The eukaryotic transcriptional machinery: complexities and mechanisms unforeseen

R. Roeder

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nm938

2003-10-01

Nature Network Boston

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Development and Validation of a Sepsis Mortality Risk Score for Sepsis-3 Patients in Intensive Care Unit

Kai Zhang,Shufang Zhang,Wei Cui,Yucai Hong,Gensheng Zhang,Zhongheng Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2020.609769

IF: 3.9

2021-01-01

Frontiers in Medicine

Abstract:Background: Many severity scores are widely used for clinical outcome prediction for critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). However, for patients identified by sepsis-3 criteria, none of these have been developed. This study aimed to develop and validate a risk stratification score for mortality prediction in sepsis-3 patients.Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we employed the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care III (MIMIC III) database for model development and the eICU database for external validation. We identified septic patients by sepsis-3 criteria on day 1 of ICU entry. The Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) technique was performed to select predictive variables. We also developed a sepsis mortality prediction model and associated risk stratification score. We then compared model discrimination and calibration with other traditional severity scores.Results: For model development, we enrolled a total of 5,443 patients fulfilling the sepsis-3 criteria. The 30-day mortality was 16.7%. With 5,658 septic patients in the validation set, there were 1,135 deaths (mortality 20.1%). The score had good discrimination in development and validation sets (area under curve: 0.789 and 0.765). In the validation set, the calibration slope was 0.862, and the Brier value was 0.140. In the development dataset, the score divided patients according to mortality risk of low (3.2%), moderate (12.4%), high (30.7%), and very high (68.1%). The corresponding mortality in the validation dataset was 2.8, 10.5, 21.1, and 51.2%. As shown by the decision curve analysis, the score always had a positive net benefit.Conclusion: We observed moderate discrimination and calibration for the score termed Sepsis Mortality Risk Score (SMRS), allowing stratification of patients according to mortality risk. However, we still require further modification and external validation.
Validation and comparison of triage-based screening strategies for sepsis

Kasra Rahmati,Samuel M Brown,Joseph R Bledsoe,Paul Passey,Peter P Taillac,Scott T Youngquist,Matthew M Samore,Catherine L Hough,Ithan D Peltan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2024.08.037

Abstract:Objective: This study sought to externally validate and compare proposed methods for stratifying sepsis risk at emergency department (ED) triage. Methods: This nested case/control study enrolled ED patients from four hospitals in Utah and evaluated the performance of previously-published sepsis risk scores amenable to use at ED triage based on their area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC, which balances positive predictive value and sensitivity) and area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC, which balances sensitivity and specificity). Score performance for predicting whether patients met Sepsis-3 criteria in the ED was compared to patients' assigned ED triage score (Canadian Triage Acuity Score [CTAS]) with adjustment for multiple comparisons. Results: Among 2000 case/control patients, 981 met Sepsis-3 criteria on final adjudication. The best performing sepsis risk scores were the Predict Sepsis version #3 (AUPRC 0.183, 95 % CI 0.148-0.256; AUROC 0.859, 95 % CI 0.843-0.875) and Borelli scores (AUPRC 0.127, 95 % CI 0.107-0.160, AUROC 0.845, 95 % CI 0.829-0.862), which significantly outperformed CTAS (AUPRC 0.038, 95 % CI 0.035-0.042, AUROC 0.650, 95 % CI 0.628-0.671, p < 0.001 for all AUPRC and AUROC comparisons). The Predict Sepsis and Borelli scores exhibited sensitivity of 0.670 and 0.678 and specificity of 0.902 and 0.834, respectively, at their recommended cutoff values and outperformed Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) criteria (AUPRC 0.083, 95 % CI 0.070-0.102, p = 0.052 and p = 0.078, respectively; AUROC 0.775, 95 % CI 0.756-0.795, p < 0.001 for both scores). Conclusions: The Predict Sepsis and Borelli scores exhibited improved performance including increased specificity and positive predictive values for sepsis identification at ED triage compared to CTAS and SIRS criteria.
Development of A Novel Score for the Prediction of Hospital Mortality in Patients with Severe Sepsis: the Use of Electronic Healthcare Records with Lasso Regression

Zhongheng Zhang,Yucai Hong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.17870

2017-01-01

Oncotarget

Abstract:Background and objective: There are several disease severity scores being used for the prediction of mortality in critically ill patients. However, none of them was developed and validated specifically for patients with severe sepsis. The present study aimed to develop a novel prediction score for severe sepsis.Results: A total of 3206 patients with severe sepsis were enrolled, including 1054 non-survivors and 2152 survivors. The LASSO score showed the best discrimination (area under curve: 0.772; 95% confidence interval: 0.735-0.810) in the validation cohort as compared with other scores such as simplified acute physiology score II, acute physiological score III, Logistic organ dysfunction system, sequential organ failure assessment score, and Oxford Acute Severity of Illness Score. The calibration slope was 0.889 and Brier value was 0.173.Materials and Methods: The study employed a single center database called Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care-III) MIMIC-III for analysis. Severe sepsis was defined as infection and acute organ dysfunction. Clinical and laboratory variables used in clinical routines were included for screening. Subjects without missing values were included, and the whole dataset was split into training and validation cohorts. The score was coined LASSO score because variable selection was performed using the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) technique. Finally, the LASSO score was evaluated for its discrimination and calibration in the validation cohort.Conclusions: The study developed the LASSO score for mortality prediction in patients with severe sepsis. Although the score had good discrimination and calibration in a randomly selected subsample, external validations are still required.
Prehospital early warning scores for adults with suspected sepsis: the PHEWS observational cohort and decision-analytic modelling study

Steve Goodacre,Laura Sutton,Kate Ennis,Ben Thomas,Olivia Hawksworth,Khurram Iftikhar,Susan J Croft,Gordon Fuller,Simon Waterhouse,Daniel Hind,Matt Stevenson,Mike J Bradburn,Michael Smyth,Gavin D Perkins,Mark Millins,Andy Rosser,Jon Dickson,Matthew Wilson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3310/NDTY2403

Abstract:Background: Guidelines for sepsis recommend treating those at highest risk within 1 hour. The emergency care system can only achieve this if sepsis is recognised and prioritised. Ambulance services can use prehospital early warning scores alongside paramedic diagnostic impression to prioritise patients for treatment or early assessment in the emergency department. Objectives: To determine the accuracy, impact and cost-effectiveness of using early warning scores alongside paramedic diagnostic impression to identify sepsis requiring urgent treatment. Design: Retrospective diagnostic cohort study and decision-analytic modelling of operational consequences and cost-effectiveness. Setting: Two ambulance services and four acute hospitals in England. Participants: Adults transported to hospital by emergency ambulance, excluding episodes with injury, mental health problems, cardiac arrest, direct transfer to specialist services, or no vital signs recorded. Interventions: Twenty-one early warning scores used alongside paramedic diagnostic impression, categorised as sepsis, infection, non-specific presentation, or other specific presentation. Main outcome measures: Proportion of cases prioritised at the four hospitals; diagnostic accuracy for the sepsis-3 definition of sepsis and receiving urgent treatment (primary reference standard); daily number of cases with and without sepsis prioritised at a large and a small hospital; the minimum treatment effect associated with prioritisation at which each strategy would be cost-effective, compared to no prioritisation, assuming willingness to pay £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Results: Data from 95,022 episodes involving 71,204 patients across four hospitals showed that most early warning scores operating at their pre-specified thresholds would prioritise more than 10% of cases when applied to non-specific attendances or all attendances. Data from 12,870 episodes at one hospital identified 348 (2.7%) with the primary reference standard. The National Early Warning Score, version 2 (NEWS2), had the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve when applied only to patients with a paramedic diagnostic impression of sepsis or infection (0.756, 95% confidence interval 0.729 to 0.783) or sepsis alone (0.655, 95% confidence interval 0.63 to 0.68). None of the strategies provided high sensitivity (> 0.8) with acceptable positive predictive value (> 0.15). NEWS2 provided combinations of sensitivity and specificity that were similar or superior to all other early warning scores. Applying NEWS2 to paramedic diagnostic impression of sepsis or infection with thresholds of > 4, > 6 and > 8 respectively provided sensitivities and positive predictive values (95% confidence interval) of 0.522 (0.469 to 0.574) and 0.216 (0.189 to 0.245), 0.447 (0.395 to 0.499) and 0.274 (0.239 to 0.313), and 0.314 (0.268 to 0.365) and 0.333 (confidence interval 0.284 to 0.386). The mortality relative risk reduction from prioritisation at which each strategy would be cost-effective exceeded 0.975 for all strategies analysed. Limitations: We estimated accuracy using a sample of older patients at one hospital. Reliable evidence was not available to estimate the effectiveness of prioritisation in the decision-analytic modelling. Conclusions: No strategy is ideal but using NEWS2, in patients with a paramedic diagnostic impression of infection or sepsis could identify one-third to half of sepsis cases without prioritising unmanageable numbers. No other score provided clearly superior accuracy to NEWS2. Research is needed to develop better definition, diagnosis and treatments for sepsis. Study registration: This study is registered as Research Registry (reference: researchregistry5268). Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 17/136/10) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 16. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.
Establishment of a Novel Risk Score for In-Hospital Mortality in Adult Sepsis Patients

Yan-Jun Zheng,Xiao-Juan Zhu,Yu-Wei Chen,Yu-Zhen Zheng,Yi Zhou,Wen-Jie Chen,Xiang-Tao Zheng,Ming Zhong,Zhi-Tao Yang,En-Qiang Mao,Er-Zhen Chen,Ying Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/atm-21-2900

IF: 3.616

2022-01-01

Annals of Translational Medicine

Abstract:Background:Existing scoring systems have limitations in predicting the in-hospital mortality of adult sepsis patients. We aimed to develop and validate a novel risk score for predicting the in-hospital mortality of adult sepsis patients.Methods:The clinical data of 1,335 adult sepsis inpatients were retrospectively analyzed. Enrolled patients were randomly divided into a modeling group and a validation group at a 3:2 ratio. The modeling group (n=801) was used to develop the risk score by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. The score's performance was validated in the validation group (n=534). We classified patients into four risk levels according to the novel risk score.Results:Age, central vein catheterization, mechanical ventilation, vasopressin, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), respiratory rate (RR), heart rate (HR), Glasgow coma scale (GCS) score, platelet (PLT), hematocrit (HCT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), and activated partial thrombin time (APTT) were independent risk factors for in-hospital death in adult sepsis patients. Continuous variables were converted into classified variables to develop the risk score, with a total score of 39 points. Adult sepsis patients with low, lower medium, higher medium, and high risk levels had in-hospital mortality rates of 9.8%, 24.7%, 55.8%, and 83.5%, respectively.Conclusions:Compared with the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scoring system (APACHE II) and the Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), the novel risk score showed good predictive performance for in-hospital mortality in adult sepsis patients.
Early warning scores for sepsis identification and prediction of in‐hospital mortality in adults with sepsis: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Wei Ling Chua,Khairul Dzakirin Bin Rusli,Leanne M. Aitken

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.17061

2024-02-22

Journal of Clinical Nursing

Abstract:Aim The early warning scores (EWS), quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) and systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria have been proposed as sepsis screening tools. This review aims to summarise and compare the performance of EWS with the qSOFA and SIRS criteria for predicting sepsis diagnosis and in‐hospital mortality in patients with sepsis. Design A systematic review with meta‐analysis. Review Methods Seven databases were searched from January 1, 2016 until March 10, 2022. Study quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool. Sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios and diagnostic odd ratios were pooled by using the bivariate random effects model. Overall performance was summarised by using the hierarchical summary receiver–operating characteristics curve. This paper adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies (PRISMA‐DTA) guidelines. Results Ten studies involving 52,474 subjects were included in the review. For predicting sepsis diagnosis, the pooled sensitivity of EWS (65%, 95% CI: 55, 75) was similar to SIRS ≥2 (70%, 95% CI: 49, 85) and higher than qSOFA ≥2 (37%, 95% CI: 20, 59). The pooled specificity of EWS (77%, 95% CI: 64, 86) was higher than SIRS ≥2 (62%, 95% CI: 41, 80) but lower than qSOFA ≥2 (94%, 95% CI: 86, 98). Results were similar for the secondary outcome of in‐hospital mortality. Conclusions Although no one scoring system had both high sensitivity and specificity, the EWS had at least equivalent values in most measures of diagnostic accuracy compared with SIRS or qSOFA. Implications for the profession Healthcare systems in which EWS is already in place should consider whether there is any clinical benefit in adopting qSOFA or SIRS. No patient or public contribution This systematic review did not directly involve patient or public contribution to the manuscript.

nursing
Computer-aided National Early Warning Score to predict the risk of sepsis following emergency medical admission to hospital: a model development and external validation study

Muhammad Faisal,Donald Richardson,Andrew J Scally,Robin Howes,Kevin Beatson,Kevin Speed,Mohammed A Mohammed,Andrew J. Scally,Mohammed A. Mohammed

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.181418

2019-04-07

Canadian Medical Association Journal

Abstract:BACKGROUND: In hospitals in England, patients' vital signs are monitored and summarized into the National Early Warning Score (NEWS); this score is more accurate than the Quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score at identifying patients with sepsis. We investigated the extent to which the accuracy of the NEWS is enhanced by developing and comparing 3 computer-aided NEWS (cNEWS) models (M0 = NEWS alone, M1 = M0 + age + sex, M2 = M1 + subcomponents of NEWS + diastolic blood pressure) to predict the risk of sepsis.METHODS: We included all emergency medical admissions of patients 16 years of age and older discharged over 24 months from 2 acute care hospital centres (York Hospital [YH] for model development and a combined data set from 2 hospitals [Diana, Princess of Wales Hospital and Scunthorpe General Hospital] in the Northern Lincolnshire and Goole National Health Service Foundation Trust [NH] for external model validation). We used a validated Canadian method for defining sepsis from administrative hospital data.RESULTS: The prevalence of sepsis was lower in YH (4.5%, 1596/35 807) than in NH (8.5%, 2983/35 161). The C statistic increased across models (YH: M0 0.705, M1 0.763, M2 0.777; NH: M0 0.708, M1 0.777, M2 0.791). For NEWS of 5 or higher, sensitivity increased (YH: 47.24% v. 50.56% v. 52.69%; NH: 37.91% v. 43.35% v. 48.07%), the positive likelihood ratio increased (YH: 2.77 v. 2.99 v. 3.06; NH: 3.18 v. 3.32 v. 3.45) and the positive predictive value increased (YH: 11.44% v. 12.24% v. 12.49%; NH: 22.75% v. 23.55% v. 24.21%).INTERPRETATION: From the 3 cNEWS models, model M2 is the most accurate. Given that it places no additional burden of data collection on clinicians and can be automated, it may now be carefully introduced and evaluated in hospitals with sufficient informatics infrastructure.

medicine, general & internal
Development of a Clinical Score for Predicting 28-Day Mortality in Geriatric Sepsis Patients; a Cohort study

Pitsucha Sanguanwit,Chaiyaporn Yuksen,Jiraporn Khorana,Krongkarn Sutham,Yuranun Phootothum,Siriporn Damdin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.22037/aaem.v12i1.2269

2024-06-29

Abstract:Introduction: Sepsis is a significant and common cause of death and burden among critically ill patients, which has increasing incidence and mortality in adults over 60 and advanced age. This study aimed to develop an easy-to-use clinical tool for assessing 28-day mortality risk in older sepsis patients upon their initial assessment in the emergency department (ED). Method: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using electronic medical records of older (≥60 years) ED patients with suspected sepsis from August 1, 2018, to December 31, 2018. A new prediction score was formulated based on the logistic coefficients of clinical predictors through multivariable regression analyses. Then, the score's screening performance was evaluated and compared to existing scoring systems; Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS), quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), National early warning score (NEWS), and The Ramathibodi early warning score (REWS); using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis (AuROC). Result: The study included 599 patients with the mean age of 77.13 (range: 60-101) years (56.43% male) and an overall 28-day mortality rate of 7.01%. The newly developed prediction score had seven independent predictors of 28-day mortality: malignancy, dependent status, heart rate, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, consciousness, and lactate, which demonstrated excellent discriminative ability (AuROC: 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.82 - 0.92), significantly outperforming SIRS (AuROC: 0.62), qSOFA (AuROC: 0.72), NEWS (AuROC: 0.74), and REWS (AuROC: 0.71), all with p-values <0.01. The score allowed risk stratification into low-risk (positive likelihood ratio (LR+): 0.37, 95% CI: 0.24 - 0.58) and high-risk (LR+: 4.14, 95% CI: 3.14 - 5.44) groups with sensitivity of 69.0% and specificity of 83.3% at a cut-off point of 6. Conclusion: The novel prediction score demonstrates a remarkable ability to predict 28-day mortality risk in older sepsis patients during their initial ED assessment, offering potential for improved risk stratification and treatment guidance in older patients.
SEPSIGN: early identification of sepsis signs in emergency department

Thomas Lafon,Marie-Angélique Cazalis,Kimberly W. Hart,Cassandra Hennessy,Karim Tazarourte,Wesley H. Self,Arvin Radfar Akhavan,Saïd Laribi,Damien Viglino,Marion Douplat,Adit A. Ginde,Sophie Tolou,Simon A. Mahler,Pierrick Le Borgne,Yann-Erick Claessens,Youri Yordanov,Quentin Le Bastard,Agathe Pancher,Jim Ducharme,Christopher J. Lindsell,Nathan I. Shapiro

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11739-024-03802-5

2024-11-01

Internal and Emergency Medicine

Abstract:Because 20-30% of patients with sepsis deteriorate to critical illness, biomarkers that provide accurate early prognosis may identify which patients need more intensive treatment versus safe early discharge. The objective was to test the performance of sVEGFR2, suPAR and PCT, alone or combined with clinical signs and symptoms, for the prediction of clinical deterioration. This prospective observational study enrolled patients with suspected infection who met SIRS criteria without organ dysfunction (delta SOFA <2 from baseline) from 16 emergency departments. The primary endpoint was clinical deterioration (increased SOFA score ≥2 points, new or increased organ support, or death) within 72 hours of enrollment. Diagnosis and classification of infection status were adjudicated. 724 patients were enrolled, (54% men, median age 55 [38-70] y-o). Infection origin was abdominopelvic (21%), skin and soft tissues (17%), urinary (16%) and pulmonary (15%). 176 (24%) patients deteriorated, with a 28-day mortality of 1.4%. They had lower sVEGFR2 level (6.17 [5.00-7.40] vs 6.52 [5.40-7.84], p=0.024), higher circulating suPAR (5.25 [3.86-7.50] vs 4.18 [3.16-5.68], p<0.001) and higher PCT level (0.32 [0.08-1.80] vs 0.18 [0.05-0.98], p=0.004). suPAR demonstrated superior performance (AUC=0.65 [0.60-0.70]), compared to other biomarkers (PCT, AUC=0.57 [0.52-0.62] and sVEGFR2, AUC=0.58 [0.53-0.64]). Maximum accuracy was achieved from the combination of clinical information, sVEGFR2 and suPAR, yielding an AUC of 0.74 [0.69-0.78] and NPV 0.90 [0.88-0.94]. sVEGFR2 and suPAR were insufficiently accurate to rule out clinical deterioration. Panels of biomarkers will likely be needed to capture the heterogeneous mechanistic pathways involved in sepsis-related organ failure.

medicine, general & internal
Screening strategies to identify sepsis in the prehospital setting: a validation study

Daniel J Lane,Hannah Wunsch,Refik Saskin,Sheldon Cheskes,Steve Lin,Laurie J Morrison,Damon C Scales

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.190966

2020-03-09

CMAJ

Abstract:Background: In the prehospital setting, differentiating patients who have sepsis from those who have infection but no organ dysfunction is important to initiate sepsis treatments appropriately. We aimed to identify which published screening strategies for paramedics to use in identifying patients with sepsis provide the most certainty for prehospital diagnosis. Methods: We identified published strategies for screening by paramedics through a literature search. We then conducted a validation study in Alberta, Canada, from April 2015 to March 2016. For adult patients (≥ 18 yr) who were transferred by ambulance, we linked records to an administrative database and then restricted the search to patients with infection diagnosed in the emergency department. For each patient, the classification from each strategy was determined and compared with the diagnosis recorded in the emergency department. For all strategies that generated numeric scores, we constructed diagnostic prediction models to estimate the probability of sepsis being diagnosed in the emergency department. Results: We identified 21 unique prehospital screening strategies, 14 of which had numeric scores. We linked a total of 131 745 eligible patients to hospital databases. No single strategy had both high sensitivity (overall range 0.02-0.85) and high specificity (overall range 0.38-0.99) for classifying sepsis. However, the Critical Illness Prediction (CIP) score, the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) and the Quick Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score predicted a low to high probability of a sepsis diagnosis at different scores. The qSOFA identified patients with a 7% (lowest score) to 87% (highest score) probability of sepsis diagnosis. Interpretation: The CIP, NEWS and qSOFA scores are tools with good predictive ability for sepsis diagnosis in the prehospital setting. The qSOFA score is simple to calculate and may be useful to paramedics in screening patients with possible sepsis.
Application of a 72 h National Early Warning Score and Incorporation with Sequential Organ Failure Assessment for Predicting Sepsis Outcomes and Risk Stratification in an Intensive Care Unit: A Derivation and Validation Cohort Study

Chih-Yi Hsu,Yi-Hsuan Tsai,Chiung-Yu Lin,Ya-Chun Chang,Hung-Cheng Chen,Yu-Ping Chang,Yu-Mu Chen,Kuo-Tung Huang,Yi-Hsi Wang,Chin-Chou Wang,Meng-Chih Lin,Wen-Feng Fang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm11090910

IF: 3.5083

2021-09-13

Journal of Personalized Medicine

Abstract:We investigated the best timing for using the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) for predicting sepsis outcomes and whether combining the NEWS2 and the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) was applicable for mortality risk stratification in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with severe sepsis. All adult patients who met the Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock criteria between August 2013 and January 2017 with complete clinical parameters and laboratory data were enrolled as a derivation cohort. The primary outcomes were the 7-, 14-, 21-, and 28-day mortalities. Furthermore, another group of patients under the same setting between January 2020 and March 2020 were also enrolled as a validation cohort. In the derivation cohort, we included 699 consecutive adult patients. The 72 h NEWS2 had good discrimination for predicting 7-, 14-, 21-, and 28-day mortalities (AUC: 0.780, 0.724, 0.700, and 0.667, respectively) and was not inferior to the SOFA (AUC: 0.740, 0.680, 0.684, and 0.677, respectively). With the new combined NESO tool, the hazard ratio was 1.854 (1.203–2.950) for the intermediate-risk group and 6.810 (3.927–11.811) for the high-risk group relative to the low-risk group. This finding was confirmed in the validation cohort using a separated survival curve for 28-day mortality. The 72 h NEWS2 alone was non-inferior to the admission SOFA or day 3 SOFA for predicting sepsis outcomes. The NESO tool was found to be useful for 7-, 14-, 21-, and 28-day mortality risk stratification in patients with severe sepsis.

medicine, general & internal,health care sciences & services
[Assessment of the severity scores in patients included in a sepsis code in an Emergency Departament]

A Redondo-González,M Varela-Patiño,J Álvarez-Manzanares,J R Oliva-Ramos,R López-Izquierdo,C Ramos-Sánchez,J M Eiros

Abstract:Objective: The objective of the study is to determine the usefulness of the SOFA (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment), quick SOFA (qSOFA), LODS (Logistic Organ Dysfunction System) and EWS (Early Warning Score) scores to predict in-hospital mortality among septic patients attended in the emergency department; to evaluate what factors are associated with mortality; and develop a predictive model of in-hospital mortality. Methods: Retrospective study including patients over 14 years of age included in the sepsis code of an Emergency Department of a University Hospital between November 2013 and September 2015. Demographic variables, hemodynamic and analytical variables, and in-hospital mortality were collected to obtain qSOFA, SOFA, LODS, EWS scores. Receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed for each score. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the probability of in-hospital mortality. Results: A total of 349 patients were analyzed, median age 72.7 (range 86), males: 54.4%. The in-hospital mortality was 21.8%. AUC obtained: LODS: 0.73 (IC 95% 0.67-0.80; p<0.001), EWS: 0.73 (IC 95% 0.65-0.81; p<0.001), SOFA: 0.72 (IC 95% 0.65- 0.78; p<0.001), qSOFA: 0.67 (IC 95% 0.58-0.76; p<0.001). After the multivariate analysis, these were the independent factors associated with in-hospital mortality: Oxygen saturation ≤92%, Glasgow coma score <14, lactate ≥2mmol/L (p<0.05). Two prognostic models were generated: MPRO1: age, oxygen saturation ≤92% and Glasgow coma score <14, AUC: 0.78 (IC 95% 0.72-0.84; p<0.001) and MPRO2 formed by the previous ones and lactate ≥2mmol/L, AUC: 0.82 (IC 95% 0.76-0.87; p<0.001). Conclusions: SOFA score and the new developed scores could be useful in asses the risk of in-hospital mortality in patients included in the sepsis code.
Early prediction of sepsis in emergency department patients using various methods and scoring systems

Yun‐Feng Song,Hao‐Neng Huang,Jia‐Jun Ma,Rui Xing,Yu‐Qi Song,Li Li,Jin Zhou,Chun‐Quan Ou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/nicc.13201

2024-10-27

Nursing in Critical Care

Abstract:Background Early recognition of sepsis, a common life‐threatening condition in intensive care units (ICUs), is beneficial for improving patient outcomes. However, most sepsis prediction models were trained and assessed in the ICU, which might not apply to emergency department (ED) settings. Aims To establish an early predictive model based on basic but essential information collected upon ED presentation for the follow‐up diagnosis of sepsis observed in the ICU. Study Design This study developed and validated a reliable model of sepsis prediction among ED patients by comparing 10 different methods based on retrospective electronic health record data from the MIMIC‐IV database. In‐ICU sepsis was identified as the primary outcome. The potential predictors encompassed baseline demographics, vital signs, pain scale, chief complaints and Emergency Severity Index (ESI). 80% and 20% of the total of 425 737 ED visit records were randomly selected for the train set and the test set for model development and validation, respectively. Results Among the methods evaluated, XGBoost demonstrated an optimal predictive performance with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.90–0.91). Logistic regression exhibited a comparable predictive ability to XGBoost, with an AUC of 0.89 (95% CI: 0.89–0.90), along with a sensitivity and specificity of 85% (95% CI: 0.83–0.86) and 78% (95% CI: 0.77–0.80), respectively. Neither of the five commonly used severity scoring systems demonstrated satisfactory performance for sepsis prediction. The predictive ability of using ESI as the sole predictor (AUC: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.78–0.80) was also inferior to the model integrating ESI and other basic information. Conclusions The use of ESI combined with basic clinical information upon ED presentation accurately predicted sepsis among ED patients, strengthening its application in ED. Relevance to Clinical Practice The proposed model may assist nurses in risk stratification management and prioritize interventions for potential sepsis patients, even in low‐resource settings.

nursing
Development and Evaluation of a Machine Learning Model for the Early Identification of Patients at Risk for Sepsis

Ryan J. Delahanty,JoAnn Alvarez,Lisa M. Flynn,Robert L. Sherwin,Spencer S. Jones

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2018.11.036

IF: 6.762

2019-04-01

Annals of Emergency Medicine

Abstract:STUDY OBJECTIVE: The Third International Consensus Definitions (Sepsis-3) Task Force recommended the use of the quick Sequential [Sepsis-related] Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score to screen patients for sepsis outside of the ICU. However, subsequent studies raise concerns about the sensitivity of qSOFA as a screening tool. We aim to use machine learning to develop a new sepsis screening tool, the Risk of Sepsis (RoS) score, and compare it with a slate of benchmark sepsis-screening tools, including the Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), qSOFA, Modified Early Warning Score, and National Early Warning Score.METHODS: We used retrospective electronic health record data from adult patients who presented to 49 urban community hospital emergency departments during a 22-month period (N=2,759,529). We used the Rhee clinical surveillance criteria as our standard definition of sepsis and as the primary target for developing our model. The data were randomly split into training and test cohorts to derive and then evaluate the model. A feature selection process was carried out in 3 stages: first, we reviewed existing models for sepsis screening; second, we consulted with local subject matter experts; and third, we used a supervised machine learning called gradient boosting. Key metrics of performance included alert rate, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, specificity, and precision. Performance was assessed at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 hours after an index time.RESULTS: The RoS score was the most discriminant screening tool at all time thresholds (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.93 to 0.97). Compared with the next most discriminant benchmark (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment), RoS was significantly more sensitive (67.7% versus 49.2% at 1 hour and 84.6% versus 80.4% at 24 hours) and precise (27.6% versus 12.2% at 1 hour and 28.8% versus 11.4% at 24 hours). The sensitivity of qSOFA was relatively low (3.7% at 1 hour and 23.5% at 24 hours).CONCLUSION: In this retrospective study, RoS was more timely and discriminant than benchmark screening tools, including those recommend by the Sepsis-3 Task Force. Further study is needed to validate the RoS score at independent sites.

emergency medicine
Establishment and Effectiveness Evaluation of a Scoring System-RAAS (RDW, AGE, APACHE II, SOFA) for Sepsis by a Retrospective Analysis

Yingying Huang,Shaowei Jiang,Wenjie Li,Yiwen Fan,Yuxin Leng,Chengjin Gao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/JIR.S348490

IF: 4.5

2022-01-21

Journal of Inflammation Research

Abstract:Yingying Huang, 1, &ast Shaowei Jiang, 1, &ast Wenjie Li, 1 Yiwen Fan, 2 Yuxin Leng, 3 Chengjin Gao 1 1 Emergency Department, Xinhua Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, People's Republic of China; 2 Department of Pathology Medicine Biology, The University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands; 3 Critical Care Medicine Department, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China &astThese authors contributed equally to this work Correspondence: Chengjin Gao; Yuxin Leng Email ; Background: A modified scoring system based on the RDW, AGE, SOFA, and APACHE II score (RAAS score) was composed to investigated the short-, medium-, and long-term high risk of mortality in patients with sepsis identified early in the emergency department (ED). Methods: Data were collected from a total of 1066 sepsis patients in emergency department, Xinhua Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine from March 2013 to April 2021, including 529 patients in the primary cohort and 537 patients in the validation cohort. By comparing each parameter and the area under ROC (AUC) and K-M (Kaplan–Meier) survival curve in different periods, valuable parameters were screened out to form a new scoring system, and finally the prediction model of the nomogram was built. Results: The RAAS scoring system, consisting of RDW, AGE, SOFA and APACHE II, is a 0– 6 scale to reflect the severity of sepsis. AUC at 30, 60, and 90 days was 0.816, 0.815, and 0.820, respectively. K-M curves across six prognostic time periods in both databases showed survival probabilities with different RDW segments and RAAS scores. In the calibration curve, the results of the internal validation of the primary cohort and the results of the external validation cohort showed the prognostic accuracy of RAAS. Conclusion: The RAAS score system is a novel and reliable indicator to predict the short-term and medium-term mortality of patients with sepsis. With the increase of the RAAS score, the mortality of patients with sepsis gradually increases. Keywords: sepsis, risk factors, prognosis, mortality, nomograms Sepsis is a serious, life-threatening syndrome that is one of the leading causes of death in hospitals. 1,2 Sepsis was also among the leading causes of the death associated with COVID-19. 3 Despite significant advances in critical care, sepsis still has a relatively high short-term mortality rate due to organ failure due to a dysregulated response to infection. 4 Often as the first place where sepsis patients are initially treated, it is significant for the emergency department (ED) to identify patients with a high mortality rate among sepsis patients in the early stages of sepsis, in order to provide more timely and adequate interventions for these patients and to help patients be properly classified. 5 Up to now, there is still no effective treatment and means for sepsis. 6 Early prediction of progressive septic shock plays an important role in its clinical course and prognosis. 7 Although several biomarkers have been studied to predict mortality in patients with sepsis, none of these biomarkers have been shown to reliably identify patients at high risk for sepsis, and tests for these biomarkers are often not widely used in clinical practice. 8 Moreover, due to the complexity of sepsis, the diagnostic accuracy of each parameter is limited in clinical practice. As a standard to evaluate the severity of disease in intensive care unit (ICU), scoring system has become an important tool to help clinicians make decisions. 9 A scoring system with higher prognostic accuracy has been developed that combines four clinical indicators to predict the mortality of patients with sepsis using a score of 0 to 6, with one point awarded for each value that meets the scoring requirement ( Supplementary Table 1 ). The main objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of RAAS on short-term (30 days), medium-term (60 days, 90 days) and long-term (180 days, 365 days, 730 days) mortality in patients with sepsis using a large clinical database, and then to establish nomograms of the effective prediction period to visually predict the 30-day,60-day and 90-day mortality probability in patients with sepsis. The RAAS score has a great predictive function for the evaluation of the prognosis of death in sepsis. We conducted a retrospective observational study on 1066 patients with sepsis between March 2013 and April 2021. According to the time point, 529 patients were selected as the primary coh -Abstract Truncated-

immunology
A PREDICTION MODEL FOR SEPSIS IN INFECTED PATIENTS: EARLY ASSESSMENT OF SEPSIS ENGAGEMENT

Haiyan Liao,Zhe Guo,Xuesong Wang,Huadong Zhu,Qidong Ren,Siying Guo,Zhong Wang,Ziwen Wang,Z. Wang,Yan Chai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/SHK.0000000000002170

2023-07-12

Shock

Abstract:ABSTRACT Purpose: To evaluate significant risk variables for sepsis incidence and develop a predictive model for rapid screening and diagnosis of sepsis in patients from the emergency department (ED). Methods: Sepsis-related risk variables were screened based on the PIRO (Predisposition, Insult, Response, Organ dysfunction) system. Training (n = 1,272) and external validation (n = 568) datasets were collected from Peking Union Medical College Hospital (PUMCH) and Beijing Tsinghua Changgung Hospital (BTCH), respectively. Variables were collected at the time of admission. Sepsis incidences were determined within 72 h after ED admissions. A predictive model, Early Assessment of Sepsis Engagement (EASE), was developed, and an EASE-based nomogram was generated for clinical applications. The predictive ability of EASE was evaluated and compared with the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) scoring system. In addition, internal and external validations were performed. Results: A total of 48 characteristics were identified. The EASE model, which consists of alcohol consumption, lung infection, temperature, respiration rate, heart rate, serum urea nitrogen, and white blood cell count, had an excellent predictive performance. The EASE-based nomogram showed a significantly higher area under curve (AUC) value of 86.5% (95% CI, 84.2%–88.8%) compared with the AUC value of 78.2% for the NEWS scoring system. The AUC of EASE in the external validation dataset was 72.2% (95% CI, 66.6%–77.7%). Both calibration curves of EASE in training and external validation datasets were close to the ideal model and were well-calibrated. Conclusions: The EASE model can predict and screen ED-admitted patients with sepsis. It demonstrated superior diagnostic performance and clinical application promise by external validation and in-parallel comparison with the NEWS scoring system.

Medicine
Sepsis incidence, suspicion, prediction and mortality in emergency medical services: a cohort study related to the current international sepsis guideline

Silke Piedmont,Ludwig Goldhahn,Enno Swart,Bernt-Peter Robra,Carolin Fleischmann-Struzek,Rajan Somasundaram,Wolfgang Bauer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s15010-024-02181-5

2024-02-20

Infection

Abstract:Purpose Sepsis suspicion by Emergency Medical Services (EMS) is associated with improved patient outcomes. This study assessed sepsis incidence and recognition by EMS and analyzed which of the screening tools recommended by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign best facilitates sepsis prediction. Methods Retrospective cohort study of claims data from health insurances ( n = 221,429 EMS cases), and paramedics' and emergency physicians' EMS documentation ( n = 110,419); analyzed outcomes were: sepsis incidence and case fatality compared to stroke and myocardial infarction, the extent of documentation for screening-relevant variables and sepsis suspicion, tools' intersections for screening positive in identical EMS cases and their predictive ability for an inpatient sepsis diagnosis. Results Incidence of sepsis (1.6%) was similar to myocardial infarction (2.6%) and stroke (2.7%); however, 30-day case fatality rate was almost threefold higher (31.7% vs. 13.4%; 11.8%). Complete vital sign documentation was achieved in 8.2% of all cases. Paramedics never, emergency physicians rarely (0.1%) documented a sepsis suspicion, respectively septic shock. NEWS2 had the highest sensitivity (73.1%; Specificity:81.6%) compared to qSOFA (23.1%; Sp:96.6%), SIRS (28.2%; Sp:94.3%) and MEWS (48.7%; Sp:88.1%). Depending on the tool, 3.7% to 19.4% of all cases screened positive; only 0.8% in all tools simultaneously. Conclusion Incidence and mortality underline the need for better sepsis awareness, documentation of vital signs and use of screening tools. Guidelines may omit MEWS and SIRS as recommendations for prehospital providers since they were inferior in all accuracy measures. Though no tool performed ideally, NEWS2 qualifies as the best tool to predict the highest proportion of septic patients and to rule out cases that are likely non-septic.

infectious diseases
A novel scoring system combining Modified Early Warning Score with biomarkers of monocyte distribution width, white blood cell counts, and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio to improve early sepsis prediction in older adults

Sheng-Feng Lin,Hui-An Lin,Yi-Hsiang Pan,Sen-Kuang Hou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2022-0656

2022-09-15

Abstract:Objectives: This study aims to investigate whether combining scoring systems with monocyte distribution width (MDW) improves early sepsis detection in older adults in the emergency department (ED). Methods: In this prospective observational study, we enrolled older adults aged ≥60 years who presented with confirmed infectious diseases to the ED. Three scoring systems-namely quick sepsis-related organ failure assessment (qSOFA), Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), and National Early Warning Score (NEWS), and biomarkers including MDW, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and C-reactive protein (CRP), were assessed in the ED. Logistic regression models were used to construct sepsis prediction models. Results: After propensity score matching, we included 522 and 2088 patients with and without sepsis in our analysis from January 1, 2020, to September 30, 2021. NEWS ≥5 and MEWS ≥3 exhibited a moderate-to-high sensitivity and a low specificity for sepsis, whereas qSOFA score ≥2 demonstrated a low sensitivity and a high specificity. When combined with biomarkers, the NEWS-based, the MEWS-based, and the qSOFA-based models exhibited improved diagnostic accuracy for sepsis detection without CRP inclusion (c-statistics=0.842, 0.842, and 0.826, respectively). Of the three models, MEWS ≥3 with white blood cell (WBC) count ≥11 × 109/L, NLR ≥8, and MDW ≥20 demonstrated the highest diagnostic accuracy in all age subgroups (c-statistics=0.886, 0.825, and 0.822 in patients aged 60-74, 75-89, and 90-109 years, respectively). Conclusions: Our novel scoring system combining MEWS with WBC, NLR, and MDW effectively detected sepsis in older adults.
Detection of sepsis during emergency department triage using machine learning

Oleksandr Ivanov,Karin Molander,Robert Dunne,Stephen Liu,Deena Brecher,Kevin Masek,Erica Lewis,Lisa Wolf,Debbie Travers,Deb Delaney,Kyla Montgomery,Christian Reilly

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2204.07657

IF: 5.414

2022-04-15

Machine Learning

Abstract:Sepsis is a life-threatening condition with organ dysfunction and is a leading cause of death and critical illness worldwide. Even a few hours of delay in the treatment of sepsis results in increased mortality. Early detection of sepsis during emergency department triage would allow early initiation of lab analysis, antibiotic administration, and other sepsis treatment protocols. The purpose of this study was to compare sepsis detection performance at ED triage (prior to the use of laboratory diagnostics) of the standard sepsis screening algorithm (SIRS with source of infection) and a machine learning algorithm trained on EHR triage data. A machine learning model (KATE Sepsis) was developed using patient encounters with triage data from 16participating hospitals. KATE Sepsis and standard screening were retrospectively evaluated on the adult population of 512,949 medical records. KATE Sepsis demonstrates an AUC of 0.9423 (0.9401 - 0.9441) with sensitivity of 71.09% (70.12% - 71.98%) and specificity of 94.81% (94.75% - 94.87%). Standard screening demonstrates an AUC of 0.6826 (0.6774 - 0.6878) with sensitivity of 40.8% (39.71% - 41.86%) and specificity of95.72% (95.68% - 95.78%). The KATE Sepsis model trained to detect sepsis demonstrates 77.67% (75.78% -79.42%) sensitivity in detecting severe sepsis and 86.95% (84.2% - 88.81%) sensitivity in detecting septic shock. The standard screening protocol demonstrates 43.06% (41% - 45.87%) sensitivity in detecting severe sepsis and40% (36.55% - 43.26%) sensitivity in detecting septic shock. Future research should focus on the prospective impact of KATE Sepsis on administration of antibiotics, readmission rate, morbidity and mortality.
Utilizing the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) to confirm the impact of emergency department management in sepsis patients: a cohort study from taiwan 1998–2020

Ming-Shun Hsieh,Kuan-Chih Chiu,Amrita Chattopadhyay,Tzu-Pin Lu,Shu-Hui Liao,Chia-Ming Chang,Yi-Chen Lee,Wei-En Lo,Vivian Chia-Rong Hsieh,Sung-Yuan Hu,Chorng-Kuang How

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12245-024-00614-4

2024-03-17

International Journal of Emergency Medicine

Abstract:Most sepsis patients could potentially experience advantageous outcomes from targeted medical intervention, such as fluid resuscitation, antibiotic administration, respiratory support, and nursing care, promptly upon arrival at the emergency department (ED). Several scoring systems have been devised to predict hospital outcomes in sepsis patients, including the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score. In contrast to prior research, our study introduces the novel approach of utilizing the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) as a means of assessing treatment efficacy and disease progression during an ED stay for sepsis.

The eukaryotic transcriptional machinery: complexities and mechanisms unforeseen

Development and Validation of a Sepsis Mortality Risk Score for Sepsis-3 Patients in Intensive Care Unit

Validation and comparison of triage-based screening strategies for sepsis

Development of A Novel Score for the Prediction of Hospital Mortality in Patients with Severe Sepsis: the Use of Electronic Healthcare Records with Lasso Regression

Prehospital early warning scores for adults with suspected sepsis: the PHEWS observational cohort and decision-analytic modelling study

Establishment of a Novel Risk Score for In-Hospital Mortality in Adult Sepsis Patients

Early warning scores for sepsis identification and prediction of in‐hospital mortality in adults with sepsis: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Computer-aided National Early Warning Score to predict the risk of sepsis following emergency medical admission to hospital: a model development and external validation study

Development of a Clinical Score for Predicting 28-Day Mortality in Geriatric Sepsis Patients; a Cohort study

SEPSIGN: early identification of sepsis signs in emergency department

Screening strategies to identify sepsis in the prehospital setting: a validation study

Application of a 72 h National Early Warning Score and Incorporation with Sequential Organ Failure Assessment for Predicting Sepsis Outcomes and Risk Stratification in an Intensive Care Unit: A Derivation and Validation Cohort Study

[Assessment of the severity scores in patients included in a sepsis code in an Emergency Departament]

Early prediction of sepsis in emergency department patients using various methods and scoring systems

Development and Evaluation of a Machine Learning Model for the Early Identification of Patients at Risk for Sepsis

Establishment and Effectiveness Evaluation of a Scoring System-RAAS (RDW, AGE, APACHE II, SOFA) for Sepsis by a Retrospective Analysis

A PREDICTION MODEL FOR SEPSIS IN INFECTED PATIENTS: EARLY ASSESSMENT OF SEPSIS ENGAGEMENT

Sepsis incidence, suspicion, prediction and mortality in emergency medical services: a cohort study related to the current international sepsis guideline

A novel scoring system combining Modified Early Warning Score with biomarkers of monocyte distribution width, white blood cell counts, and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio to improve early sepsis prediction in older adults

Detection of sepsis during emergency department triage using machine learning

Utilizing the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) to confirm the impact of emergency department management in sepsis patients: a cohort study from taiwan 1998–2020