevated score +1 additional increase) and documented blood or urine cultures. Descriptive statistics and stepwise multivariable logistic regression modelling with ROC analysis were performed in order to obtain a composite risk score to predict the risk of sepsis after surgery.

RESULTS

Fifty-five (20.3%) patients developed sepsis. At multivariable analysis, CCI ≥2 (OR 3.10; 95%CI 1.36-7.04), max body temperature ≥38°C (OR 4.35; 95%CI 1.89-9.44), grade III-IV hydronephrosis (OR 2.37; 95%CI 1.10-4.98), Hounsfield units of the dilated collecting system ≥7.0 (OR 4.47; 95%CI 2.03-9.81), WBC ≥15x103/mmc (OR 2.77; 95%CI 1.24-6.19) and C-reactive protein ≥10 (OR 3.27; 95%CI 1.41-7.56) were independently associated with sepsis. The PPV of a true sepsis increased incrementally as a function of number of positive variables, ranging from 1.6% to 100.0% among patients with 1 and 6 positive variables, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our risk score identifies accurately patients with an increased risk of sepsis after urinary decompression for obstructive uropathy, hence improving clinical management.

CT imaging of acute and chronic pyelonephritis: a practical guide for emergency radiologists

Contrast-enhanced CT is not routinely indicated in uncomplicated urinary infections, but it may be necessary in patients with specific risk factors (i.e., diabetes, immunocompromised patients, history of stones, or prior renal surgery) or in patients not responding to antibiotics and in detecting complications of pyelonephritis. CT is the gold standard for imaging assessment of pyelonephritis severity. Imaging appearance of acute pyelonephritis, including focal (i.e., wedge-shaped zones of decreased attenuation or hypodense mass) and diffuse (i.e., global enlargement, poor parenchymal enhancement, lack of excretion of contrast, fat stranding) forms, needs to be differentiated from renal infarction, renal lymphoma, and interstitial nephritis. Chronic pyelonephritis-which appears as focal polar scars with underlying calyceal distortion, global atrophy, and hypertrophy of residual tissue-may mimic at imaging lobar infarcts. This pictorial essay reviews the CT imaging appearance of acute and chronic pyelonephritis, their uncommon subtypes, and their complications, with key features for early diagnosis. Their knowledge is crucial for emergency and abdominal radiologists to avoid misdiagnosis with malignancy and to guide the clinician towards the appropriate medical or surgical treatment.