Comparison of Sepsis-1, 2 and 3 for Predicting Mortality in Septic Patients of a Middle-Income Country: A Retrospective Observational Cohort Study

Author:

Machado Lessa Carem Luana1ORCID,Branchini Gisele1,Moreira Delfino Isabela2,Ramos Voos Matheus Henrique3,Teixeira Cassiano4ORCID,Hoher Jorge Amilton45,Nunes Fernanda Bordignon16

Affiliation:

1. Graduate Program in Pathology, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre, Brazil

2. Graduate Program in Health Sciences, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre, Brazil

3. Undergraduate Program in Medicine, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre, Brazil

4. Department of Clinical Medicine, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre, Brazil

5. Central-intensive Care Unit, Complexo Hospitalar Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Porto Alegre, Brazil

6. School of Health and Life Sciences, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil

Abstract

Introduction The diagnosis of sepsis is based on expert consensus and does not yet have a “gold standard.” With the aim of improving and standardizing diagnostic methods, there have already been three major consensuses on the subject. However, there are still few studies in middle-income countries comparing the methods. This study describes the characteristics of patients diagnosed with sepsis and evaluates and compares the performance of Sepsis-1, 2, and 3 criteria in predicting 28 days, and in-hospital mortality. Patients and Methods A retrospective observational cohort study was conducted in the intensive care unit of a tertiary hospital. All admissions between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2019, were reviewed. Patients diagnosed with sepsis were included. Results During the study period, 653 patients diagnosed with sepsis (by any of the studied criteria) were included in the study. The 28 days mortality rate was 45.8%, and the in-hospital mortality rate was 59.7%. We observed that 72.1% of patients met the minimum criteria for diagnosing sepsis according to the three protocols, and this group also had the highest mortality rate. Age and comorbidities such as cancer and liver cirrhosis were significantly associated with in-hospital mortality. The most common microorganisms were Escherichia coli, Klebsiella spp., and Staphylococcus spp. Conclusions The study found that most patients met the diagnostic criteria for sepsis using the three methods. Sepsis-2 showed greater sensitivity to predict mortality, while Sequential Organ Failure Assessment showed low accuracy, but was the only significant one. Furthermore, quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) had the highest specificity for mortality. Overall, these findings suggest that, although all three methods contribute to the diagnosis and prognosis of sepsis, Sepsis-2 is particularly sensitive in predicting mortality. Sepsis-3 shows some accuracy but requires improvement, and qSOFA exhibits the highest specificity. More research is needed to improve predictive capabilities and patient outcomes.

Funder

Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3