The utility of scoring systems in critically ill cirrhotic patients admitted to a general intensive care unit

Purpose: This study aimed to establish which prognostic scoring tool provides the greatest discriminative ability when assessing critically ill cirrhotic patients in a general intensive care unit (ICU) setting.<p></p> Methods: This was a 12-month, single-centered prospective cohort study performed in a general, nontransplant ICU. Forty clinical and demographic variables were collected on admission to calculate 8 prospective scoring tools. Patients were followed up to obtain ICU and inhospital mortality. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to determine the discriminative ability of the scores. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify any independent predictors of mortality in these patients. The incorporation of any significant variables into the scoring tools was assessed.<p></p> Results: Fifty-nine cirrhotic patients were admitted over the study period, with an ICU mortality of 31%. All scores other than the renal-specific Acute Kidney Injury Network score had similar discriminative abilities, producing area under the curves of between 0.70 and 0.76. None reached the clinically applicable level of 0.8. The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score was the best performing score. Lactate and ascites were individual predictors of ICU mortality with statistically significant odds ratios of 1.69 and 5.91, respectively. When lactate was incorporated into the Child-Pugh score, its prognostic accuracy increased to a clinically applicable level (area under the curve, 0.86).<p></p> Conclusions: This investigation suggests that established prognostic scoring systems should be used with caution when applied to the general, nontransplant ICU as compared to specialist centers. Our data suggest that serum arterial lactate may improve the prognostic ability of these scores

Effect of a machine learning-based severe sepsis prediction algorithm on patient survival and hospital length of stay: a randomised clinical trial.

IntroductionSeveral methods have been developed to electronically monitor patients for severe sepsis, but few provide predictive capabilities to enable early intervention; furthermore, no severe sepsis prediction systems have been previously validated in a randomised study. We tested the use of a machine learning-based severe sepsis prediction system for reductions in average length of stay and in-hospital mortality rate.MethodsWe conducted a randomised controlled clinical trial at two medical-surgical intensive care units at the University of California, San Francisco Medical Center, evaluating the primary outcome of average length of stay, and secondary outcome of in-hospital mortality rate from December 2016 to February 2017. Adult patients (18+) admitted to participating units were eligible for this factorial, open-label study. Enrolled patients were assigned to a trial arm by a random allocation sequence. In the control group, only the current severe sepsis detector was used; in the experimental group, the machine learning algorithm (MLA) was also used. On receiving an alert, the care team evaluated the patient and initiated the severe sepsis bundle, if appropriate. Although participants were randomly assigned to a trial arm, group assignments were automatically revealed for any patients who received MLA alerts.ResultsOutcomes from 75 patients in the control and 67 patients in the experimental group were analysed. Average length of stay decreased from 13.0 days in the control to 10.3 days in the experimental group (p=0.042). In-hospital mortality decreased by 12.4 percentage points when using the MLA (p=0.018), a relative reduction of 58.0%. No adverse events were reported during this trial.ConclusionThe MLA was associated with improved patient outcomes. This is the first randomised controlled trial of a sepsis surveillance system to demonstrate statistically significant differences in length of stay and in-hospital mortality.Trial registrationNCT03015454

Assessment of Clinical Criteria for Sepsis For the Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3)

IMPORTANCE: The Third International Consensus Definitions Task Force defined sepsis as “life-threatening organ dysfunction due to a dysregulated host response to infection.” The performance of clinical criteria for this sepsis definition is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the validity of clinical criteria to identify patients with suspected infection who are at risk of sepsis. DESIGN, SETTINGS AND POPULATION: Among 1.3 million electronic health record encounters from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2012, at 12 hospitals in southwestern Pennsylvania, we identified those with suspected infection in whom to compare criteria. Confirmatory analyses were performed in 4 data sets of 706 399 out-of-hospital and hospital encounters at 165 US and non-US hospitals ranging from January 1, 2008, until December 31, 2013. EXPOSURES: Sequential [Sepsis-related] Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria, Logistic Organ Dysfunction System (LODS) score, and a new model derived using multivariable logistic regression in a split sample, the quick Sequential [Sepsis-related] Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score (range, 0-3 points, with 1 point each for systolic hypotension [≤100 mm Hg], tachypnea [≥22/min], or altered mentation). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: For construct validity, pairwise agreement was assessed. For predictive validity, the discrimination for outcomes (primary: in-hospital mortality; secondary: in-hospital mortality or intensive care unit [ICU] length of stay ≥3 days) more common in sepsis than uncomplicated infection was determined. Results were expressed as the fold change in outcome over deciles of baseline risk of death and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). RESULTS: In the primary cohort, 148 907 encounters had suspected infection (n = 74 453 derivation; n = 74 454 validation), of whom 6347 (4%) died. Among ICU encounters in the validation cohort (n = 7932 with suspected infection, of whom 1289 [16%] died), the predictive validity for in-hospital mortality was lower for SIRS (AUROC = 0.64; 95% CI, 0.62-0.66) and qSOFA (AUROC = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.64-0.68) vs SOFA (AUROC = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.73-0.76; P < .001 for both) or LODS (AUROC = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.73-0.76; P < .001 for both). Among non-ICU encounters in the validation cohort (n = 66 522 with suspected infection, of whom 1886 [3%] died), qSOFA had predictive validity (AUROC = 0.81; 95% CI, 0.80-0.82) that was greater than SOFA (AUROC = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.78-0.80; P < .001) and SIRS (AUROC = 0.76; 95% CI, 0.75-0.77; P < .001). Relative to qSOFA scores lower than 2, encounters with qSOFA scores of 2 or higher had a 3- to 14-fold increase in hospital mortality across baseline risk deciles. Findings were similar in external data sets and for the secondary outcome. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among ICU encounters with suspected infection, the predictive validity for in-hospital mortality of SOFA was not significantly different than the more complex LODS but was statistically greater than SIRS and qSOFA, supporting its use in clinical criteria for sepsis. Among encounters with suspected infection outside of the ICU, the predictive validity for in-hospital mortality of qSOFA was statistically greater than SOFA and SIRS, supporting its use as a prompt to consider possible sepsis

Real-Time Electronic Health Record Mortality Prediction During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Prospective Cohort Study

Background: The SARS-CoV-2 virus has infected millions of people, overwhelming critical care resources in some regions. Many plans for rationing critical care resources during crises are based on the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score. The COVID-19 pandemic created an emergent need to develop and validate a novel electronic health record (EHR)-computable tool to predict mortality. Research Questions: To rapidly develop, validate, and implement a novel real-time mortality score for the COVID-19 pandemic that improves upon SOFA. Study Design and Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study of a regional health system with 12 hospitals in Colorado between March 2020 and July 2020. All patients >14 years old hospitalized during the study period without a do not resuscitate order were included. Patients were stratified by the diagnosis of COVID-19. From this cohort, we developed and validated a model using stacked generalization to predict mortality using data widely available in the EHR by combining five previously validated scores and additional novel variables reported to be associated with COVID-19-specific mortality. We compared the area under the receiver operator curve (AUROC) for the new model to the SOFA score and the Charlson Comorbidity Index. Results: We prospectively analyzed 27,296 encounters, of which 1,358 (5.0%) were positive for SARS-CoV-2, 4,494 (16.5%) included intensive care unit (ICU)-level care, 1,480 (5.4%) included invasive mechanical ventilation, and 717 (2.6%) ended in death. The Charlson Comorbidity Index and SOFA scores predicted overall mortality with an AUROC of 0.72 and 0.90, respectively. Our novel score predicted overall mortality with AUROC 0.94. In the subset of patients with COVID-19, we predicted mortality with AUROC 0.90, whereas SOFA had AUROC of 0.85. Interpretation: We developed and validated an accurate, in-hospital mortality prediction score in a live EHR for automatic and continuous calculation using a novel model, that improved upon SOFA. Study Question: Can we improve upon the SOFA score for real-time mortality prediction during the COVID-19 pandemic by leveraging electronic health record (EHR) data? Results: We rapidly developed and implemented a novel yet SOFA-anchored mortality model across 12 hospitals and conducted a prospective cohort study of 27,296 adult hospitalizations, 1,358 (5.0%) of which were positive for SARS-CoV-2. The Charlson Comorbidity Index and SOFA scores predicted all-cause mortality with AUROCs of 0.72 and 0.90, respectively. Our novel score predicted mortality with AUROC 0.94. Interpretation: A novel EHR-based mortality score can be rapidly implemented to better predict patient outcomes during an evolving pandemic

Improved diagnosis and management of sepsis and bloodstream infection

Sepsis is a severe organ dysfunction triggered by infections, and a leading cause of hospitalization and death. Concurrent bloodstream infection (BSI) is common and around one third of sepsis patients have positive blood cultures. Prompt diagnosis and treatment is crucial, but there is a trade-off between the negative effects of over diagnosis and failure to recognize sepsis in time. The emerging crisis of antimicrobial resistance has made bacterial infections more difficult to treat, especially gram-negative pathogens such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa. The overall aim with this thesis was to improve diagnosis, assess the influence of time to antimicrobial treatment and explore prognostic bacterial virulence markers in sepsis and BSI. The papers are based on observational data from 7 cohorts of more than 100 000 hospital episodes. In addition, whole genome sequencing has been performed on approximately 800 invasive P. aeruginosa isolates collected from centers in Europe and Australia. Paper I showed that automated surveillance of sepsis incidence using the Sepsis-3 criteria is feasible in the non-ICU setting, with examples of how implementing this model generates continuous epidemiological data down to the ward level. This information can be used for directing resources and evaluating quality-of-care interventions. In Paper II, evidence is provided for using peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) to diagnose respiratory dysfunction in sepsis, proposing the novel thresholds 94% and 90% to get 1 and 2 SOFA points, respectively. This has important implications for improving sepsis diagnosis, especially when conventional arterial blood gas measurements are unavailable. Paper III verified that sepsis surveillance data can be utilized to develop machine learning screening tools to improve early identification of sepsis. A Bayesian network algorithm trained on routine electronic health record data predicted sepsis onset within 48 hours with better discrimination and earlier than conventional NEWS2 outside the ICU. The results suggested that screening may primarily be suited for the early admission period, which have broader implications also for other sepsis screening tools. Paper IV demonstrated that delays in antimicrobial treatment with in vitro pathogen coverage in BSI were associated with increased mortality after 12 hours from blood culture collection, but not at 1, 3, and 6 hours. This indicates a time window where clinicians should focus on the diagnostic workup, and proposes a target for rapid diagnostics of blood cultures. Finally, Paper V showed that the virulence genotype had some influence on mortality and septic shock in P. aeruginosa BSI, however, it was not a major prognostic determinant. Together these studies contribute to better understanding of the sepsis and BSI populations, and provide several suggestions to improve diagnosis and timing of treatment, with implications for clinical practice. Future works should focus on the implementation of sepsis surveillance, clinical trials of time to antimicrobial treatment and evaluating the prognostic importance of bacterial genotype data in larger populations from diverse infection sources and pathogens

Descriptors of Sepsis Using the Sepsis-3 Criteria: A Cohort Study in Critical Care Units Within the U.K. National Institute for Health Research Critical Care Health Informatics Collaborative

OBJECTIVES: To describe the epidemiology of sepsis in critical care by applying the Sepsis-3 criteria to electronic health records. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using electronic health records. SETTING: Ten ICUs from four U.K. National Health Service hospital trusts contributing to the National Institute for Health Research Critical Care Health Informatics Collaborative. PATIENTS: A total of 28,456 critical care admissions (14,332 emergency medical, 4,585 emergency surgical, and 9,539 elective surgical). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-nine thousand three hundred forty-three episodes of clinical deterioration were identified with a rise in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score of at least 2 points, of which 14,869 (50.7%) were associated with antibiotic escalation and thereby met the Sepsis-3 criteria for sepsis. A total of 4,100 episodes of sepsis (27.6%) were associated with vasopressor use and lactate greater than 2.0 mmol/L, and therefore met the Sepsis-3 criteria for septic shock. ICU mortality by source of sepsis was highest for ICU-acquired sepsis (23.7%; 95% CI, 21.9-25.6%), followed by hospital-acquired sepsis (18.6%; 95% CI, 17.5-19.9%), and community-acquired sepsis (12.9%; 95% CI, 12.1-13.6%) (p for comparison less than 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: We successfully operationalized the Sepsis-3 criteria to an electronic health record dataset to describe the characteristics of critical care patients with sepsis. This may facilitate sepsis research using electronic health record data at scale without relying on human coding