Systemic inflammatory response syndrome, sequential organ failure assessment, and quick sequential organ failure assessment: more pieces needed in the sepsis puzzle

Evaluation of quick sequential organ failure scores in dogs with severe sepsis and septic shock

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the prognostic utility of the quick sequential organ failure assessment score in dogs with severe sepsis and septic shock presenting to an emergency service, and evaluate the clinical value of the quick sequential organ failure assessment score to predict severe sepsis and septic shock.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The quick sequential organ failure assessment score was calculated by evaluating respiratory rate (>22 breaths per minute), arterial systolic blood pressure (≤100 mmHg) and altered mentation. The quick sequential organ failure assessment scores with respiratory rate cut-offs of greater than 22, greater than 30 and greater than 40 were compared. Cases were defined as dogs presented to the emergency room and met at least 2 systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria, had documented infection, and at least one organ dysfunction. A control population of dogs included animals with non-infectious systemic inflammatory response syndrome.

RESULTS

Forty-five dogs with severe sepsis and septic shock and 45 dogs with non-infectious systemic inflammatory response syndrome were included in the final analysis. The quick sequential organ failure assessment provided poor discrimination between survivors and non-survivors for severe sepsis and septic shock (area under receiving operating characteristic curve, 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.35 to 0.67). Discrimination remained poor when quick sequential organ failure assessment greater than 30 and quick sequential organ failure assessment greater than 40 scores were calculated (area under receiving operating characteristic curve, 0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.39 to 0.72, and 0.54; 95% confidence interval, 0.36 to 0.71). The quick sequential organ failure assessment of at least 2, quick sequential organ failure assessment greater than 30 of at least 2 and quick sequential organ failure assessment greater than 40 of at least 2 produced sensitivity and specificity to detect severe sepsis and septic shock of 66.7% and 64.5%, 62.2% and 71.1%, 44.4% and 80%, respectively.

CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Scoring systems utilised in emergency rooms should have high sensitivity to reduce missed sepsis cases and treatment delays. The use of the quick sequential organ failure assessment for severe sepsis and septic shock demonstrated poor mortality prediction and low sensitivity to detect canine patients with severe sepsis and septic shock and should not be used alone when screening for sepsis.

Lactate-enhanced-qSOFA (LqSOFA) score is superior to the other four rapid scoring tools in predicting in-hospital mortality rate of the sepsis patients

Background

The rising prevalence of early therapy for sepsis has led to the demand for rapid risk-stratification tools that can estimate the risk of in-hospital mortality for sepsis patients and the need for intensive care unit (ICU) admission. A robust risk-stratification tool is crucial for in-time sepsis treatment. This study aimed to compare the abilities of five rapid scoring systems, i.e., LqSOFA score, qSOFA score, SIRS, MEDS, and MEWS, in predicting the mortality in hospital and ICU admission for sepsis patients.

Methods

A retrospective observational clinical study was conducted in West China Hospital. Our cases included all patients admitted to the hospital with a diagnosis of sepsis (sepsis-3). We calculated five rapid prediction scores for the enrolled cases. We then compared each rapid score’s ability to predict in-hospital mortality and ICU admission.

Results

A total of 821 of mixed sepsis patients by sepsis-3 definition were included. The all-cause hospital mortality rate was 21.1%. The LqSOFA score presented the most significant discrimination with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.751. The AUC of the LqSOFA score for mortality in the hospital was significantly higher than qSOFA (AUC 0.717), SIRS (AUC 0.704), MEDS (AUC 0.670), and MEWS (AUC 0.685).

Conclusions

LqSOFA is a superior prognostic tool for predicting mortality in the hospital. It may provide more exact information for hospital mortality than the other 4 rapid scores in treating sepsis patients.

Epidemiology of Sepsis-3 in a sub-district of Beijing: secondary analysis of a population-based database

BACKGROUND

With the publication of Sepsis-3 definition, epidemiological data based on Sepsis-3 definition from middle-income countries including China are scarce, which prohibits understanding of the disease burden of this newly defined syndrome in these settings. The purpose of this study was to describe incidence and outcome of Sepsis-3 in Yuetan sub-district of Beijing and to estimate the incidence rate of Sepsis-3 in China.

METHODS

The medical records of all adult residents hospitalized from July 1, 2012 to June 30, 2014 in Yuetan sub-district of Beijing were reviewed. Patients with sepsis-3 and severe sepsis/septic shock were identified. The incidence rates and mortality rate of sepsis-3 and sepsis/septic shock were calculated, incidence rates and in-hospital mortality rates were normalized to the population distribution in the 2010 National Census. Population incidence rate and case fatality rate between sexes were compared with the Z test, as the data conformed to Poisson distribution.

RESULTS

Of the 21,191 hospitalized patients, 935 patients were diagnosed with Sepsis-3, and 498 cases met severe sepsis/septic shock criteria. The crude annual incidence rate of Sepsis-3 in Yuetan sub-district was 363 cases per 100,000 population, corresponding to standardized incidence rates of 236 cases per 100,000 population per year, respectively. The overall case fatality rate of Sepsis-3 was 32.0%, the crude population mortality rates of Sepsis-3 was 116 cases per 100,000 population per year, the standardized mortality rate was 67 cases per 100,000 population per year, corresponding to a speculative extrapolation of 700,437 deaths in China. The incidence rate and mortality rate of Sepsis-3 were significantly higher in males, elderly people, and patients with more comorbidities. The 62.1% of patients with Sepsis-3 had community-acquired infections, compared with 75.3% of infected patients without Sepsis-3 (P < 0.001). The most common infection in patients with Sepsis-3 was lower respiratory tract infection. When compared with patients with Sepsis-3, patients diagnosed as severe sepsis/septic shock were more likely to have higher case fatality rate (53.4% vs. 32.0%, P < 0.001) CONCLUSIONS:: This study found the standardized incidence rate of 236 cases per 100,000 person-year for Sepsis-3, which was more common in males and elderly population. This corresponded to about 2.5 million new cases of Sepsis-3 per year, resulting in more than 700,000 deaths in China.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02285257, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT02285257.

Accuracy of qSOFA for the diagnosis of sepsis-3: a secondary analysis of a population-based cohort study

Background

We aimed to evaluate the accuracy of quick Sequential (sepsis-related) Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) for the diagnosis of sepsis-3, and to analyze the prognosis of infected patients in wards over-diagnosed with qSOFA but missed by sepsis-3, and those missed by qSOFA but in accordance with sepsis-3 criteria. We also intended to validate the performance of qSOFA as one predictor of outcome in patients with suspicion of infection.

Methods

We reviewed the medical records of 1,716 adult patients with infection who were hospitalized from July 1^st, 2012 to June 30^th, 2014 in the Yuetan subdistrict of Beijing, China. Based on the sepsis-3 criteria and qSOFA score proposed by the Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock, these patients were categorized into four groups: qSOFA(-)sepsis(-), qSOFA(+)sepsis(-), qSOFA(-)sepsis(+), and qSOFA(+)sepsis(+). Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to determine the independent risk factors for in-hospital mortality. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) of the qSOFA(+) group were compared with the sepsis(+) group for in-hospital mortality, ICU admission, and invasive ventilation.

Results

Among the 1,716 patients with infection, there were 935 patients (54.5%) with sepsis, and 640 patients (37.3%) with qSOFA ≥2. There were 610 patients in the qSOFA(-)sepsis(-) group, 171 in the qSOFA(+)sepsis(-) group, 466 in the qSOFA(-)sepsis(+) group, and 469 in the qSOFA(+)sepsis(+) group. In the logistic regression analysis, increasing age, bedridden status, and malignancy were all independent risk factors of hospital mortality. Sepsis and qSOFA ≥2 were also independent risk factors of hospital mortality, with an adjusted OR of 3.85 (95% CI: 2.70-5.50) and 13.92 (95% CI: 9.87-16.93) respectively. qSOFA had a sensitivity of 50.2% and a specificity of 78.1% for sepsis-3. The false-positive [qSOFA(+)sepsis(-)] group had 38 patients (22.2%) die during hospitalization, and an adjusted OR of 9.20 (95% CI: 4.86-17.38). In addition, the false-negative [qSOFA(-)sepsis(+)] group had a hospital mortality rate of 7.3% (34/466) and an adjusted OR of 2.59 (95% CI: 1.39-4.83). In comparison, patients meeting neither qSOFA nor sepsis criteria had the lowest hospital mortality [2.6% (16/610)], whereas patients with both qSOFA ≥2 and sepsis had the highest hospital mortality [56.5% (265/469)], with an adjusted OR of 42.02 (95% CI: 24.31-72.64). The discrimination of in-hospital mortality using qSOFA (AUROC, 0.846; 95% CI, 0.824-0.868) was greater compared with sepsis-3 criteria (AUROC, 0.834; 95% CI, 0.805-0.863; P<0.001).

Conclusions

In our analysis, the sensitivity(Se) of qSOFA for the diagnosis of sepsis was lower, and qSOFA score ≥2 might identify a group of patients at a higher risk of mortality, regardless of being septic or not.