Objectives. The NUTRIC (nutrition risk in the critically ill) score and the modified NUTRIC score are two scoring systems that show the nutritional risk status and severity of acute disease of patients. The only difference between them is the examination of interleukin-6 (IL-6) level. The aim of this study was to investigate whether or not the NUTRIC score is superior to the mNUTRIC score in the prediction of mortality of patients with COVID-19 followed up in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Material and Method. This retrospective study included 322 patients followed up in ICU with a diagnosis of COVID-19. A record was made of demographic data, laboratory values, clinical results, and mortality status. All the data of the patients were compared between high and low variations of the NUTRIC score and the mNUTRIC score. Results. A high NUTRIC score was determined in 62 patients and a high mNUTRIC score in 86 patients. The need for invasive mechanical ventilation, the use of vasopressors in ICU, the development of acute kidney injury, and mortality rates were statistically significantly higher in the patients with high NUTRIC and high mNUTRIC scores than in those with low scores ( p  = 0.0001 for all). The AUC values were 0.791 for high NUTRIC score and 0.786 for high mNUTRIC score ( p  = 0.0001 for both). No statistically significant difference was determined between the two scoring systems. Conclusion. Although the NUTRIC score was seen to be superior to the mNUTRIC score, no statistically significant difference was determined. Therefore, when IL-6 cannot be examined, the mNUTRIC score can be considered safe and effective for the prediction of mortality in COVID-19 patients.

Aim: The Delta Neutrophil Index (DNI) shows the ratio of immature granulocytes in the circulation and increases in conditions of infection and inflammation. The aim of this study was to investigate the suitability of using DNI as a prognostic marker of mortality in COVID-19 patients in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Material and Method: This retrospective study included 316 patients followed up in the ICU with a diagnosis of COVID-19. A record was made for each patient of demographic data, laboratory values, clinical results and mortality status. All the data of the patients were evaluated and compared between the two groups of surviving and non-surviving patients. Results: Mortality developed in 181 (57.27%) patients. The Glasgow Coma Scale score was lower and the APACHE II and SOFA scores were higher in the mortality group than in the surviving group (p<0.001 for all). The creatinine, procalcitonin, white blood cell, neutrophil count, neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, lactate, interleukin -6 and C-reactive protein values were statistically significantly higher in the mortality group. In the comparison of DNI between the groups, a statistically significant difference was only determined on day 3 (p=0.026). For the DNI examined on day 3, the AUC value was 0.574 and the cutoff value was 1.35% for the prediction of mortality. Conclusion: DNI, which is low cost and simple to use, can be considered safe for use in the prediction of mortality of ICU patients diagnosed with COVID-19. The monitoring of increasing or decreasing trends by keeping regular records can be considered important for the clinical course.