[A simple method for the determination of blood clot retraction and natural lysis].

M. Kotovshchikova,B. Kuznik

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Prognostic value of SOFA combined with chest CT severity score in patients with critical COVID-19 pneumonia: a retrospective study

Honglong Fang,Yang Yu,Junjie Zhao,Lanxin Cao,Weiting Chen,Jiafei Yu,Kai Zhang,Caimu Wang,Wei Cui,Jian Luo,Weiwen Zhang,Gensheng Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4066044/v1

2024-01-01

Abstract:Abstract Background: Either sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score or chest CT severity score (CT-SS) is often used alone to evaluate the prognosis of patients with critical coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but each of them has intrinsic deficiency. Herein, we attempted to investigate the predictive value of the combination of SOFA and CT-SS for the prognosis of COVID-19. Materials and Methods: A single-center retrospective study was performed in the Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine from December 2022 to January 2023. Patients with critical COVID-19 pneumonia were divided into two groups of survival or non-survival of hospitalization. The data including clinical characteristics, CT-SS, SOFA score, laboratory results on admission day were collected and analyzed. In addition, the predictive value of SOFAscore, chest CT-SS, or their combination for in-hospital mortality of COVID-19 pneumonia were compared by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Results: A total of 424 patients with a mean age of 75.46 years and a major proportion of male (69.10%) were finally enrolled, and the total in-hospital mortality was 43.40% (184/424). In comparison with survival group, significant higher proportions of older age (>75 years), comorbidities including obesity, diabetes, and cerebrovascular disease, more needs of mechanical ventilation and continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) were observed in the non-survival group (all P﹤0.05). In addition, non-survival patients had a higher value of creatinine, procalcitonin, C-reactive protein, interleukin-6 , SOFA score , CT-SS (all P﹤0.05) on admission day. Multivariate logistic regression analysis further showed that older age, obesity, diabetes, SOFA score, CT-SS, mechanical ventilation, and lymphocytopenia (all P﹤0.05) were independently related with in-hospital mortality. Moreover, the area under the curve (AUC) of combination of SOFA score and chest CT-SS became significant higher than their respective alone (P＜0.01). Conclusion: A simple combination of SOFA scorewith chest CT-SS on admission elicits a better predictive value for in-hospital mortality of critical COVID-19 patients, which could also serve as a promising indicator for prognosis prediction of other severe lung diseases like severe pneumonia and acute lung injury.
Performance of SOFA, qSOFA and SIRS to predict septic shock after percutaneous nephrolithotomy

Yonghan Peng,Wei Zhang,Yalong Xu,Ling Li,Weixing Yu,Jianwen Zeng,Shaoxiong Ming,Ziyu Fang,Zeyu Wang,Xiaofeng Gao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03183-2

2020-01-01

World Journal of Urology

Abstract:Objective The new clinical criteria termed SOFA and qSOFA were demonstrated to be more accurate than SIRS in screening patients at high risk of sepsis. We aim to evaluate the ability of SOFA, qSOFA and SIRS to predict septic shock after PCNL. Patients and methods Consecutive patients undergoing PCNL were included to assess the performance of SOFA, qSOFA and SIRS in predicting septic shock, the AUC of ROC curve and decision curve analysis were used, and the optimal cutoff values and their achieving time were calculated. Results Of the 431 included patients, 12 (2.7%) cases developed septic shock. Compared with non-septic shock patients, patients with septic shock were more likely to be female, have positive history of urine culture and higher urine leukocyte count, and show increased postoperative serum creatinine, PCT and decreased leukocyte. The optimal cutoff of SOFA, qSOFA and SIRS was > 2, > 0 and > 1, respectively. All of the 12 patients with verified septic shock met SOFA and SIRS criteria, while only 11 cases met qSOFA criterion. SOFA had the identical highest sensitivity (100%) and greater specificity (87% vs. 81%) than SIRS. qSOFA had higher specificity (92%) than both SOFA and SIRS at the expense of lower sensitivity (92%). The AUC of SOFA (0.973) to predict septic shock was greater than that of qSOFA (0.928) and SIRS (0.935). When combined with SIRS, SOFA outperformed qSOFA for discrimination of septic shock (AUC 0.987 vs. 0.978). Decision curve analysis indicated SOFA was clearly superior to both qSOFA and SIRS with a higher net benefit and net reduction in intervention. The qSOFA achieved the best time-based predictive efficiency, with the shortest median time to meet its cutoff, followed by SOFA and SIRS. Conclusion The performance of SOFA in predicting septic shock after PCNL was slightly greater than qSOFA and SIRS. The comprehensive application of various criteria is recommended to assist early detection of septic shock following PCNL.
Predictive Value of Qsofa Score for Death in Emergency Department Resuscitation Room among Adult Trauma Patients:A Retrospective Study

Huang Wenjuan,Yang Peng,Xu Feng,Chen Du

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12873-021-00498-0

2021-01-01

Abstract:Background To explore the predictive value of the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score for death in the emergency department (ED) resuscitation room among adult trauma patients. Methods During the period November 1, 2016 to November 30, 2019, data was retrospectively collected of adult trauma patients triaged to the ED resuscitation room in the First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University. Death occurring in the ED resuscitation room was the study endpoint. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to explore the association between qSOFA score and death. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was also performed for death. Results A total of 1739 trauma victims were admitted, including 1695 survivors and 44 non-survivors. The death proportion raised with qSOFA score: 0.60% for qSOFA = 0, 3.28% for qSOFA = 1, 12.06% for qSOFA = 2, and 15.38% for qSOFA = 3, p < 0.001. Subgroup of qSOFA = 0 was used as a reference. In univariate analysis, crude OR for death with qSOFA = 1 was 5.65 [95% CI 2.25 to 14.24, p < 0.001], qSOFA = 2 was 22.85 [95% CI 8.84 to 59.04, p < 0.001], and qSOFA = 3 was 30.30 [95% CI 5.50 to 167.05, p < 0.001]. In multivariate analysis, with an adjusted OR (aOR) of 2.87 (95% CI 0.84 to 9.87, p = 0.094) for qSOFA = 1, aOR 6.80 (95% CI 1.79 to 25.90, p = 0.005) for qSOFA = 2, and aOR 24.42 (95% CI 3.67 to 162.27, p = 0.001) for qSOFA = 3. The Area Under the Curve (AUC) for predicting death in the ED resuscitation room among trauma patients was 0.78 [95% CI, 0.72–0.85]. Conclusions The qSOFA score can assess the severity of emergency trauma patients and has good predictive value for death in the ED resuscitation room.
Accuracy of Qsofa for the Diagnosis of Sepsis-3: a Secondary Analysis of a Population-Based Cohort Study.

Hongcheng Tian,Jianfang Zhou,Li Weng,Xiaoyun Hu,Jinmin Peng,Chunyao Wang,Wei Jiang,Xueping Du,Xiuming Xi,Youzhong An,Meili Duan,Bin Du

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/jtd.2019.04.90

2019-01-01

Journal of Thoracic Disease

Abstract:Background: We aimed to evaluate the accuracy of quick Sequential (sepsis-related) Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) for the diagnosis of sepsis-3, and to analyze the prognosis of infected patients in wards over-diagnosed with qSOFA but missed by sepsis-3, and those missed by qSOFA but in accordance with sepsis-3 criteria. We also intended to validate the performance of qSOFA as one predictor of outcome in patients with suspicion of infection. Methods: We reviewed the medical records of 1,716 adult patients with infection who were hospitalized from July 1st, 2012 to June 30th , 2014 in the Yuetan subdistrict of Beijing, China. Based on the sepsis-3 criteria and qSOFA score proposed by the Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock, these patients were categorized into four groups: qSOFA(-)sepsis(-), qSOFA(+)sepsis(-), qSOFA(-) sepsis(+), and qSOFA(+)sepsis(+). Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to determine the independent risk factors for in-hospital mortality. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) of the qSOFA(+) group were compared with the sepsis(+) group for in-hospital mortality, ICU admission, and invasive ventilation. Results: Among the 1,716 patients with infection, there were 935 patients (54.5%) with sepsis, and 640 patients (37.3%) with qSOFA >= 2. There were 610 patients in the qS0FA(-)sepsis(-) group, 171 in the qSOFA(+)sepsis(-) group, 466 in the qSOFA(-)sepsis(+) group, and 469 in the qSOFA(+)sepsis(+) group. In the logistic regression analysis, increasing age, bedridden status, and malignancy were all independent risk factors of hospital mortality. Sepsis and qSOFA >= 2 were also independent risk factors of hospital mortality, with an adjusted OR of 3.85 (95% CI: 2.70-5.50) and 13.92 (95% CI: 9.87-16.93) respectively. qSOFA had a sensitivity of 50.2% and a specificity of 78.1% for sepsis-3. The false-positive [qSOFA(+)sepsis(-)] group had 38 patients (22.2%) die during hospitalization, and an adjusted OR of 9.20 (95% CI: 4.86-17.38). In addition, the false-negative [qSOFA(-)sepsis(+)] group had a hospital mortality rate of 7.3% (34/466) and an adjusted OR of 2.59 (95% CI: 1.39-4.83). In comparison, patients meeting neither qSOFA nor sepsis criteria had the lowest hospital mortality [2.6% (16/610)], whereas patients with both qSOFA >= 2 and sepsis had the highest hospital mortality [56.5% (265/469)], with an adjusted OR of 42.02 (95% CI: 24.31-72.64). The discrimination of in-hospital mortality using qSOFA (AUROC, 0.846; 95% CI, 0.824-0.868) was greater compared with sepsis-3 criteria (AUROC, 0.834; 95% CI, 0.805-0.863; P<0.001). Conclusions: In our analysis, the sensitivity(Se) of qSOFA for the diagnosis of sepsis was lower, and qSOFA score >= 2 might identify a group of patients at a higher risk of mortality, regardless of being septic or not.
Usefulness of Qsofa and SIRS Scores for Detection of Incipient Sepsis in General Ward Patients: A Prospective Cohort Study.

Jingchao Luo,Wei Jiang,Li Weng,Jinmin Peng,Xiaoyun Hu,Chunyao Wang,Guangyun Liu,Huibin Huang,Bin Du

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrc.2019.01.012

IF: 4.298

2019-01-01

Journal of Critical Care

Abstract:PURPOSE:To prospectively assess the diagnostic value of quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) and systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) scores for sepsis in ward patients with infections.MATERIALS AND METHODS:Consecutive patients admitted with infection or developing infection during hospital stay were included. All variables for calculating qSOFA, SIRS, and SOFA scores were collected, and the maximum scores were determined until hospital discharge, death, or day 28, whichever occurred earlier. The primary outcome was sepsis at 28 days. Diagnostic and prognostic values were assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) with the conventional cutoff value of 2.RESULTS:Of 409 general ward patients, 146 patients and 371 patients met qSOFA and SIRS criteria, 229 patients developed sepsis. Although qSOFA score had a better overall diagnostic performance of sepsis (AUROC 0.75 vs. 0.69), it had a much lower sensitivity (53% vs. 98%) and higher specificity (87% vs. 18%) than SIRS score. In addition, qSOFA score had a better prognostic value than SIRS score (AUROC 0.86 vs. 0.67).CONCLUSIONS:Neither SIRS score nor qSOFA score could serve as an ideal screening tool for early identification sepsis, whereas qSOFA score might help to identify patients with higher risk of poor clinical outcome.TRIAL REGISTRATION:clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02930070.
[Prognosis analysis of multi-indicator combined with sequential organ failure assessment in patients with sepsis]

Lilin Zhang,Jinpeng Zhang,Lyu Jin,Hongyue Xu,Xiaohui Zhao,Yadong Yang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn121430-20230617-00453

Abstract:Objective: To explore the prognostic value of early multiple detection indicators in combination with sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) in sepsis patients. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted. Patients with sepsis admitted to the department of critical care medicine of Huanggang Central Hospital of Yangtze University from May 2020 to May 2022 were selected as the research subjects. Coagulation indicators, inflammatory factors, blood routine, liver and kidney function, and blood gas analysis were collected at admission. Organ dysfunction was assessed based on the SOFA score within 24 hours after admission. Patients were divided into a survival group and a death group according to the outcome of 28 days in ICU. Differences in the above indicators between the two groups were compared. Multifactorial Logistic regression analysis was used to analyze prognostic factors of 28-day mortality in sepsis patients. Receiver operator characteristic curve (ROC curve) was drawn to analyze the predictive performance of various indicators, the SOFA score, and the combine model for the 28-day outcome in patients with sepsis. Results: A total of 101 patients with sepsis were enrolled, 56 patients survived and 45 patients died. Compared to the survival group, patients in the death group were older, the proportion of patients with septic shock was larger, the SOFA score, and the proportion of pulmonary infection were higher, the prothrombin time (PT) and activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) were significantly prolonged, the prothrombin activity (PTA) was significantly shortened, and antithrombin (AT) was significantly decreased, the levels of hypersensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), blood urea nitrogen (BUN), total bilirubin (TBil), and lactic acid (Lac) were significantly increased, while the platelet count (PLT) was significantly decreased. Multifactorial Logistic regression analysis showed that pulmonary infection [odds ratio (OR) = 0.010, 95% confidence interval (95%CI) was 0.001-0.164, P = 0.001], AT (OR = 0.944, 95%CI was 0.910-0.978, P = 0.002), hs-CRP (OR = 1.008, 95%CI was 1.001-1.015, P = 0.017), Lac (OR = 1.619, 95%CI was 1.195-2.193, P = 0.002), and SOFA score (OR = 1.363, 95%CI was 1.076-1.727, P = 0.010) were independent prognostic factors for 28-day mortality in patients. A combined model was constructed using pulmonary infection, AT, hs-CRP, Lac, and SOFA score. ROC curve analysis showed that the area under the ROC curve (AUC) for the combine model in predicting sepsis prognosis was 0.936 (95%CI was 0.869-0.975, P < 0.001), which was higher in value compared to single indicators (AUC of AT, hs-CRP, Lac, and SOFA score were 0.775, 0.666, 0.802, 0.796, respectively, all P < 0.05). Conclusions: The predictive ability of the SOFA score for sepsis patient outcomes is limited. The combine model combining infection site, AT, hs-CRP, and Lac shows better predictive ability.
Clinical Evaluation of Sepsis-1 and Sepsis-3 in the ICU.

Xueling Fang,Zhenzhen Wang,Jun Yang,Hongliu Cai,Zhengjie Yao,Kun Li,Qiang Fang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2017.06.037

2017-01-01

CHEST Journal

Abstract:BACKGROUND: There has been considerable controversy between sepsis-1 and sepsis-3 criteria. METHODS: Patients with infection meeting two or more systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria (sepsis-1) or a Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score >= 2 (sepsis-3) on the first day after ICU admission were selected from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care-III database, and their outcomes were compared using all-cause death as the end point. Subgroup analysis was also performed based on prior chronic organ dysfunction. RESULTS: There were 21,491 infected patients included. Of those meeting the diagnostic criteria for sepsis-1, 13.42% did not satisfy sepsis-3 criteria, and this population had a 21-day mortality rate of 6.96%. In contrast, 7.00% of the patients meeting sepsis-3 criteria did not meet sepsis-1 criteria, and their 21-day mortality rate was 10.76%. When excluding preexisting organ conditions, 18.41% of patients with sepsis-1 did not meet sepsis-3 criteria, with a 21-day mortality rate of 6.39%, and 6.00% of patients with sepsis-3 did not meet sepsis-1 criteria, with a 21-day mortality rate of 9.11%. When two or more SIRS criteria or SOFA score >= 2 were applied to predict 21-day all-cause mortality in infected patients without prior chronic organ dysfunction, the sensitivity was 96.0% or 91.0%, respectively. Although the areas under the receiver operator curve of both SOFA and SIRS criteria could be used for predicting mortality, SOFA score represented the severity of the condition, whereas SIRS score represented a clinically evident host response to infection. CONCLUSIONS: Sepsis-3 diagnostic criteria narrow the sepsis population at the expense of sensitivity, and the resulting false negatives may delay disease diagnosis. It may be inappropriate to compare the prediction performance of SIRS and SOFA criteria when sepsis-3 is defined.
[A multicenter confirmatory study about precision and practicability of Sepsis-3].

Xiaotong Hu,Mingjie Wu,Qiang Fang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.2095-4352.2017.02.002

2017-01-01

Abstract:OBJECTIVE:To clinically validate the precision of diagnostic Sepsis-3 criteria, and to guide and generalize its clinical application. METHODS:A multicenter retrospective observational study was conducted. The patients admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) of 6 tertiary hospitals in Zhejiang Province from January to June 2015 were enrolled, and the patients satisfying the diagnostic criteria of Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 were screened. Population characteristics between the patients satisfying two editions were compared, and the diagnosis accuracy rate in different degree hospitals were investigated. According to the doctor's diagnosis, the patients who met the criteria of Sepsis-2 were divided into diagnosis group and non-diagnosis group, and the factors influencing the diagnosis of sepsis were analyzed by logistic regression. The patients meeting Sepsis-2 but no meeting Sepsis-3 were served as exclusion group, and those meeting Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 were served as enroll group, and the characteristics of patients between the two groups were compared. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was plotted to evaluate the predictive value of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) score, sepsis-related quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) and sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) on death, and whether the consistency of qSOFA and SOFA would affect the sensitivity of definition. The patients meeting Sepsis-2 were divided into non-survived group and survived group, and the factors associated with death were analyzed by logistic regression. RESULTS:Finally, 1 423 patients were enrolled, 3 patients with age < 18 years and 19 patients with missing data were excluded. There were 363 patients and 329 patients met Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3, respectively. No significant differences were found in population characteristics between the groups of Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 (all P > 0.05) except for acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACHE II) score [19.10 (8.00) vs. 20.28 (8.00), P < 0.05]. It was shown on the clinical data analysis of the hospitals that the patients meeting Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 in hospital 3 had the highest 28-day mortality (60.4% and 60.0%) with the lowest rate of diagnosis (0). While in the hospital 1, the patients had the lowest 28-day mortality (22.9% and 27.2%), and the rate of diagnosis was 19.5%. Interestingly, the patients in hospital 4 had the highest diagnosis rate of sepsis (44.8%), but 28-day mortality was both 58.6%. It was shown by logistic regression analysis that the patients with old age [odds ratio (OR) = 0.970, P = 0.021], high blood lactate (OR = 0.443, P = 0.004), high blood pressure (OR = 0.957, P = 0.009) and low oxygenation index (OR = 1.004, P = 0.024) were easy to neglect diagnosis. Compared with Sepsis-3 exclude group, the patients in Sepsis-3 enroll group were older [years: 68.52 (26.00) vs. 53.75 (18.00), P < 0.01] with higher APACHEII score [20.38 (8.00) vs. 7.72 (6.00), P < 0.01], higher blood lactate [mmol/L: 3.45 (3.00) vs. 1.95 (1.20), P > 0.05], longer length of ICU stay [days: 22.42 (22.00) vs. 15.13 (16.00), P < 0.01], and higher 28-day mortality [45.29% (149/329) vs. 14.71% (5/34), P < 0.01], indicating that the diagnostic efficiency of Sepsis-2 was low, the diagnostic specificity of Sepsis-3 was high, and the prognosis of Sepsis-3 patients was worse. It was shown by ROC curve analysis that the prognostic value of SIRS, qSOFA and SOFA to mortality was gradually increased [area under ROC curve (AUC) was 0.567, 0.597, 0.683, respectively], but the prognostic value were all low. Comparing patients meeting qSOFA and (or) SOFA in Sepsis-2, significant differences were found in APACHE II score [17.55 (7.00) vs. 23.24 (8.00)] and 28-day mortality [38.75% (31/80) vs. 58.59% (75/128), both P < 0.01]. The patients who just met the qSOFA or SOFA, their 28-day mortality was up to 38.75%, suggesting that qSOFA should not be ignored. Compared with survived group, the patients in survived group were older with higher APACHE II score and shorter length of ICU stay (all P < 0.05). It was shown by logistic regression analysis that APACHE II score (OR = 1.199, P = 0.000) and length of ICU stay (OR = 0.949, P = 0.000) were related with death. CONCLUSIONS:Patients satisfied Sepsis-3 were easier to develop more organ failure, Sepsis-3 and higher death prediction than Sepsis-2 and higher diagnosis specificity, but data shows that there is extra room for improvement.
SIRS, SOFA, qSOFA, and NEWS in the diagnosis of sepsis and prediction of adverse outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Xia Qiu,Yu-Peng Lei,Rui-Xi Zhou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14787210.2023.2237192

2023-07-19

Expert Review of Anti-infective Therapy

Abstract:We compared Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), Quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), and National Early Warning Score (NEWS) for sepsis diagnosis and adverse outcomes prediction. Clinical studies that used SIRS, SOFA, qSOFA, and NEWS for sepsis diagnosis and prognosis assessment were included. Data were extracted, and meta-analysis was performed for outcome measures, including sepsis diagnosis, in-hospital mortality, 7/10/14-day mortality, 28/30-day mortality, and ICU admission. Fifty-seven included studies showed good overall quality. Regarding sepsis prediction, SIRS demonstrated high sensitivity (0.85) but low specificity (0.41), qSOFA showed low sensitivity (0.42) but high specificity (0.98), and NEWS exhibited high sensitivity (0.71) and specificity (0.85). For predicting in-hospital mortality, SOFA demonstrated the highest sensitivity (0.89) and specificity (0.69). In terms of predicting 7/10/14-day mortality, SIRS exhibited high sensitivity (0.87), while qSOFA had high specificity (0.75). For predicting 28/30-day mortality, SOFA showed high sensitivity (0.97) but low specificity (0.14), whereas qSOFA displayed low sensitivity (0.41) but high specificity (0.88). NEWS independently demonstrates good diagnostic capability for sepsis, especially in high-income countries. SOFA emerges as the optimal choice for predicting in-hospital mortality and can be employed as a screening tool for 28/30-day mortality in low-income countries.

pharmacology & pharmacy,infectious diseases,microbiology
Contributions of individual qSOFA elements to assessment of severity and for prediction of mortality

Qi Guo,Hai-Yan Li,Wei-Dong Song,Ming Li,Xiao-Ke Chen,Hui Liu,Hong-Lin Peng,Hai-Qiong Yu,Nian Liu,Yan-Hong Li,Zhong-Dong Lü,Li-Hua Liang,Qing-Zhou Zhao,Mei Jiang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07853890.2024.2397090

Abstract:Background: The quick sequential [sepsis-related] organ failure assessment (qSOFA) acts as a prompt to consider possible sepsis. The contributions of individual qSOFA elements to assessment of severity and for prediction of mortality remain unknown. Methods: A total of 3974 patients with community-acquired pneumonia were recruited to an observational prospective cohort study. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), odds ratio, relative risk and Youden's index were employed to assess discrimination. Results: Respiratory rate ≥22/min demonstrated the most superior diagnostic value, indicated by largest odds ratio, relative risk and AUROC, and maximum Youden's index for mortality. However, the indices for altered mentation and systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≤100 mm Hg decreased notably in turn. The predictive validities of respiratory rate ≥22/min, altered mentation and SBP ≤100 mm Hg were good, adequate and poor for mortality, indicated by AUROC (0.837, 0.734 and 0.671, respectively). Respiratory rate ≥22/min showed the strongest associations with SOFA scores, pneumonia severity index, hospital length of stay and costs. However, SBP ≤100 mm Hg was most weakly correlated with the indices. Conclusions: Respiratory rate ≥22/min made the greatest contribution to parsimonious qSOFA to assess severity and predict mortality. However, the contributions of altered mentation and SBP ≤100 mm Hg decreased strikingly in turn. It is the first known prospective evidence of the contributions of individual qSOFA elements to assessment of severity and for prediction of mortality, which might have implications for more accurate clinical triage decisions.
SOFA Score in relation to Sepsis: Clinical Implications in Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prognostic Assessment

Changbo Liu,Shuzhen Suo,Liya Luo,Xixian Chen,Chunxiang Ling,Shixiong Cao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/7870434

IF: 2.809

2022-08-12

Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine

Abstract:Purpose. To analyze the clinical significance of the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score in the diagnosis, treatment, and prognostic assessment of sepsis. Methods. 140 patients with sepsis from January 2020 to January 2021 were selected as the observation group, and 40 healthy people were selected as the control group. The observation group was divided into mild group, severe group, and septic shock group by single blind grouping according to the condition of the disease, and they were also divided into survival group and death group according to the prognosis. Collect the fasting venous blood of the subjects in each group in the morning, compare the levels of total bilirubin (TBIL), blood creatinine (CR), and platelet count (PLT) in each group, and record and compare the patients' respiratory system oxygen partial pressure/inhaled oxygen concentration (po2/fio2), acute physiology and chronic health scoring system II (APACHE II), sequential organ failure assessment (sofa) score, q-SOFA score, and △SOFA score; Pearson analysis was used to analyze the correlation between SOFA score and other indicators; multivariate logistic regression was used to analyze the prognostic risk factors of patients with sepsis; receiver-operating characteristic curve (ROC) was used to analyze the value of SOFA score alone and in combination in the diagnosis, condition, and prognosis of sepsis. Results. There were significant differences in Apache II score, SOFA score, q-SOFA score map, po2/fio2, PLT, GCS, TBIL, and serum creatinine (SCR) between the control group and the observation group ( P < 0.05 ). There were significant differences in Apache II score, SOFA score, q-SOFA score, mean arterial pressure (map) po2/fio2, PLT, Glasgow Coma Score (GCS), TBIL, SCR, and △SOFA score among patients in mild, severe, and septic shock groups ( P < 0.05 ). There were significant differences in age, Apache II score, SOFA score, q-SOFA score, map, po2/fio2, PLT, GCS, TBIL, SCR, and △SOFA score between survival group and death group ( P < 0.05 ). SOFA score and q-SOFA score were significantly positively correlated with TBIL and SCR and significantly negatively correlated with po2/fio2 and PLT; △SOFA score was significantly negatively correlated with TBIL and SCR and significantly positively correlated with map, po2/fio2, PLT, and GCS. Apache II score, SOFA score, and q-SOFA score were independent risk factors for sepsis patients, and △SOFA score, po2/fio2, and GCS score were protective factors ( P < 0.05 ). ROC curve analysis showed that the AUC of sepsis combined with SOFA score and q-SOFA score was 0.880; the AUC of sepsis assessed by SOFA score, q-SOFA score, and △SOFA score was 0.929; the AUC of sepsis prognosis assessed by SOFA score, q-SOFA score, and △SOFA score was 0.900. Conclusion. SOFA score, q-SOFA score, and △SOFA score were abnormally expressed in patients with sepsis and were risk factors for the severity of the patient's condition and prognosis. The SOFA score, q-SOFA score, and △SOFA score were risk factors for the severity and prognosis of patients with sepsis and had some value in diagnosing sepsis and assessing the condition and prognosis, of which the combined value of the three was higher.

mathematical & computational biology
Comparison of the Performance between Sepsis-1 and Sepsis-3 in Icus in China: A Retrospective Multicenter Study

Baoli Cheng,Zhongwang Li,Jingya Wang,Guohao Xie,Xu Liu,Zhipeng Xu,Lihua Chu,Jialian Zhao,Yongming Yao,Xiangming Fang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/SHK.0000000000000868

2017-01-01

Shock

Abstract:The definition of sepsis was updated to sepsis-3 in February 2016. However, the performance of the previous and new definition of sepsis remains unclear in China. This was a retrospective multicenter study in six intensive care unit (ICUs) from five university-affiliated hospitals to compare the performance between sepsis-1 and sepsis-3 in China. From May 1, 2016 to June 1, 2016, 496 patients were enrolled consecutively. Data were extracted from the electronic clinical records. We evaluated the performance of sepsis-1 and sepsis-3 by measuring the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROC) to predict 28-day mortality rates. Of 496 enrolled patients, 186 (37.5%) were diagnosed with sepsis according to sepsis-1, while 175 (35.3%) fulfilled the criteria of sepsis-3. The AUROC of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) is significantly smaller than that of sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) (0.55 [95% confidence interval, 0.46-0.64] vs. 0.69 (95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.77], P = 0.008) to predict 28-day mortality rates of infected patients. Moreover, 5.9% infected patients (11 patients) were diagnosed as sepsis according to sepsis-1 but not to sepsis-3. The APACHE II, SOFA scores, and mortality rate of the 11 patients were significantly lower than of patients whose sepsis was defined by both the previous and new criteria (8.6 +/- 3.5 vs. 16.3 +/- 6.2, P = < 0.001; 1 (0-1) vs. 6 (4-8), P = < 0.001; 0.0 vs. 33.1%, P = 0.019). In addition, the APACHE II, length of stay in ICU, and 28-day mortality rate of septic patients rose gradually corresponding with the raise in SOFA score (but not the SIRS score). Sepsis-3 performed better than sepsis-1 in the study samples in ICUs in China.
[Meta analysis of the predictive efficacy of various derived indicators of sequential organ failure assessment in outcomes of patients with sepsis].

Wen Li,Zhiling Zhao,Qingtao Zhou,Qinggang Ge

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn121430-20231007-00843

2024-01-01

Abstract:OBJECTIVE:To systematically review and evaluate the predictive efficacy of various derived indicators of sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) in mortality rate of sepsis patients. METHODS:Literature on sepsis and SOFA scores were searched in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library. The retrieval time will be set to the time of database-building to February, 2023. The main outcome measures included 28-day mortality, 30-day mortality, in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) mortality and long-term mortality. Literature screening, data extraction and quality evaluation were carried out independently by 2 researchers. Data were analyzed by Revman 5.3.5, Meta-disc and Stata software. Deek funnel plots were used to assess publication bias in the included studies. RESULTS:A total of 40 articles including 51 trials were included. Of these, 32 were in English and 8 in Chinese, 17 were in prospective trials and 34 were in retrospective trials, 38 were in initial SOFA-related trials and 9 were in the change of SOFA score (ΔSOFA)-related studies, a total of 59 962 patients were enrolled. (1) The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC) of initial SOFA and ΔSOFA for predicting outcome in sepsis was 0.773 and 0.787 (Z = 0.115, P > 0.05), respectively. There was no significant difference between the two indexes in predicting the outcome of patients with sepsis. (2) In subgroup analysis, due to limitations in the number of literature articles, the 28-day mortality rate and 30-day mortality rate were merged for discussion. The predictive power of ΔSOFA for 28-day or 30-day mortality was significantly higher than that of initial SOFA (AUC was 0.854, 0.787, Z = 2.603, P ≤ 0.01). (3) There were few studies on ΔSOFA in predicting in-hospital mortality, ICU mortality and long-term mortality of sepsis patients. The AUC of the initial SOFA for predicting the study endpoints described above was: ICU mortality (0.814) > 28-day or 30-day mortality (0.787) > in-hospital mortality (0.697) > long-term mortality (0.646). (4) Initial SOFA and ΔSOFA in patients with sepsis of non-Han original had good predictive performance and there was no significant difference between them (AUC was 0.766, 0.811, respectively). However, the pooled sensitivity of ΔSOFA was higher (92%). (5) In prospective studies, initial SOFA was better at predicting outcomes in patients with sepsis (AUC was 0.804, pooled sensitivity 64%). The sensitivity of ΔSOFA indicators in predicting the outcome of sepsis patients was significantly higher than the initial SOFA (78% vs. 64%). The funnel plot showed that there was no significant publication bias in the included literature. CONCLUSIONS:ΔSOFA has a relatively high diagnostic efficacy in predicting short-term (28-day or 30-day) mortality in patients with sepsis.
Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, and Procalcitonin for Early Diagnosis and Prediction of Death in Elderly Patients with Suspicion of Sepsis in the Emergency Department, Based on Sepsis-3 Definition

German Devia Jaramillo,Milciades Ibáñez Pinilla

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000515851

2021-05-05

Gerontology

Abstract:Background: Sepsis is a disease with a high mortality rate without prompt treatment. However, this entity is difficult to diagnose in the elderly population in the emergency room; for this reason, it is necessary to have diagnostic tools for early detection. Objective: The aim of the study was to determine the highest diagnostic yield of procalcitonin (PCT), Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) for sepsis (based on the sepsis-3 consensus), on admission at the emergency department, in those older than 65 years. Methods: This is a diagnostic test study of a historical cohort of 65-year-old patients with suspected sepsis. Results: In the sample of 179 patients, 53.6% had confirmed sepsis. Significant differences were found ( p < 0.0001), with a greater diagnostic and predictive capacity of PCT for the diagnosis of sepsis (receiver operating characteristics curve area [area under the curve (AUC) = 0.883, 95% CI: 0.835–0.931] than qSOFA (AUC = 0.559, 95% CI: 0.485–0.663) and SOFA (AUC = 0.662, 95% CI: 0.584–0.739); these results were similar in the cohort of patients ≥75 years. In positive PCT(≥0.5 ng/mL), the sensitivity was 71.8% (95% CI: 62.36–81.39), specificity of 89.1% (95% CI: 81.87–96.45%), V+ 88.4% (95% CI: 80.73–96.19%), V− of 73.2% (95% CI: 64.14–82.39%), positive likelihood ratio of 6.63 (95% CI: 3.53–12.44), and negative likelihood ratio of 0.32 (95% CI: 0.23–0.44); these results were similar in the cohort of patients ≥75 years. Lactate ≥2 mmol/L (RR = 1.659 [95% CI: 1.002–2.747]) and PCT ≥0.5 ng/mL (RR = 1.942 [95% CI: 1.157–3.261]) showed a significant association with in-hospital mortality. Conclusion: In the elderly population with suspicion of infection on admission to the emergency department, qSOFA presents a low diagnostic performance of confirmed sepsis and in-hospital mortality, for which other tools with higher diagnostic and prognostic performance should be added, such as PCT and lactate.

geriatrics & gerontology,gerontology
Prognostic value of PaO/FiO, SOFA and D-dimer in elderly patients with sepsis

Tao Li,Wan-Qin Hu,Xian Li,Jia-Peng Zhang,Li-Zhi Tan,Li-Xia Yu,Hai-Rong Gu,Ze-Ya Shi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/03000605221100755

2022-01-01

Journal of International Medical Research

Abstract:Objective To investigate the prognostic value for predicting mortality of partial pressure of oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO 2 /FiO 2 ), the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score and D-dimer in elderly patients with sepsis. Methods This retrospective cohort study enrolled elderly patients with sepsis admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) between January 2019 and October 2020. Patients were divided into a survival group and a non-survival group. Biomarkers, SOFA, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II and Glasgow Coma Scale scores were recorded within 24 h after admission to the ICU. Results A total of 135 elderly patients with sepsis were enrolled in the study: 89 were in the survival group and 46 were in the non-survival group at 28 days. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses demonstrated that PaO 2 /FiO 2 , SOFA and D-dimer were independently associated with 28-day mortality. The predictive performance for mortality of the combination of PaO 2 /FiO 2 , SOFA score and D-dimer (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.926) was higher than the values for the individual factors (0.761, 0.745 and 0.878, respectively). Conclusion The combination of PaO 2 /FiO 2 , SOFA score and D-dimer represents a promising tool and biomarker for predicting 28-day mortality of the elderly patients with sepsis.
Performance of the MEDS score in predicting mortality among emergency department patients with a suspected infection: a meta-analysis.

Gensheng Zhang,Kai Zhang,Xie Zheng,Wei Cui,Yucai Hong,Zhongheng Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2019-208901

2020-01-01

Emergency Medicine Journal

Abstract:Objectives To carry out a meta-analysis to examine the prognostic performance of the Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis (MEDS) score in predicting mortality among emergency department patients with a suspected infection. Methods Electronic databases-PubMed, Embase, Scopus, EBSCO and the Cochrane Library-were searched for eligible articles from their respective inception through February 2019. Sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios and receiver operator characteristic area under the curve were calculated. Subgroup analyses were performed to explore the prognostic performance of MEDS in selected populations. Results We identified 24 studies involving 21 246 participants. The pooled sensitivity of MEDS to predict mortality was 79% (95% CI 72% to 84%); specificity was 74% (95% CI 68% to 80%); positive likelihood ratio 3.07 (95% CI 2.47 to 3.82); negative likelihood ratio 0.29 (95% CI 0.22 to 0.37) and area under the curve 0.83 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.86). Significant heterogeneity was seen among included studies. Meta-regression analyses showed that the time at which the MEDS score was measured and the cut-off value used were important sources of heterogeneity. Conclusion The MEDS score has moderate accuracy in predicting mortality among emergency department patients with a suspected infection. A study comparison MEDS and qSOFA in the same population is needed.
Performance of the MEDS Score in Predicting Mortality among Emergency Department Patients with a Suspected Infection: a Meta-Analysis

Gensheng Zhang,Kai Zhang,Zheng Xie,Wei Cui,Yucai Hong,Zhongheng Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2019-208901

2019-01-01

Emergency Medicine Journal

Abstract:Objectives To carry out a meta-analysis to examine the prognostic performance of the Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis (MEDS) score in predicting mortality among emergency department patients with a suspected infection. Methods Electronic databases—PubMed, Embase, Scopus, EBSCO and the Cochrane Library—were searched for eligible articles from their respective inception through February 2019. Sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios and receiver operator characteristic area under the curve were calculated. Subgroup analyses were performed to explore the prognostic performance of MEDS in selected populations. Results We identified 24 studies involving 21 246 participants. The pooled sensitivity of MEDS to predict mortality was 79% (95% CI 72% to 84%); specificity was 74% (95% CI 68% to 80%); positive likelihood ratio 3.07 (95% CI 2.47 to 3.82); negative likelihood ratio 0.29 (95% CI 0.22 to 0.37) and area under the curve 0.83 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.86). Significant heterogeneity was seen among included studies. Meta-regression analyses showed that the time at which the MEDS score was measured and the cut-off value used were important sources of heterogeneity. Conclusion The MEDS score has moderate accuracy in predicting mortality among emergency department patients with a suspected infection. A study comparison MEDS and qSOFA in the same population is needed.
Is qSOFA Suitable for Early Diagnosis of Sepsis Among Bacteremia Patients in Emergency Departments? Time for a Reappraisal of Sepsis-3 Criteria

Ching-Chi Lee,Ching-Yu Ho,Po-Lin Chen,Chih-Chia Hsieh,William Yu Chung Wang,Chih-Hao Lin,Wen-Chien Ko

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.743822

IF: 3.9

2021-10-20

Frontiers in Medicine

Abstract:Background: For early recognition of patients with sepsis, quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) was proposed by Sepsis-3 criteria as initial sepsis identification outside of intensive care units. However, the new definition has subsequently led to controversy and prompted much discussion for delayed treatment efforts. We aimed to validate Sepsis-3 criteria on bacteremia patients by investigating prognostic impacts of inappropriate administration of empirical antimicrobial therapy (EAT) and delayed source control (SC) compared to Sepsis-2 criteria. Methods: In the multicenter cohort of adults with community-onset bacteremia in emergency departments (EDs), adverse effects of delayed treatment efforts on 30-day mortality were examined in septic and non-septic patients by fulfilling the Sepsis-2 or Sepsis-3 criteria using the Cox regression model after adjusting independent determinants of mortality. Results: Of the 3,898 total adults, septic patients accounted for 92.8% (3,619 patients) by Sepsis-2 criteria (i.e., SIRS criteria). Using Sepsis-3 criteria, 1,827 (46.9%) patients were diagnosed with early sepsis (i.e., initial qSOFA scores ≥ 2) in EDs and 2,622 (67.3%) with sepsis during hospitalization (i.e., increased SOFA scores of ≥ 2 from ED arrival). The prognostic impacts of inappropriate EAT or delayed SC (for complicated bacteremia) were both significant in septic patients with fulfilling the Sepsis-2 or Sepsis-3 (i.e., SOFA) criteria, respectively. Meanwhile, these delayed treatment efforts trivially impact prognoses of non-septic patients recognized by the Sepsis-2 or Sepsis-3 (i.e., SOFA) definitions. Notably, prognostic effects of inappropriate EAT or delayed SC were disclosed for septic patients in EDs, specifically those with qSOFA scores of ≥ 2, and prognostic impacts of delayed treatment efforts remained significant for patients initially recognized early as being non-septic (i.e., initial qSOFA scores of <2). Conclusions: For patients with community-onset bacteremia, inappropriate EAT and delayed SC might result in unfavorable outcomes of patients early identified as being non-septic on ED arrival based on the qSOFA scores (by Sepsis-3 criteria). Accordingly, a more prudent diagnosis of sepsis adopted among bacteremia patients in the ED is necessary.

medicine, general & internal
Lactate-enhanced-qSOFA (LqSOFA) score is superior to the other four rapid scoring tools in predicting in-hospital mortality rate of the sepsis patients

Sijia Liu,Chengqi He,Weilue He,Tian Jiang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/atm-20-5410

IF: 3.616

2020-08-01

Annals of Translational Medicine

Abstract:BACKGROUND: The rising prevalence of early therapy for sepsis has led to the demand for rapid risk-stratification tools that can estimate the risk of in-hospital mortality for sepsis patients and the need for intensive care unit (ICU) admission. A robust risk-stratification tool is crucial for in-time sepsis treatment. This study aimed to compare the abilities of five rapid scoring systems, i.e., LqSOFA score, qSOFA score, SIRS, MEDS, and MEWS, in predicting the mortality in hospital and ICU admission for sepsis patients.METHODS: A retrospective observational clinical study was conducted in West China Hospital. Our cases included all patients admitted to the hospital with a diagnosis of sepsis (sepsis-3). We calculated five rapid prediction scores for the enrolled cases. We then compared each rapid score's ability to predict in-hospital mortality and ICU admission.RESULTS: A total of 821 of mixed sepsis patients by sepsis-3 definition were included. The all-cause hospital mortality rate was 21.1%. The LqSOFA score presented the most significant discrimination with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.751. The AUC of the LqSOFA score for mortality in the hospital was significantly higher than qSOFA (AUC 0.717), SIRS (AUC 0.704), MEDS (AUC 0.670), and MEWS (AUC 0.685).CONCLUSIONS: LqSOFA is a superior prognostic tool for predicting mortality in the hospital. It may provide more exact information for hospital mortality than the other 4 rapid scores in treating sepsis patients.

oncology,medicine, research & experimental
Performance of sequential organ failure assessment, logistic organ dysfunction and multiple organ dysfunction score in severe sepsis within Chinese intensive care units.

H Wang,L Ye,L Yu,G Xie,B Cheng,X Liu,Y Jin,S Wu,T Zhu,Q Chen,X Fang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0310057X1103900108

2011-01-01

Anaesthesia and Intensive Care

Abstract:This study assessed the performance of Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, Logistic Organ Dysfunction Score and Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score in outcome prediction in severe sepsis. A total of 528 consecutive patients with a diagnosis of severe sepsis were enrolled from two surgical intensive care units of university hospitals in China. Clinical and laboratory data of patients were collected and admission and maximum values of each scoring system were calculated. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve, which were used to assess discrimination, were 0.80, 0.83 and 0.74 for admission Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, Logistic Organ Dysfunction Score and Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score respectively, and 0.91, 0.93 and 0.86 for corresponding maximum values respectively. Calibration assessed by the Hosmer-Lemeshow statistic was better with admission (chi(2)=18.2) and maximum Logistic Organ Dysfunction Score (chi(2)=19.6) than with admission (chi(2)=98.1) and maximum Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score (chi(2)=30.9). Brier Scores, indicating the overall performance of the scores, were 0.18, 0.17 and 0.22 for admission Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, Logistic Organ Dysfunction Score and Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score respectively, and 0.12, 0.10 and 0.15 for their maximum counterparts respectively This study found good performance of both admission Sequential Organ Failure Assessment and Logistic Organ Dysfunction Score in severe sepsis, and a slightly weaker performance of admission Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score. Since poor calibration was observed in Logistic Organ Dysfunction Score and Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score, we suggest further study of customisation of these scores in critical illness with severe sepsis.

[A simple method for the determination of blood clot retraction and natural lysis].

Prognostic value of SOFA combined with chest CT severity score in patients with critical COVID-19 pneumonia: a retrospective study

Performance of SOFA, qSOFA and SIRS to predict septic shock after percutaneous nephrolithotomy

Predictive Value of Qsofa Score for Death in Emergency Department Resuscitation Room among Adult Trauma Patients:A Retrospective Study

Accuracy of Qsofa for the Diagnosis of Sepsis-3: a Secondary Analysis of a Population-Based Cohort Study.

Usefulness of Qsofa and SIRS Scores for Detection of Incipient Sepsis in General Ward Patients: A Prospective Cohort Study.

[Prognosis analysis of multi-indicator combined with sequential organ failure assessment in patients with sepsis]

Clinical Evaluation of Sepsis-1 and Sepsis-3 in the ICU.

[A multicenter confirmatory study about precision and practicability of Sepsis-3].

SIRS, SOFA, qSOFA, and NEWS in the diagnosis of sepsis and prediction of adverse outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Contributions of individual qSOFA elements to assessment of severity and for prediction of mortality

SOFA Score in relation to Sepsis: Clinical Implications in Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prognostic Assessment

Comparison of the Performance between Sepsis-1 and Sepsis-3 in Icus in China: A Retrospective Multicenter Study

[Meta analysis of the predictive efficacy of various derived indicators of sequential organ failure assessment in outcomes of patients with sepsis].

Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, and Procalcitonin for Early Diagnosis and Prediction of Death in Elderly Patients with Suspicion of Sepsis in the Emergency Department, Based on Sepsis-3 Definition

Prognostic value of PaO/FiO, SOFA and D-dimer in elderly patients with sepsis

Performance of the MEDS score in predicting mortality among emergency department patients with a suspected infection: a meta-analysis.

Performance of the MEDS Score in Predicting Mortality among Emergency Department Patients with a Suspected Infection: a Meta-Analysis

Is qSOFA Suitable for Early Diagnosis of Sepsis Among Bacteremia Patients in Emergency Departments? Time for a Reappraisal of Sepsis-3 Criteria

Lactate-enhanced-qSOFA (LqSOFA) score is superior to the other four rapid scoring tools in predicting in-hospital mortality rate of the sepsis patients

Performance of sequential organ failure assessment, logistic organ dysfunction and multiple organ dysfunction score in severe sepsis within Chinese intensive care units.