Predictive factors for secondary intensive care unit admission within 48 hours after hospitalization in a medical ward from the emergency room

International audienceBACKGROUND:Unplanned transfer to an ICU within 48 hours of admission from the emergency department (ED) can be considered an adverse event. Screening at risk for such an event is a challenge for ED staff. Our purpose was to identify the clinical and biological variables which may be identified in the ED setting and can predict short-term unplanned secondary transfer to the intensive care setting.METHODS:This was a three-year retrospective case controlled monocentric study. The cases were patients transferred to a medical ICU within 48 hours of admission to the general wards from the ED. Each case was matched to two controls (patients not transferred to the ICU) based on age, gender, year of admission, and hospital unit. A conditional logistic regression was performed.RESULTS:Three hundred nineteen patients, including 107 cases and 212 controls, were studied. Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) was the most frequent diagnosis (23% of cases) followed by sepsis (16%). We identified six predictive factors of an unplanned short-term transfer to the ICU. Former smoking status, fever between 38°C and 40°C, dyspnea as the chief complaint in the ED, a lower MEDS score, an elevated acute physiology age chronic health evaluation score, and the ordering of an arterial blood gas each correlate with secondary transfer to an intensive care setting.CONCLUSION:We report a higher risk of short-term unscheduled ICU transfer in patients meeting these criteria. These patients should be closely monitored and frequently re-evaluated before being transferred to a general ward

Monocyte distribution width (MDW) performance as an early sepsis indicator in the emergency department: comparison with CRP and procalcitonin in a multicenter international European prospective study

International audienceBackgroundEarly sepsis diagnosis has emerged as one of the main challenges in the emergency room. Measurement of sepsis biomarkers is largely used in current practice to improve the diagnosis accuracy. Monocyte distribution width (MDW) is a recent new sepsis biomarker, available as part of the complete blood count with differential. The objective was to evaluate the performance of MDW for the detection of sepsis in the emergency department (ED) and to compare to procalcitonin (PCT) and C-reactive protein (CRP).MethodsSubjects whose initial evaluation included a complete blood count were enrolled consecutively in 2 EDs in France and Spain and categorized per Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 criteria. The performance of MDW for sepsis detection was compared to that of procalcitonin (PCT) and C-reactive protein (CRP).ResultsA total of 1,517 patients were analyzed: 837 men and 680 women, mean age 61 ± 19 years, 260 (17.1%) categorized as Sepsis-2 and 144 patients (9.5%) as Sepsis-3. The AUCs [95% confidence interval] for the diagnosis of Sepsis-2 were 0.81 [0.78–0.84] and 0.86 [0.84–0.88] for MDW and MDW combined with WBC, respectively. For Sepsis-3, MDW performance was 0.82 [0.79–0.85]. The performance of MDW combined with WBC for Sepsis-2 in a subgroup of patients with low sepsis pretest probability was 0.90 [0.84–0.95]. The AUC for sepsis detection using MDW combined with WBC was similar to CRP alone (0.85 [0.83–0.87]) and exceeded that of PCT. Combining the biomarkers did not improve the AUC. Compared to normal MDW, abnormal MDW increased the odds of Sepsis-2 by factor of 5.5 [4.2–7.1, 95% CI] and Sepsis-3 by 7.6 [5.1–11.3, 95% CI].ConclusionsMDW in combination with WBC has the diagnostic accuracy to detect sepsis, particularly when assessed in patients with lower pretest sepsis probability. We suggest the use of MDW as a systematic screening test, used together with qSOFA score to improve the accuracy of sepsis diagnosis in the emergency department.Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03588325)

Biomarkers of COVID-19 short-term worsening: a multiparameter analysis within the prospective multicenter COVIDeF cohort

International audienceBackground During a pandemic like COVID-19, hospital resources are constrained and accurate severity triage of the patients is required. Objective The objective of this study is to estimate the predictive performances of candidate biomarkers for short-term worsening (STW) of COVID-19. Design Prospective, multicenter (20 hospitals in Paris) cohort study of consecutive COVID-19 patients with systematic biobanking at admission, during the first waves of COVID-19 in France in 2020 (COVIDeF cohort). Setting and participants Consecutive COVID-19 patients were screened for inclusion. They were excluded in presence of severity criteria defined by either an ICU admission, mechanical ventilation (including noninvasive ventilation), acute respiratory distress, or in-hospital death before sampling. Routine blood tests measured during usual care and centralized systematic measurement of creatine kinase, C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin, soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR), high-sensitive troponin T (TnT-hs), N terminal pro-B natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), calprotectin, platelet factor 4, mid-regional pro-adrenomedullin (MR-proADM), and proendothelin were performed. Outcome measures and analyses The primary outcome was STW, defined by a severity criteria within 7 days. A backward stepwise logistic regression model and a ‘best subset’ approach were used to identify independent association, and the area under the receiving operator characteristics (AUROC) was computed. Results Five hundred and eleven patients were analyzed, of whom 60 (11.7%) experienced STW. Median time to occurrence of a severity criteria was 3 days. At admission, lower values of eosinophils, lymphocytes, platelets, alanine aminotransferase, and higher values of neutrophils, creatinine, urea, CRP, TnT-hs, suPAR, NT-proBNP, calprotectin, procalcitonin, MR-proADM, and proendothelin were predictive of worsening. Stepwise logistic regression identified three biomarkers significantly associated with worsening: CRP [adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.10, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.06–1.15 for a 10-unit increase, AUROC: 0.73 (0.66–0.79)], procalcitonin [aOR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.22–0.81, AUROC: 0.69 (0.64–0.88)], and MR-proADM [aOR: 2.85, 95% CI: 1.74–4.69, AUROC: 0.75 (0.69–0.81)]. These biomarkers outperformed clinical variables except diabetes and cancer comorbidities. Conclusion In this multicenter prospective study that assessed a large panel of biomarkers for COVID-19 patients, CRP, procalcitonin, and MR-proADM were independently associated with the risk of STW. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04352348

Effect of the 1-h bundle on mortality in patients with suspected sepsis in the emergency department: a stepped wedge cluster randomized clinical trial

International audiencePurpose: The efficacy of the 1-h bundle for emergency department (ED) patients with suspected sepsis, which includes lactate measurement, blood culture, broad-spectrum antibiotics administration, administration of 30 mL/kg crystalloid fluid for hypotension or lactate ≥ 4 mmol/L, remains controversial.Methods: We carried out a pragmatic stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial in 23 EDs in France and Spain. Adult patients with Sepsis-3 criteria or a quick sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score ≥ 2 or a lactate > 2 mmol/L were eligible. The intervention was the implementation of the 1-h sepsis bundle. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality truncated at 28 days. Secondary outcomes included volume of fluid resuscitation at 24 h, acute heart failure at 24 h, SOFA score at 72 h, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, number of days on mechanical ventilation or renal replacement therapy, vasopressor free days, unnecessary antibiotic administration, and mortality at 28 days. 1148 patients were planned to be analysed; the study period ended after 873 patients were included.Results: 872 patients (mean age 66, 42% female) were analyzed: 387 (44.4%) in the intervention group and 485 (55.6%) in the control group. Median SOFA score was 3 [1-5]. Median time to antibiotic administration was 40 min in the intervention group vs 113 min in the control group (difference - 73 [95% confidence interval (CI) - 93 to - 53]). There was a significantly higher rate, volume, and shorter time to fluid resuscitation within 3 h in the intervention group. There were 47 (12.1%) in-hospital deaths in the intervention group compared to 61 (12.6%) in the control group (difference in percentage - 0.4 [95% CI - 5.1 to 4.2], adjusted relative risk (aRR) 0.81 [95% CI 0.48 to 1.39]). There were no differences between groups for other secondary endpoints.Conclusions: Among patients with suspected sepsis in the ED, the implementation of the 1-h sepsis bundle was not associated with significant difference in in-hospital mortality. However, this study may be underpowered to report a statistically significant difference between groups