Underweight but not overweight is associated with excess mortality in septic ICU patients

Background Higher survival has been shown for overweight septic patients compared with normal or underweight patients in the past. This study aimed at investigating the management and outcome of septic ICU patients in different body mass index (BMI) categories in a large multicenter database. Methods In total, 16,612 patients of the eICU collaborative research database were included. Baseline characteristics and data on organ support were documented. Multilevel logistic regression analysis was performed to fit three sequential regression models for the binary primary outcome (ICU mortality) to evaluate the impact of the BMI categories: underweight (<18.5 kg/m2), normal weight (18.5 to < 25 kg/m2), overweight (25 to < 30 kg/m2) and obesity (≥ 30 kg/m2). Data were adjusted for patient level characteristics (model 2) as well as management strategies (model 3). Results Management strategies were similar across BMI categories. Underweight patients evidenced higher rates of ICU mortality. This finding persisted after adjusting in model 2 (aOR 1.54, 95% CI 1.15–2.06; p = 0.004) and model 3 (aOR 1.57, 95%CI 1.16–2.12; p = 0.003). No differences were found regarding ICU mortality between normal and overweight patients (aOR 0.93, 95%CI 0.81–1.06; p = 0.29). Obese patients evidenced a lower risk of ICU mortality compared to normal weight, a finding which persisted across all models (model 2: aOR 0.83, 95%CI 0.69–0.99; p = 0.04; model 3: aOR 0.82, 95%CI 0.68–0.98; p = 0.03). The protective effect of obesity and the negative effect of underweight were significant in individuals > 65 years only. Conclusion In this cohort, underweight was associated with a worse outcome, whereas obese patients evidenced lower mortality. Our analysis thus supports the thesis of the obesity paradox

Frailty's influence on 30-day mortality in old critically ill ICU patients: a bayesian analysis evaluating the clinical frailty scale.

INTRODUCTION: Frailty is widely acknowledged as influencing health outcomes among critically ill old patients. Yet, the traditional understanding of its impact has predominantly been through frequentist statistics. We endeavored to explore this association using Bayesian statistics aiming to provide a more nuanced understanding of this multifaceted relationship. METHODS: Our analysis incorporated a cohort of 10,363 older (median age 82 years) patients from three international prospective studies, with 30-day all-cause mortality as the primary outcome. We defined frailty as Clinical Frailty Scale ≥ 5. A hierarchical Bayesian logistic regression model was employed, adjusting for covariables, using a range of priors. An international steering committee of registry members reached a consensus on a minimal clinically important difference (MCID). RESULTS: In our study, the 30-day mortality was 43%, with rates of 38% in non-frail and 51% in frail groups. Post-adjustment, the median odds ratio (OR) for frailty was 1.60 (95% CI 1.45-1.76). Frailty was invariably linked to adverse outcomes (OR > 1) with 100% probability and had a 90% chance of exceeding the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) (OR > 1.5). For the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) as a continuous variable, the median OR was 1.19 (1.16-1.22), with over 99% probability of the effect being more significant than 1.5 times the MCID. Frailty remained outside the region of practical equivalence (ROPE) in all analyses, underscoring its clinical importance regardless of how it is measured. CONCLUSIONS: This research demonstrates the significant impact of frailty on short-term mortality in critically ill elderly patients, particularly when the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is used as a continuous measure. This approach, which views frailty as a spectrum, enables more effective, personalized care for this vulnerable group. Significantly, frailty was consistently outside the region of practical equivalence (ROPE) in our analysis, highlighting its clinical importance