Proposal and Validation of a Clinically Relevant Modification of the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation Diagnostic Criteria for Sepsis
Gando,Satoshi
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1786808
2024-05-12
Thrombosis and Haemostasis
Abstract:Background Japanese Association for Acute Medicine (JAAM) disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) criteria were launched nearly 20 years ago. Following the revised conceptual definition of sepsis and subsequent omission of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) score from the latest sepsis diagnostic criteria, we omitted the SIRS score and proposed a modified version of JAAM DIC criteria, the JAAM-2 DIC criteria. Objectives To validate and compare performance between new JAAM-2 DIC criteria and conventional JAAM DIC criteria for sepsis. Methods We used three datasets containing adult sepsis patients from a multicenter nationwide Japanese cohort study (J-septic DIC, FORECAST, and SPICE-ICU registries). JAAM-2 DIC criteria omitted the SIRS score and set the cutoff value at ≥3 points. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were performed between the two DIC criteria to evaluate prognostic value. Associations between in-hospital mortality and anticoagulant therapy according to DIC status were analyzed using propensity score weighting to compare significance of the criteria in determining introduction of anticoagulants against sepsis. Results Final study cohorts of the datasets included 2,154, 1,065, and 608 sepsis patients, respectively. ROC analysis revealed that curves for both JAAM and JAAM-2 DIC criteria as predictors of in-hospital mortality were almost consistent. Survival curves for the anticoagulant and control groups in the propensity score-weighted prediction model diagnosed using the two criteria were also almost entirely consistent. Conclusion JAAM-2 DIC criteria were equivalent to JAAM DIC criteria regarding prognostic and diagnostic values for initiating anticoagulation. The newly proposed JAAM-2 DIC criteria could be potentially alternative criteria for sepsis management. The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Osaka General Medical Center (approval numbers: #25–2050, #30-S11–004, and #S201901009). Informed consent was waived due to the nature of the registries. K.Y. and T.I. conceived and designed this study. K.Y. contributed to acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of the data and was responsible for drafting, editing, and submission of the manuscript. Y.U. contributed to acquisition, analysis, interpretation of the data, and drafting of the manuscript. K.M., T.M., T.W., and M.H. played a significant role in the analysis of the data and helped to draft the manuscript. T.I., Y.O., K.O., T.M., T.I., H.I., H.O., S.K., D.S., and S.G. had a significant influence on the interpretation of the data and critical appraisal of the manuscript. All of the authors contributed to the acquisition of data and reviewed, discussed, and approved the final manuscript. Received: 12 October 2023 Accepted: 02 April 2024 Article published online: 10 May 2024 © 2024. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) Georg Thieme Verlag KG Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
hematology,peripheral vascular disease