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

医学 败血症 沙发评分 全身炎症反应综合征 器官功能障碍 死亡率 接收机工作特性 重症监护医学 内科学 人口 环境卫生
作者
Xueling Fang,Zhenzhen Wang,Jun Yang,Hongliu Cai,Zhengjie Yao,Kun Li,Qiang Fang
出处
期刊:Chest [Elsevier]
卷期号:153 (5): 1169-1176 被引量:40
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.chest.2017.06.037
摘要

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. There has been considerable controversy between sepsis-1 and sepsis-3 criteria. 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. 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. 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.
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
啦啦啦啦啦完成签到,获得积分10
刚刚
irisy完成签到,获得积分10
刚刚
CodeCraft应助deng采纳,获得10
1秒前
踏实凝云完成签到,获得积分10
1秒前
跳跃完成签到,获得积分10
1秒前
葛彬洁完成签到,获得积分10
1秒前
潇洒的宛菡完成签到,获得积分10
1秒前
1秒前
lulu完成签到 ,获得积分10
2秒前
鱼大大完成签到,获得积分10
3秒前
3秒前
小陈完成签到,获得积分10
3秒前
傻傻的哈密瓜完成签到,获得积分10
3秒前
泽出森完成签到,获得积分10
4秒前
青山完成签到,获得积分10
4秒前
小植完成签到,获得积分10
4秒前
潘忠旭完成签到,获得积分10
4秒前
LEO2025完成签到,获得积分10
5秒前
yqsf789发布了新的文献求助10
6秒前
聪明小于完成签到 ,获得积分10
6秒前
HK完成签到 ,获得积分10
7秒前
彭于晏应助杨佳莉采纳,获得10
7秒前
雪豹完成签到,获得积分10
8秒前
峰成完成签到 ,获得积分10
8秒前
不仅要发文章还有发财完成签到,获得积分10
9秒前
受伤问凝完成签到 ,获得积分10
9秒前
研友_8Qq1r8完成签到,获得积分10
9秒前
牧紫菱完成签到,获得积分10
9秒前
zqingqing完成签到,获得积分10
10秒前
水无波完成签到,获得积分10
10秒前
10秒前
岩鹰完成签到,获得积分10
11秒前
洋洋洋完成签到,获得积分10
11秒前
siyan156完成签到,获得积分10
11秒前
11秒前
大民王完成签到,获得积分10
11秒前
zx598376321完成签到,获得积分0
12秒前
木子完成签到,获得积分10
12秒前
可问春风完成签到,获得积分10
12秒前
neo完成签到,获得积分10
12秒前
高分求助中
Modern Epidemiology, Fourth Edition 5000
Kinesiophobia : a new view of chronic pain behavior 5000
Molecular Biology of Cancer: Mechanisms, Targets, and Therapeutics 3000
Digital Twins of Advanced Materials Processing 2000
Propeller Design 2000
Weaponeering, Fourth Edition – Two Volume SET 2000
First commercial application of ELCRES™ HTV150A film in Nichicon capacitors for AC-DC inverters: SABIC at PCIM Europe 1000
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 工程类 有机化学 纳米技术 化学工程 生物化学 物理 计算机科学 内科学 复合材料 催化作用 物理化学 光电子学 电极 冶金 细胞生物学 基因
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 6005147
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 7528325
关于积分的说明 16113035
捐赠科研通 5150755
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 2759825
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 1736999
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 1632195