Elias SR, Elías AK, Lecourtois ML, Bordelois AMS, Fong BYP

Language: Spanish
References: 21
Page: 1-11
PDF size: 280.55 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Controversies are currently being revealed about the predictive score for the diagnosis of septic shock.
Objective: To compare the effectiveness of the criteria of systemic inflammatory response syndrome and the quick SOFA score in the prediction of septic shock.
Methods: A descriptive, longitudinal, prospective study was conducted in patients admitted to the intensive care unit at “Dr. Agostino Netoˮ Teaching General Hospital, from January 2018 to March 2019. Patients with suspected sepsis were studied. A random sample of 50 patients was selected: 25 met the criteria for Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome and 25 met the quick SOFA criteria. Those who developed septic shock during their stay in the intensive care unit were monitored.
Results: The number of patients that fulfilled three or more criteria of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome, two or more quick SOFA score was higher (p <0.05). The fulfillment of three or more criteria of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome did not show significant differences with the fulfillment of two or more quick SOFA score (p=0.08). However, significance was found when comparing if patients fulfilled three or more criteria of Systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria and two or more quick SOFA score.
Conclusions: The use of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria allows a diagnostic approach of sepsis more frequent in adult patients hospitalized for infection compared to the quick SOFA score, but this allows a better prediction of mortality from septic shock.

REFERENCES

1. Rhodes A, Evans LE, Alhazzani W, Levy MM, Antonelli M, Ferrer R, et al. Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock. Crit Care Med. 2017;45:486-552. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000002255

2. Macdonald SPJ, Arendts G, Fatovich DM, Brown SGA. Comparison of PIRO, SOFA, and MEDS scores for predicting mortality in Emergency Department patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. Acad Emerg Med. 2014[acceso: 10/05/2018];21:1257-63. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.12515

3. Williams JM, Greenslade JH, McKenzie JV, Chu K, Brown AFT, Lipman J. Systemic inflammatory response syndrome, quick sequential organ function assessment, and organ dysfunction: insights from a prospective database of ED patients with infec- tion. Chest. 2017[acceso: 10/05/2018];151:586-96. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2016.10.057

4. Simpson SQ. New sepsis criteria: a change we should not make. Chest. 2016[acceso: 10/05/2018];149:1117-8. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2016.02.653

5. Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, Shankar-Hari M, Annane D, Bauer M, et al. The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA. 2016[acceso: 10/05/2018];315:801. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.0287

6. Seymour CW, Liu VX, Iwashyna TJ, Brunkhorst FM, Rea TD, Scherag A, et al. Assessment of clinical criteria for sepsis: for the third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA. 2016[acceso: 10/05/2018];315:762-74. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.0288

7. Vincent JL, Martin GS, Levy MM. qSOFA does not replace SIRS in the definition of sepsis. Crit Care. 2016[acceso: 10/05/2018];20. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-016-1389-z

8. Donnelly JP, Safford MM, Shapiro NI, Baddley JW, Wang HE. Application of the third international consensus definitions for sepsis (Sepsis-3) classification: a retrospec- tive population-based cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2017[acceso: 10/05/2018];17:661-70. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(17)30117-2

9. Freund Y, Lemachatti N, Krastinova E, Van Laer M, Claessens YE, Avondo A, et al. Prognostic accuracy of Sepsis-3 criteria for in-hospital mortality among patients with suspected infection presenting to the Emergency Department. JAMA. 2017[acceso: 10/05/2018];317:301-8. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.20329

10. Mc Lymont N, Glover GW. Scoring systems for the characterization of sepsis and associated outcomes. Ann Transl Med. 2016[acceso: 10/05/2018];4. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.21037/atm.2016.12.53

11. Corfield AR, Lees F, Zealley I, Houston G, Dickie S, Ward K, et al. Utility of a single early warning score in patients with sepsis in the emergency department. Emerg Med J. 2014[acceso: 10/05/2018];31:482-7. Disponibe en: https://doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2012- 202186

12. de Groot B, Stolwijk F, Warmerdam M, Lucke JA, Singh GK, Abbas M, et al. The most commonly used disease severity scores are inappropriate for risk stratification of older emergency department sepsis patients: an observational multi-centre study. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2017[acceso: 10/05/2018];25:91. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13049-017-0436-3

13. Finkelsztein EJ, Jones DS, Ma KC, Pabón MA, Delgado T, Nakahira K, et al. Comparison of qSOFA and SIRS for predicting adverse outcomes of patients with suspicion of sep- sis outside the intensive care unit. Crit Care. 2017[acceso: 10/05/2018];21. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1186/ s13054-017-1658-5

14. Hayden GE, Tuuri RE, Scott R, Losek JD, Blackshaw AM, Schoenling AJ, et al. Triage sepsis alert and sepsis protocol lower times to fluids and antibiotics in the ED. Am J Emerg Med. 2016[acceso: 10/05/2018];34:1-9. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2015.08.039

15. Jones SL, Ashton CM, Kiehne L, Gigliotti E, Bell-Gordon C, Disbot M, et al. Reductions in sepsis mortality and costs after design and implementation of a nurse-based early recognition and response program. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2015[acceso: 10/05/2018];41:483-91. Disponible en: http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0735-6757(18)30889- 1/rf0120

16. Keep JW, Messmer AS, Sladden R, Burrell N, Pinate R, Tunnicliff M, et al. National early warning score at Emergency Department triage may allow earlier identification of patients with severe sepsis and septic shock: a retrospective observational study. Emerg Med J. 2016[acceso: 10/05/2018];33:37-41. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1136/emermed- 2014-204465

17. ProCESS Investigators, Yealy DM, Kellum JA, Huang DT, Barnato AE, Weissfeld LA, et al. A randomized trial of protocol-based care for early septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2014[acceso: 10/05/2018];370:1683-93. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1401602

18. Askim Å, Moser F, Gustad LT, Stene H, Gundersen M, Åsvold BO, et al. Poor performance of quick-SOFA (qSOFA) score in predicting severe sepsis and mortality–a prospective study of patients admitted with infection to the emergency department. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2017[acceso: 10/05/2018];25. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13049-017-0399-4

19. Churpek MM, Snyder A, Han X, Sokol S, Pettit N, Howell MD, et al. Quick sepsisrelated organ failure assessment, systemic inflammatory response syndrome, and early warning scores for detecting clinical deterioration in infected patients outside the intensive care unit. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2017[acceso: 10/05/2018];195:906-11. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201604-0854OC

20. Andaluz D, Ferrer R. SIRS, qSOFA, and organ failure for assessing sepsis at the emergency department. J Thorac Dis. 2017[acceso: 10/05/2018];9:1459-62. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.21037/jtd.2017.05.36

21. Finkelsztein E, Jones D, Ma K, Pabón M, Berlin D, Siempos I, et al. Validation of the Recently Proposed qSOFA Score in the Weill Cornell Medicine Registry of Critical Illness. Crit Care. 2017[acceso: 10/05/2018];21:73. Disponible en: https://doi: 10.1186/s13054-017-1658-5