The vasoactive inotropic score (VIS) is calculated as a weighted sum of all administered vasopressor and inotropic medications and quantifies the amount of pharmacological cardiovascular support in patients with the most severe combined cardiopulmonary failure supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). This study evaluated (1) whether VIS prior to the initiation of ECMO is an independent predictor of survival in these patients and (2) whether VIS might guide the selection of the appropriate extracorporeal cannulation modality (Veno-Venous ‘V-V’ or Veno-VenoArterial ‘V-VA’). In this study, 39 V-VA and 182 V-V ECMO runs were retrospectively analyzed. VIS immediately prior to ECMO initiation (pre-ECMO) was 40 (10/113) in all patients, 30 (10/80) in patients with V-V ECMO and 207 (60/328) in patients with V-VA ECMO. Pre-ECMO VIS was an independent predictor of survival in univariate (AUC = 0.68, p = 0.001) and multi-variable analyses (p = 0.02). Pre-ECMO VIS was clearly associated with mortality (p = 0.001) in V-V ECMO group; however, V-VA ECMO disrupted this association (p = 0.18). Therefore, in conjunction with echocardiography, VIS might assist in selecting the appropriate ECMO cannulation strategy as patients with a pre-ECMO VIS ≥ 61.4 had significantly lower odds of survival compared to those with lower VIS.
Background Sepsis-3 definition uses SOFA score to discriminate sepsis from uncomplicated infection, replacing SIRS criteria that were criticized for being inaccurate. Eligibility of sepsis-3 criteria for sepsis diagnosis and the applied validation methodology using mortality as endpoint are topic of ongoing debate. We assessed the impact of different criteria on sepsis diagnosis in our ICU and devised a mathematical approach for mortality-based validation of sepsis criteria. As infectious status is often unclear at clinical deterioration, we integrated non-infected patients into analysis. Methods Suspected infection, SOFA and SIRS were captured for an ICU cohort of a university center over one year. For raw scores (SIRS/SOFA) and sepsis criteria (SIRS�2/SOFA�2/ SOFA_change�2) frequencies and associations with in-hospital mortality were assessed. Using a mathematical approach, we estimated the correlation between sepsis and in-hospital mortality serving as reference for evaluation of observed mortality correlations of sepsis criteria. Results Of 791 patients, 369 (47%) were infected and 422 (53%) non-infected, with an in-hospital mortality of 39% and 15%. SIRS�2 indicated sepsis in 90% of infected patients, SOFA�2 in 99% and SOFA_change�2 in 77%. In non-infected patients, SIRS, SOFA and SOFA_ change were �2 in 78%, 88% and 58%. In AUROC analyses neither SOFA nor SIRS
Background Sepsis is the leading cause of death in the intensive care unit (ICU). Expediting its diagnosis, largely determined by clinical assessment, improves survival. Predictive and explanatory modelling of sepsis in the critically ill commonly bases both outcome definition and predictions on clinical criteria for consensus definitions of sepsis, leading to circularity. As a remedy, we collected ground truth labels for sepsis. Methods In the Ground Truth for Sepsis Questionnaire (GTSQ), senior attending physicians in the ICU documented daily their opinion on each patient’s condition regarding sepsis as a five-category working diagnosis and nine related items. Working diagnosis groups were described and compared and their SOFA-scores analyzed with a generalized linear mixed model. Agreement and discriminatory performance measures for clinical criteria of sepsis and GTSQ labels as reference class were derived. Results We analyzed 7291 questionnaires and 761 complete encounters from the first survey year. Editing rates for all items were > 90%, and responses were consistent with current understanding of critical illness pathophysiology, including sepsis pathogenesis. Interrater agreement for presence and absence of sepsis was almost perfect but only slight for suspected infection. ICU mortality was 19.5% in encounters with SIRS as the “worst” working diagnosis compared to 5.9% with sepsis and 5.9% with severe sepsis without differences in admission and maximum SOFA. Compared to sepsis, proportions of GTSQs with SIRS plus acute organ dysfunction were equal and macrocirculatory abnormalities higher (p < 0.0001). SIRS proportionally ranked above sepsis in daily assessment of illness severity (p < 0.0001). Separate analyses of neurosurgical referrals revealed similar differences. Discriminatory performance of Sepsis-1/2 and Sepsis-3 compared to GTSQ labels was similar with sensitivities around 70% and specificities 92%. Essentially no difference between the prevalence of SIRS and SOFA ≥ 2 yielded sensitivities and specificities for detecting sepsis onset close to 55% and 83%, respectively. Conclusions GTSQ labels are a valid measure of sepsis in the ICU. They reveal suspicion of infection as an unclear clinical concept and refute an illness severity hierarchy in the SIRS-sepsis-severe sepsis spectrum. Ground truth challenges the accuracy of Sepsis-1/2 and Sepsis-3 in detecting sepsis onset. It is an indispensable intermediate step towards advancing diagnosis and therapy in the ICU and, potentially, other health care settings.
Data on sepsis in patients with a subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) are scarce. We assessed the impact of different sepsis criteria on the outcome in an SAH cohort. Adult patients admitted to our ICU with a spontaneous SAH between 11/2014 and 11/2018 were retrospectively included. In patients developing an infection, different criteria for sepsis diagnosis (Sepsis-1, Sepsis-3_original, Sepsis-3_modified accounting for SAH-specific therapy, alternative sepsis criteria compiled of consensus conferences) were applied and their impact on functional outcome using the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) on hospital discharge and in-hospital mortality was evaluated. Of 270 SAH patients, 129 (48%) developed an infection. Depending on the underlying criteria, the incidence of sepsis and septic shock ranged between 21–46% and 9–39%. In multivariate logistic regression, the Sepsis-1 criteria were not associated with the outcome. The Sepsis-3 criteria were not associated with the functional outcome, but in shock with mortality. Alternative sepsis criteria were associated with mortality for sepsis and in shock with mortality and the functional outcome. While Sepsis-1 criteria were irrelevant for the outcome in SAH patients, septic shock, according to the Sepsis-3 criteria, adversely impacted survival. This impact was higher for the modified Sepsis-3 criteria, accounting for SAH-specific treatment. Modified Sepsis-3 and alternative sepsis criteria diagnosed septic conditions of a higher relevance for outcomes in patients with an SAH.
Objectives The aim of this study was to establish quantitative CT (qCT) parameters for pathophysiological understanding and clinical use in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The most promising parameter is introduced. Materials and methods 28 intubated patients with ARDS obtained a conventional CT scan in end-expiratory breathhold within the first 48 hours after admission to intensive care unit (ICU). Following manual segmentation, 137 volume- and lung weight-associated qCT parameters were correlated with 71 clinical parameters such as blood gases, applied ventilation pressures, pulse contour cardiac output measurements and established status and prognosis scores (SOFA, SAPS II). Results Of all examined qCT parameters, excess lung weight (ELW), i.e. the difference between a patient’s current lung weight and the virtual lung weight of a healthy person at the same height, displayed the most significant results. ELW correlated significantly with the amount of inflated lung tissue [%] (p<0.0001; r = -0.66) and was closely associated with the amount of extravascular lung water (EVLW) (p<0.0001; r = 0.72). More substantially than the oxygenation index (PaO2/FiO2) or any other clinical parameter it correlated with the patients’ mean SOFA- (p<0.0001, r = 0.69) and SAPS II-Score (p = 0.0005, r = 0.62). Patients who did not survive intensive care treatment displayed higher values of ELW in the initial CT scans. Conclusions ELW could serve as a non-invasive method to quantify the amount of pulmonary oedema. It might serve as an early radiological marker of severity in patients with ARDS.
Background Intestinal ischemia is a common complication with obscure pathophysiology in critically ill patients. Since insufficient delivery of oxygen is discussed, we investigated the influence of oxygen delivery, hemoglobin, arterial oxygen saturation, cardiac index and the systemic vascular resistance index on the development of intestinal ischemia. Furthermore, we evaluated the predictive power of elevated lactate levels for the diagnosis of intestinal ischemia. Methods In a retrospective case-control study data (mean oxygen delivery, minimum oxygen delivery, systemic vascular resistance index) of critical ill patients from 02/2009–07/2017 were analyzed using a proportional hazard model. General model fit and linearity were tested by likelihood ratio tests. The components of oxygen delivery (hemoglobin, arterial oxygen saturation and cardiac index) were individually tested in models. Results 59 out of 874 patients developed intestinal ischemia. A mean oxygen delivery less than 250ml/min/m2 (LRT vs. null model: p = 0.018; LRT for non-linearity: p = 0.012) as well as a minimum oxygen delivery less than 400ml/min/m2 (LRT vs null model: p = 0.016; LRT for linearity: p = 0.019) were associated with increased risk of the development of intestinal ischemia. We found no significant influence of hemoglobin, arterial oxygen saturation, cardiac index or systemic vascular resistance index. Receiver operating characteristics analysis for elevated lactate levels, pH, CO2 and central venous saturation was poor with an area under the receiver operating characteristic of 0.5324, 0.52, 0.6017 and 0.6786. Conclusion There was a significant correlation for mean and minimum oxygen delivery with the incidence of intestinal ischemia for values below 250ml/min/m2 respectively 400ml/min/m2. Neither hemoglobin, arterial oxygen saturation, cardiac index, systemic vascular resistance index nor elevated lactate levels could be identified as individual risk factors.
Viral pneumonia is frequently complicated by bacterial co- or superinfection (c/s) with adverse effects on patients’ outcomes. However, the incidence of c/s and its impact on the outcomes of patients might be dependent on the type of viral pneumonia. We performed a retrospective observational study in patients with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia (CP) or influenza pneumonia (IP) from 01/2009 to 04/2022, investigating the incidence of c/s using a competing risk model and its impact on mortality in these patients in a tertiary referral center using multivariate logistic regressions. Co-infection was defined as pulmonary pathogenic bacteria confirmed in tracheal aspirate or bronchoalveolar lavage within 48 h after hospitalization. Superinfection was defined as pulmonary pathogenic bacteria detected in tracheal aspirate or bronchoalveolar lavage 48 h after hospitalization. We examined 114 patients with CP and 76 patients with IP. Pulmonary bacterial co-infection was detected in 15 (13.2%), and superinfection was detected in 50 (43.9%) of CP patients. A total of 5 (6.6%) co-infections (p = 0.2269) and 28 (36.8%) superinfections (p = 0.3687) were detected in IP patients. The overall incidence of c/s did not differ between CP and IP patients, and c/s was not an independent predictor for mortality in a study cohort with a high disease severity. We found a significantly higher probability of superinfection for patients with CP compared to patients with IP (p = 0.0017).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.