The Noninvasive Ventilation Outcomes (NIVO) score: prediction of in-hospital mortality in exacerbations of COPD requiring assisted ventilation

A simple clinical risk score (ABCDMP) for predicting mortality in patients with AECOPD and cardiovascular diseases

BACKGROUND

The morbidity and mortality among hospital inpatients with AECOPD and CVDs remains unacceptably high. Currently, no risk score for predicting mortality has been specifically developed in patients with AECOPD and CVDs. We therefore aimed to derive and validate a simple clinical risk score to assess individuals' risk of poor prognosis.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We evaluated inpatients with AECOPD and CVDs in a prospective, noninterventional, multicenter cohort study. We used multivariable logistic regression analysis to identify the independent prognostic risk factors and created a risk score model according to patients' data from a derivation cohort. Discrimination was evaluated by the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC), and calibration was assessed by the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test. The model was validated and compared with the BAP-65, CURB-65, DECAF and NIVO models in a validation cohort.

RESULTS

We derived a combined risk score, the ABCDMP score, that included the following variables: age > 75 years, BUN > 7 mmol/L, consolidation, diastolic blood pressure ≤ 60 mmHg, mental status altered, and pulse > 109 beats/min. Discrimination (AUC 0.847, 95% CI, 0.805-0.890) and calibration (Hosmer‒Lemeshow statistic, P = 0.142) were good in the derivation cohort and similar in the validation cohort (AUC 0.811, 95% CI, 0.755-0.868). The ABCDMP score had significantly better predictivity for in-hospital mortality than the BAP-65, CURB-65, DECAF, and NIVO scores (all P < 0.001). Additionally, the new score also had moderate predictive performance for 3-year mortality and can be used to stratify patients into different management groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The ABCDMP risk score could help predict mortality in AECOPD and CVDs patients and guide further clinical research on risk-based treatment.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trail Registry NO.:ChiCTR2100044625; URL: http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=121626 .

Global mortality and readmission rates following COPD exacerbation-related hospitalisation: a meta-analysis of 65 945 individual patients

Background

Exacerbations of COPD (ECOPD) have a major impact on patients and healthcare systems across the world. Precise estimates of the global burden of ECOPD on mortality and hospital readmission are needed to inform policy makers and aid preventive strategies to mitigate this burden. The aims of the present study were to explore global in-hospital mortality, post-discharge mortality and hospital readmission rates after ECOPD-related hospitalisation using an individual patient data meta-analysis (IPDMA) design.

Methods

A systematic review was performed identifying studies that reported in-hospital mortality, post-discharge mortality and hospital readmission rates following ECOPD-related hospitalisation. Data analyses were conducted using a one-stage random-effects meta-analysis model. This study was conducted and reported in accordance with the PRISMA-IPD statement.

Results

Data of 65 945 individual patients with COPD were analysed. The pooled in-hospital mortality rate was 6.2%, pooled 30-, 90- and 365-day post-discharge mortality rates were 1.8%, 5.5% and 10.9%, respectively, and pooled 30-, 90- and 365-day hospital readmission rates were 7.1%, 12.6% and 32.1%, respectively, with noticeable variability between studies and countries. Strongest predictors of mortality and hospital readmission included noninvasive mechanical ventilation and a history of two or more ECOPD-related hospitalisations <12 months prior to the index event.

Conclusions

This IPDMA stresses the poor outcomes and high heterogeneity of ECOPD-related hospitalisation across the world. Whilst global standardisation of the management and follow-up of ECOPD-related hospitalisation should be at the heart of future implementation research, policy makers should focus on reimbursing evidence-based therapies that decrease (recurrent) ECOPD.

Risk factors of in-hospital mortality and discriminating capacity of NIVO score in exacerbations of COPD requiring noninvasive ventilation

BACKGROUND

Noninvasive mechanical ventilation (NIV) is recommended as the initial mode of ventilation to treat acute respiratory failure in patients with AECOPD. The Noninvasive Ventilation Outcomes (NIVO) score has been proposed to evaluate the prognosis in patients with AECOPD requiring assisted NIV. However, it is not validated in Chinese patients.

METHODS

We used data from the MAGNET AECOPD Registry study, which is a prospective, noninterventional, multicenter, real-world study conducted between September 2017 and July 2021 in China. Data for the potential risk factors of mortality were collected and the NIVO score was calculated, and the in-hospital mortality was evaluated using the NIVO risk score.

RESULTS

A total of 1164 patients were included in the study, and 57 patients (4.9%) died during their hospital stay. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that age ≥75 years, DBP <60 mmHg, Glasgow Coma Scale ≤14, anemia and BUN >7 mmol/L were independent predictors of in-hospital mortality. The in-hospital mortality was associated with an increase in the risk level of NIVO score and the difference was statistically significant (p < .001). The NIVO risk score showed an acceptable accuracy for predicting the in-hospital mortality in AECOPD requiring assisted NIV (AUC: 0.657, 95% CI: 0.584-0.729, p < .001).

CONCLUSION

Our findings identified predictors of mortality in patients with AECOPD receiving NIV, providing useful information to identify severe patients and guide the management of AECOPD. The NIVO score showed an acceptable predictive value for AECOPD receiving NIV in Chinese patients, and additional studies are needed to develop and validate predictive scores based on specific populations.

Association Between Rome Classification Among Hospitalized Patients With COPD Exacerbations and Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Recently, the Rome proposal updated the definition of exacerbation of COPD (ECOPD). However, such severity grade has not yet demonstrated intermediate-term clinical relevance.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What is the association between the Rome severity classification and short-term and intermediate-term clinical outcomes?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We retrospectively grouped hospitalized patients with ECOPD according to the Rome severity classification (ie, mild, moderate, severe). Baseline, clinical, microbiologic, gas analysis, and laboratory variables were collected. In addition, data about the length of hospital stay and mortality (in-hospital and a follow-up time line from 6 months until 3 years) were assessed.

RESULTS

Of the 347 hospitalized patients, 39% were categorized as mild, 31% were categorized as moderate, and 30% were categorized as severe. Overall, patients with severe ECOPD had an extended length of hospital stay. Although in-hospital mortality was similar among groups, patients with severe ECOPD presented a worse prognosis in all follow-up time points. The Kaplan-Meier curves show the role of the severe classification in the cumulative survival at 1 and 3 years (Gehan-Breslow-Wilcoxon test, P = .032 and P = .004, respectively). The multivariable Cox regression analysis showed a higher risk of death at 1 year when patients presented a severe (hazard ratio, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.49-2.65) or moderate grade (hazard ratio, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.10-1.97) compared with a mild grade. Older patients (aged ≥ 80 years), patients requiring long-term oxygen therapy, or patients reporting previous ECOPD episodes had a higher mortality risk. A BMI between 25 and 29 kg/m2 was associated with a lower risk.

INTERPRETATION

The Rome classification makes it possible to discriminate patients with a worse prognosis (severe or moderate) until a 3-year follow-up.

Acute COPD exacerbation treatment with noninvasive ventilation

The establishment of a guideline for long-term noninvasive ventilation treatment (LTH-NIV) of acute hypercapnic exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) requiring acute ventilation has proven elusive. Most studies thus far have shown no mortality benefit of long-term noninvasive ventilation treatment. Using retrospective analysis of the data of our patients (n = 143) recruited from 2012 to 2019, we aimed to compare patients discharged with and without long-term noninvasive ventilation. The follow-up results showed no significant difference (p = 0.233) between the groups [LTH-NIV (n = 83); non-NIV (n = 60)] regarding readmission due to clinical worsening. However, the first- and second-year survival rates were 82% and 72%, respectively, in the LTH-NIV group and significantly different (p = 0.023) from 67 and 55% in the non-NIV group. The statistical models showed a significant mortality risk for the non-NIV group, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 2.82 (1.31; 6.03). To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to demonstrate the mortality benefit of long-term NIV therapy for patients with AECOPD under real-world conditions.

Low diastolic blood pressure and adverse outcomes in inpatients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

Although intensively studied in patients with cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), the prognostic value of diastolic blood pressure (DBP) has little been elucidated in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). This study aimed to reveal the prognostic value of DBP in AECOPD patients.

METHODS

Inpatients with AECOPD were prospectively enrolled from 10 medical centers in China between September 2017 and July 2021. DBP was measured on admission. The primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality; invasive mechanical ventilation and intensive care unit (ICU) admission were secondary outcomes. Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) and multivariable Cox regressions were used to identify independent prognostic factors and calculate the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for adverse outcomes.

RESULTS

Among 13,633 included patients with AECOPD, 197 (1.45%) died during their hospital stay. Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed that low DBP on admission (<70 mmHg) was associated with increased risk of in-hospital mortality (HR = 2.16, 95% CI: 1.53-3.05, Z = 4.37, P <0.01), invasive mechanical ventilation (HR = 1.65, 95% CI: 1.32-2.05, Z = 19.67, P <0.01), and ICU admission (HR = 1.45, 95% CI: 1.24-1.69, Z = 22.08, P <0.01) in the overall cohort. Similar findings were observed in subgroups with or without CVDs, except for invasive mechanical ventilation in the subgroup with CVDs. When DBP was further categorized in 5-mmHg increments from <50 mmHg to ≥100 mmHg, and 75 to <80 mmHg was taken as reference, HRs for in-hospital mortality increased almost linearly with decreased DBP in the overall cohort and subgroups of patients with CVDs; higher DBP was not associated with the risk of in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSION

Low on-admission DBP, particularly <70 mmHg, was associated with an increased risk of adverse outcomes among inpatients with AECOPD, with or without CVDs, which may serve as a convenient predictor of poor prognosis in these patients.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trail Registry, No. ChiCTR2100044625.

Noninvasive positive pressure in acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIV) is standard of care for patients with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). We review the most current evidence and highlight areas of uncertainty and ongoing research. We highlight key concepts for the clinician caring for patients with AECOPD which require NIV.

RECENT FINDINGS

Implementation of NIV in AECOPD is not uniform in spite of the evidence and guidelines. Initiation of NIV should be done early and following protocols. Low-intensity NIV remains the standard of care, although research and guidelines are evaluating higher intensity NIV. Scores to predict NIV failure continue to be refined to allow early identification and interventions. Several areas of uncertainty remain, among them are interventions to improve tolerance, length of support and titration and nutritional support during NIV.

SUMMARY

The use of NIV in AECOPD is the standard of care as it has demonstrated benefits in several patient-centered outcomes. Current developments and research is related to the implementation and adjustment of NIV.

Uptake of Clinical Prognostic Tools in COPD Exacerbations Requiring Hospitalisation

Clinical prognostic tools are used to objectively predict outcomes in many fields of medicine. Whilst over 400 have been developed for use in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), only a minority have undergone full external validation and just one, the DECAF score, has undergone an implementation study supporting use in clinical practice. Little is known about how such tools are used in the UK. We distributed surveys at two time points, in 2017 and 2019, to hospitals included in the Royal College of Physicians of London national COPD secondary care audit program. The survey assessed the use of prognostic tools in routine care of hospitalized COPD patients. Hospital response rates were 71/196 in 2017 and 72/196 in 2019. The use of the DECAF and PEARL scores more than doubled in decisions about unsupported discharge (7%-15.3%), admission avoidance (8.1%-17%) and readmission avoidance (4.8%-13.1%); it more than tripled (8.8%-27.8%) in decisions around hospital-at-home or early supported discharge schemes. In other areas, routine use of clinical prognostic tools was uncommon. In palliative care decisions, the use of the Gold Standards Framework Prognostic Indicator Guidance fell (5.6%-1.4%). In 2017, 43.7% of hospitals used at least one clinical prognostic tool in routine COPD care, increasing to 52.1% in 2019. Such tools can help challenge prognostic pessimism and improve care. To integrate these further into routine clinical care, future research should explore current barriers to their use and focus on implementation studies.Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15412555.2021.1959540.