Failure of available scoring systems to predict ongoing infection in patients with abdominal sepsis after their initial emergency laparotomy

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To examine commonly used scoring systems, designed to predict overall outcome in critically ill patients, for their ability to select patients with an abdominal sepsis that have ongoing infection needing relaparotomy.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Data from a RCT comparing two surgical strategies was used. The study population consisted of 221 patients at risk for ongoing abdominal infection. The following scoring systems were evaluated with logistic regression analysis for their ability to select patients requiring a relaparotomy: APACHE-II score, SAPS-II, Mannheim Peritonitis Index (MPI), MODS, SOFA score, and the acute part of the APACHE-II score (APS).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The proportion of patients requiring a relaparotomy was 32% (71/221). Only 2 scores had a discriminatory ability in identifying patients with ongoing infection needing relaparotomy above chance: the APS on day 1 (AUC 0.61; 95%CI 0.52-0.69) and the SOFA score on day 2 (AUC 0.60; 95%CI 0.52-0.69). However, to correctly identify 90% of all patients needing a relaparotomy would require such a low cut-off value that around 80% of all patients identified by these scoring systems would have negative findings at relaparotomy.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>None of the widely-used scoring systems to predict overall outcome in critically ill patients are of clinical value for the identification of patients with ongoing infection needing relaparotomy. There is a need to develop more specific tools to assist physicians in their daily monitoring and selection of these patients after the initial emergency laparotomy.</p> <p>Trial registration number</p> <p>ISRCTN: <a href="http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN 51729393">ISRCTN 51729393</a></p

Factors associated with posttraumatic stress symptoms in a prospective cohort of patients after abdominal sepsis: a nomogram

Objective: To determine to what extent patients who have survived abdominal sepsis suffer from symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression, and to identify potential risk factors for PTSD symptoms. Design and setting: PTSD and depression symptoms were measured using the Impact of Events Scale-Revised (IES-R), the Post-Traumatic Symptom Scale 10 (PTSS-10) and the Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI-II). Patients and participants: A total of 135 peritonitis patients were eligible for this study, of whom 107 (80%) patients completed the questionnaire. The median APACHE-II score was 14 (range 12-16), and 89% were admitted to the ICU. Measurements and results: The proportion of patients with "moderate" PTSD symptom scores was 28% (95% CI 20-37), whilst 10% (95% CI 6-17) of patients had "high" PTSD symptom scores. Only 5% (95% CI 2-12) of the patients expressed severe depression symptoms. Factors associated with increased PTSD symptoms in a multivariate ordinal regression model were younger age (0.74 per 10 years older, p = 0.082), length of ICU stay (OR = 1.4 per doubling of duration, p = 0.003) and having some (OR = 4.9, p = 0.06) or many (OR = 55.5, p < 0.001) traumatic memories of the ICU or hospital stay. Conclusion: As many as 38% of patients after abdominal sepsis report elevated levels of PTSD symptoms on at least one of the questionnaires. Our nomogram may assist in identifying patients at increased risk for developing symptoms of PTSD