Severity scores in respiratory intensive care: APACHE II predicted mortality better than SAPS II

BACKGROUND: In recent years several scoring systems have been developed to describe the severity of illness, to establish the individual prognosis, and to group adult ICU patients by predicted risk of mortality. In addition, these scores can be used to measure and/or compare the quality of care in different ICUs. We compared the mortality predictions of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) score and a new Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) in patients with respiratory disease who require intensive care. PATIENTS & METHODS: We prospectively studied all 306 admissions from January 1, 1992 through December 31, 1994. McNemar and Hosmer-Lemeshow tests, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to describe and analyze our data. RESULTS: The average APACHE II score was 17.5 (SD 6.0), corresponding to a mean predicted death rate of 24.9% (SD 17.2%) as compared to an observed overall RICU mortality rate of 21.6%. The average SAPS II score was 39.1 (SD 11.1) corresponding to a mean predicted death rate of 26.0% (SD 18.4%). The ratio between the actual and predicted hospital mortality was 86% for APACHE II and 83% for SAPS II. Survivors had a significantly lower predicted risk of death than nonsurvivors (p < 0.0001) with both indices, and a higher Glasgow coma scale score (p < 0.0001). The ROC-curve analysis suggested the superior predictive ability of APACHE II in our patients. Area under the APACHE II ROC curve was 80.88% (standard error [SE] 2.89%), significantly larger (p < 0.01) than that found for SAPS II (73.52%, SE 3.61%). CONCLUSIONS: The APACHE II score was a good predictor of hospital outcome and better than SAPS II in our population.     

Validation of severity scoring systems SAPS II and APACHE II in a single-center population

OBJECTIVE: To validate two severity scoring systems, the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II), in a single-center ICU population. DESIGN AND SETTING: Prospective data collection in a two four-bed multidisciplinary ICUs of a teaching hospital. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were collected in ICU over 4 years on 1,721 consecutively admitted patients (aged 18 years or older, no transferrals, ICU stay at least 24 h) regarding SAPS II, APACHE II, predicted hospital mortality, and survival upon hospital discharge. RESULTS: At the predicted risk of 0.5, sensitivity was 39.4 % for SAPS II and 31.6 % for APACHE II, specificity 95.6 % and 97.2 %, and correct classification rate 85.6 % and 85.5 %, respectively. The area under the ROC curve was higher than 0.8 for both models. The goodness-of-fit statistic showed no significant difference between observed and predicted hospital mortality (H = 7.62 for SAPS II, H = 3.87 for APACHE II; and C = 9.32 and C = 5.05, respectively). Observed hospital mortality of patients with risk of death higher than 60 % was overpredicted by SAPS II and underpredicted by APACHE II. The observed hospital mortality was significantly higher than that predicted by the models in medical patients and in those admitted from the ward. CONCLUSIONS: This study validates both SAPS II and APACHE II scores in an ICU population comprised mainly of surgical patients. The type of ICU admission and the location in the hospital before ICU admission influence the predictive ability of the models.     

The predictive performance of the SAPS II and SAPS 3 scoring systems: A retrospective analysis

PurposeThe purpose was to analyze and compare the performance of Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II and SAPS 3 (North Europe Logit) in an intensive care unit (ICU) for internal disorders at a German university hospital.Materials and methodsThis retrospective study was conducted at a single-center 12-bed ICU sector for Internal Medicine in Essen, Germany, within an 18-month period. Data for adult ICU patients (N = 548) were evaluated. SAPS II and SAPS 3 scores were assessed along with the predicted mortality rates. Discrimination was evaluated by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, and calibration was evaluated using the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit C-test. The ratios of observed-to-expected deaths (standardized mortality ratio, SMR) were calculated along with the 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs).ResultsThe in-hospital mortality rate was 22.6%, which provided an SMR of 0.91 (95% CI, 0.77-0.99) for SAPS II and 0.62 (95% CI, 0.52-0.71) for SAPS 3. Both SAPS II and SAPS 3 exhibited acceptable discrimination, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.84 (95% CI, 0.79-0.89) and 0.73 (95% CI, 0.67-0.79), respectively. However, SAPS II demonstrated superior SMR-based discrimination, which was closer to the observed mortality rate, compared with SAPS 3. Calibration curves exhibited similar performance based on the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit C-test results: χ² = 7.10 with P = .525 for SAPS II and χ² = 3.10 with P = .876 for SAPS 3. Interestingly, both scores overpredicted mortality.ConclusionsIn this study, SAPS 3 overestimated mortality and therefore appears less suitable for risk evaluation in comparison to SAPS II.     

Outcome of patients with liver cirrhosis admitted to a specialty liver intensive care unit in India

Purpose

The study aimed to describe the clinical outcome of patients with liver cirrhosis admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) and to compare the performance of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) in predicting mortality.

Methods

In this prospective study of patients with cirrhosis admitted to the ICU, demographic data, APACHE II score, SOFA score, presence of acute renal failure (ARF), need for organ support, and mortality were collected.

Results

The observed mortality in ICU and at 30 days among 104 patients was 42.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 32.7%-52.0%) and 56.7% (95% CI, 47.0%-66.4%), respectively. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for first-day APACHE II in predicting 30-day mortality was 0.90 (95% CI, 0.83-0.96) and 0.93 (95% CI, 0.88-0.98) for SOFA score (P = .24). On multivariate analysis, ARF (adjusted odds ratio, 7.7; 95% CI, 1.09-54.64) and mechanical ventilation (adjusted odds ratio, 277.6; 95% CI, 12.83-6004.94) were significantly associated with mortality.

Conclusions

Presence of ARF and need for mechanical ventilation are associated with high mortality in patients with liver cirrhosis admitted to the ICU. Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II and SOFA are good prognostic models in predicting 30-day mortality and do not differ in performance.     

Mortality discrimination in acute myocardial infarction: comparison between APACHE III and SAPS II prognosis systems

Objective: To compare the Acute Physiology, Age and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) III with the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) in discriminating in-hospital mortality for intensive care unit (ICU) patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Design: Prospective, observational, multicenter study. Setting: 70 Spanish ICUs. Patients and participants: 1711 patients with AMI and representative of Spanish ICUs. Measurements and results: APACHE III score, APACHE III system probability of death (APACHE III probability), SAPS II score and in-hospital mortality were noted for each patient. Two hundred and twenty three (13.0 %) patients died in the hospital. The sensitivity (± SE), specificity (± SE), and accuracy (± SE) for the APACHE III score were, respectively, 75.8 ± 2.9, 75.9 ± 1.1, and 75.9 ± 1.0. The corresponding figures for APACHE III probability were 75.3 ± 2.9, 79.2 ± 1.1, and 78.7 ± 1.0, and for SAPS II 72.2 ± 3.0, 75.9 ± 1.1, and 75.4 ± 1.0. Conclusions: The results indicate good discrimination by the three tests. APACHE III probability shows a statistically significant improvement in accuracy and specificity when compared with the two scores. Received: 4 July 1996 Accepted: 27 November 1996     

Impact of standard procedures and clinical standards on cost-effectiveness and intensive care unit performance in adult patients after cardiac surgery

Objective: To investigate the impact of organizational procedures on intensive care unit (ICU) performance and cost-effectiveness after cardiac surgery. Design: Prospective study. Setting: Cardiothoracic ICU at a university hospital. Patients: Thousand five hundred twenty-six consecutive patients over a period of 18 months. Interventions: The first 6 months were used as the control period. Afterwards selected organizational changes were introduced, such as written standard procedures, time schedules and discharge reports. Measurements: Demographic data, surgical procedures, length of ICU and hospital stay and hospital outcome were recorded. Severity of illness was assessed daily using Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II), Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) and Organ Failure Score (OFS). Intensity of treatment and nursing care was monitored by the Therapeutic Intervention Scoring System (TISS). RIYADH ICU Program (RIP 5.0) was used to determine the relationship of observed to predicted mortality (standardized mortality ratio SMR) and the effective costs per survivor. Main results: SMR decreased continuously after the establishment of new management procedures while all other factors all other factors remained unchanged. Comparing outcome according to APACHE II on ICU admission demonstrated a significantly increased ICU performance in high risk patients with an APACHE II of 20–30 points (p < 0.05) while effective costs per survivor decreased significantly from DM 29,988 to DM 13,568 DM (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Organizational changes can improve ICU performance and cost-effectiveness after cardiac surgery. The RIP may be used to monitor the clinical and economical effects of change. Received: 16 December 1998 Accepted: 28 July 1999     

Critical Care in the Emergency Department A Physiologic Assessment and Outcome Evaluation

OBJECTIVES: The changing landscape of health care in this country has seen an increase in the delivery of care to critically ill patients in the emergency department (ED). However, methodologies to assess care and outcomes similar to those used in the intensive care unit (ICU) are currently lacking in this setting. This study examined the impact of ED intervention on morbidity and mortality using the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II), the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II), and the Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score (MODS). METHODS: This was a prospective, observational cohort study over a three-month period. Critically ill adult patients presenting to a large urban ED and requiring ICU admission were enrolled. APACHE II, SAPS II, and MODS scores and predicted mortality were obtained at ED admission, ED discharge, and 24, 48, and 72 hours in the ICU. In-hospital mortality was recorded. RESULTS: Eighty-one patients aged 64 +/- 18 years were enrolled during the study period, with a 30.9% in-hospital mortality. The ED length of stay was 5.9 +/- 2.7 hours and the hospital length of stay was 12.2 +/- 16.6 days. Nine (11.1%) patients initially accepted for ICU admission were later admitted to the general ward after ED intervention. Septic shock was the predominant admitting diagnosis. At ED admission, there was a significantly higher APACHE II score in nonsurvivors (23.0 +/- 6.0) vs survivors (19.8 +/- 6.5, p = 0.04), while there was no significant difference in SAPS II or MODS scores. The APACHE II, SAPS II, and MODS scores were significantly lower in survivors than nonsurvivors throughout the hospital stay (p 相似文献   

Prognosis of patients with systemic rheumatic diseases admitted to the intensive care unit

Objective To determine prognostic factors in patients with systemic rheumatic diseases admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and to examine whether the observed mortality rate is predicted using the Acute Physiology And Chronic Health Assessment II (APACHE II) score.Design and setting Retrospective study with historical controls in a 31-bed medicosurgical ICU at a university hospital.Patients and participants Seventy-one patients admitted to the ICU for an acute illness related to a systemic rheumatic disease and/or its treatment and 353 ICU control patients.Results Systemic rheumatic diseases were mainly rheumatoid arthritis and vasculitides. In-hospital mortality rate was 28/71 (39%), including 23 patients who died in the ICU. Multivariable logistic regression showed that poor prior health status (Berdits classification), APACHE II score, and admission for infection were associated with mortality, whereas prior use of immunosuppressive agents was not. APACHE II score at admission was higher in nonsurvivors (22±9) than in survivors (17±5) (p<0.01). The standard mortality ratio, i.e., the ratio between observed and predicted mortality, was 1.7 in the 71 study patients and 1.0 in the 353 control patients (p<0.0001).Conclusions In patients with systemic rheumatic diseases admitted to the ICU for at least 48 h, poor prior chronic health status, APACHE II score, and infection were prognostic factors for in-hospital mortality. SMR was higher than in a control ICU population.     

Is a specific oncological scoring system better at predicting the prognosis of cancer patients admitted for an acute medical complication in an intensive care unit than general gravity scores?

Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of a specific oncologic scoring system—the ICU Cancer Mortality model (ICM)—in predicting hospital mortality in comparison to two general severity scores—the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) and the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II).Patients and methods All 247 patients admitted for a medical acute complication over an 18-month period in an oncological medical intensive care unit were prospectively registered. Their data, including type of complication, vital status at discharge and cancer characteristics as well as other variables necessary to calculate the three scoring systems were retrospectively assessed.Results Observed in-hospital mortality was 34%. The predicted in-hospital mortality rate for APACHE II was 32%; SAPS II, 24%; and ICM, 28%. The goodness of fit was inadequate except for the ICM score. Comparison of the area under the ROC curves revealed a better fit for ICM (area 0.79). The maximum correct classification rate was 72% for APACHE II, 74% for SAPS II and 77% for ICM. APACHE II and SAPS II were better at predicting outcome for survivors to hospital discharge, although ICM was better for non-survivors. Two variables were independently predicting the risk of death during hospitalisation: ICM (OR=2.31) and SAPS II (OR=1.05).Conclusions Gravity scores were the single independent predictors for hospital mortality, and ICM was equivalent to APACHE II and SAPS II.     

Is C-reactive protein a good prognostic marker in septic patients?

Rationale  Several studies have shown that C-reactive protein (CRP) is a marker of infection. The aim of this study was to evaluate CRP as marker of prognosis outcome in septic patients and to assess the correlation of CRP with severity of sepsis. Methods  During a 14-month period, we prospectively included all patients with sepsis admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). Patients were categorized into sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock. Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score, Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, CRP, body temperature and white cell count (WCC) of the day of sepsis diagnosis were collected. Results  One hundred and fifty-eight consecutive septic patients (mean age 59 years, 98 men, ICU mortality 34%) were studied. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curves of APACHE II, SAPS II, SOFA, CRP, body temperature and WCC as prognostic markers of sepsis were 0.75 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67–0.83], 0.82 (95% CI 0.75–0.89), 0.8 (95% CI 0.72–0.88), 0.55 (95% CI 0.45–0.65), 0.48 (95% CI 0.38–0.58) and 0.46 (95% CI 0.35–0.56), respectively. In the subgroup of patients with documented sepsis we obtained similar results. The ICU mortality rate of septic patients with CRP < 10, 10–20, 20–30, 30–40 and >40 mg/dL was 20, 34, 30.8, 42.3 and 39.1%, respectively (P = 0.7). No correlation was found between CRP concentrations and severity of sepsis. Conclusions  In septic patients, CRP of the day of sepsis diagnosis is not a good marker of prognosis.     

The use of intensive care information systems alters outcome prediction

Objective: To study the effect of using an Intensive Care Information System (ICIS) on severity scores and prognostic indices: Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II), Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II), and Mortality Probability Models II (MPM II). Design: Prospective pilot study. Setting: A 20-bed medical-surgical intensive care unit (ICU) in a teaching hospital. Patients: 50 consecutive adult patients admitted to the ICU on a bed equipped with an ICIS. Interventions: None. Measurements and results: In each patient all the physiologic variables, as required by the severity scores, were both manually charted and recorded by ICIS. ICIS registration resulted in the extraction of more abnormal values for all physiologic variables (except temperature): p < 0.05. Higher severity scores and mortality prediction were achieved by using ICIS charting: predicted mortality increased by 15 % for APACHE II compared to manual charting, 25 % for SAPS II, and 24 % for MPM₀. ICIS charting resulted in higher severity scores and mortality prediction for 29 of the 50 patients using APACHE II with a mean increase in mortality prediction in this subgroup of 27 %. In the case of SAPS II, ICIS charting resulted in higher scores in 23 of the 50 patients and in the case of MPM₀ in 13 patients, the mean increase in mortality in these subgroups being 64 and 148 %, respectively. Conclusions: The use of ICIS charting to acquire the most abnormal physiologic values for severity scores and the derived prognostic indices results in a higher mortality prediction. Comparison of groups of patients and/or ICUs based on severity scores is impossible without standardization of data collection. The mortality prediction models have to be revalidated for the use of ICIS charting. While awaiting this, we suggest that every patient record in local regional, national, or international ICU databases should be marked as being recorded by manual or by ICIS charting. Received: 16 December 1997 Accepted: 11 June 1998     

The ability of the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) to predict outcome in coronary care patients

Objective: To evaluate the applicability of the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) for coronary care patients. Design: Prospective observational cohort study. Setting: Medical ICU of a community teaching hospital. Patients: 1587 consecutive patients admitted over a period of 18 months. Measurements and main results: Patients were divided in two groups according to the primary admission diagnosis: general medical intensive care (ICU) patients and intensive coronary care (CCU) patients. Score prediction was tested using criteria suitable to evaluate the discrimination and calibration properties of SAPS II. Mean SAPS II score was 31.6 (± 20.1) in ICU and 28.3 (± 15.5) in CCU patients (p = 0.06), mean risk of death 0.206 and 0.134 (p = 0.001), and observed hospital mortality 17.8 vs 10.3 %. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.888 in ICU and 0.908 in CCU patients (p = 0.5). The correlation between predicted and observed hospital mortality was 0.62 (p = 0.001) in ICU and 0.66 (p = 0.001) in CCU patients. The calibration curves did not differ from each other. The probability of death in survivors and nonsurvivors was equally distributed in ICU and CCU patients (p = 0.5). Conclusion: We conclude that SAPS II is applicable to CCU patients in our unit. Received: 30 October 1996 Accepted: 7 August 1997     

Outcome prediction in intensive care: results of a prospective, multicentre, Portuguese study

Objective: To compare the performance of the New Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II in an independent database, using formal statistical assessment. Design: Analysis of the database of a multicentre, prospective study. Setting: 19 intensive care units (ICUs) in Portugal. Patients: Data for 1094 patients consecutively admitted to the ICUs were collected over a period of 4 months. Following the original SAPS II and APACHE II criteria, the analysis excluded patients younger than 18 years of age, readmissions, acute myocardial infarction, burns, patients in the post-operative period after coronary artery bypass surgery, and patients with a length of stay in the ICU of less than 24 h. The group analysed comprised 982 patients. Interventions: Collection of the first 24 h admission data necessary for the calculation of SAPS II, APACHE II, Therapeutic Intervention Scoring System (TISS), Simplified TISS, organ system failure and basic demographic statistics. Vital status at discharge from the hospital was registered. Measurements and results: In this cohort, discrimination was better for SAPS II than for APACHE II (SAPS II: area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.817, standard error 0.015; APACHE II: 0.787, 0.015; p < 0.001); however, both models presented a poor calibration, with significant differences between observed and predicted mortality (Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit tests H and C, p < 0.001). In a stratified analysis, this study was unable to demonstrate any definite pattern of association between the poor performance of the models and specific subgroups of patients except for the most severely ill patients, where both models overestimated mortality. Conclusions: SAPS II performed better than APACHE II in this independent database, but the results do not allow its use, at least without being customised, to analyse quality of care or performance among ICUs in the target population. Received: 2 April 1996 Accepted: 24 October 1996     

Predicting six-month mortality of patients with traumatic brain injury: usefulness of common intensive care severity scores

Introduction

The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of the APACHE II (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II), SAPS II (Simplified Acute Physiology Score II) and SOFA (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment) scores compared to simpler models based on age and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) in predicting long-term outcome of patients with moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) treated in the intensive care unit (ICU).

Methods

A national ICU database was screened for eligible TBI patients (age over 15 years, GCS 3–13) admitted in 2003–2012. Logistic regression was used for customization of APACHE II, SAPS II and SOFA score-based models for six-month mortality prediction. These models were compared to an adjusted SOFA-based model (including age) and a reference model (age and GCS). Internal validation was performed by a randomized split-sample technique. Prognostic performance was determined by assessing discrimination, calibration and precision.

Results

In total, 1,625 patients were included. The overall six-month mortality was 33%. The APACHE II and SAPS II-based models showed good discrimination (area under the curve (AUC) 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75 to 0.82; and 0.80, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.83, respectively), calibration (P > 0.05) and precision (Brier score 0.166 to 0.167). The SOFA-based model showed poor discrimination (AUC 0.68, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.72) and precision (Brier score 0.201) but good calibration (P > 0.05). The AUC of the SOFA-based model was significantly improved after the insertion of age and GCS (∆AUC +0.11, P < 0.001). The performance of the reference model was comparable to the APACHE II and SAPS II in terms of discrimination (AUC 0.77; compared to APACHE II, ΔAUC −0.02, P = 0.425; compared to SAPS II, ΔAUC −0.03, P = 0.218), calibration (P > 0.05) and precision (Brier score 0.181).

Conclusions

A simple prognostic model, based only on age and GCS, displayed a fairly good prognostic performance in predicting six-month mortality of ICU-treated patients with TBI. The use of the more complex scoring systems APACHE II, SAPS II and SOFA added little to the prognostic performance.     

Comparison of three severity scores for critically ill cancer patients

Objective To compare three scoring systems, the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II, the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II and a modified Mortality Probability Model II (ICU cancer mortality model, ICMM) for their prognostic value for mortality during hospital stay in a group of cancer patients admitted to a medical ICU.Design Prospective cohort study.Setting Medical ICU of a tertiary care hospital.Patients Two hundred forty-two consecutive cancer patients admitted to the ICU.Measurements and results Variables included in APACHE II, SAPS II and the ICMM scores as well as demographic data were assessed during the first 24 h of stay in the ICU. Hospital mortality was measured; it was 44%. Calibration for all three scoring systems was acceptable, SAPS II yielded a significantly superior discrimination between survivors and non-survivors. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves were 0.776 for APACHE II, 0.825 for SAPS II and 0.698 for the ICMM.Conclusion The SAPS II was superior to APACHE II and ICMM. The newly developed ICMM does not improve mortality prediction in critically ill cancer patients.     

Performance assessment of the Simplified Acute Physiology Score II,the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score,and the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score in predicting the outcomes of adult patients with hepatic portal venous gas in the ED

ObjectiveThis study aims to evaluate the performance of Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II), the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score, and the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score for predicting illness severity and the mortality of adult hepatic portal venous gas (HPVG) patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). This will assist emergency physicians in risk stratification.MethodsData for 48 adult HPVG patients who visited our ED between December 2009 and December 2013 were analyzed. The SAPS II, APACHE II score, and SOFA score were calculated based on the worst laboratory values in the ED. The probability of death was calculated for each patient based on these scores. The ability of the SAPS II, APACHE II score, and SOFA score to predict group mortality was assessed by using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis and calibration analysis.ResultsThe sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 92.6%,71.4%, and 83.3%, respectively, for the SAPS II method; 77.8%, 81%, and 79.2%, respectively, for the APACHE II scoring system, and 77.8%, 76.2%, and 79.2%, respectively, for the SOFA score. In the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, the areas under the curve for the SAPS II, APACHE II scoring system, and SOFA score were 0.910, 0.878, and 0.809, respectively.ConclusionThis is one of the largest series performed in a population of adult HPVG patients in the ED. The results from the present study showed that SAPS II is easier and more quickly calculated than the APACHE II and more superior in predicting the mortality of ED adult HPVG patients than the SOFA. We recommend that the SAPS II be used for outcome prediction and risk stratification in adult HPVG patients in the ED.     

Thrombocytopenia and prognosis in intensive care

OBJECTIVE: To study the incidence and prognosis of thrombocytopenia in adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients. DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study. SETTING: The medical ICU of a university hospital and the combined medical-surgical ICU of a regional hospital. PATIENTS: All patients consecutively admitted during a 5-month period. INTERVENTIONS: Patient surveillance and data collection. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome measure was ICU mortality. Data of 329 patients were analyzed. Overall ICU mortality rate was 19.5%. A total of 136 patients (41.3%) had at least one platelet count <150 x 10(9)/L. These patients had higher Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score (MODS), Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II scores at admission, longer ICU stay (8 [4-16] days vs. 5 [2-9] days) (median [interquartile range]), and higher ICU mortality (crude odds ratio [OR], 5.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.7-9.1) and hospital mortality than patients with daily platelet counts >150 x 10(9)/L (p < .0005 for all comparisons). Bleeding incidence rose from 4.1% in nonthrombocytopenic patients to 21.4% in patients with minimal platelet counts between 101 x 10(9)/L and 149 x 10(9)/L (p = .0002) and to 52.6% in patients with minimal platelet counts <100 x 10(9)/L (p < .0001). In all quartiles of admission APACHE II and SAPS II scores, a nadir platelet count <150 x 10(9)/L was related with a substantially poorer vital prognosis. Similarly, a drop in platelet count to < or =50% of admission was associated with higher death rates (OR, 6.0; 95% CI, 3.0-12.0; p < .0001). In a logistic regression analysis with ICU mortality as the dependent variable, the occurrence of thrombocytopenia had more explanatory power than admission variables, including APACHE II, SAPS II, and MODS scores (adjusted OR, 4.2; 95% CI, 1.8-10.2). CONCLUSIONS: Thrombocytopenia is common in ICUs and constitutes a simple and readily available risk marker for mortality, independent of and complementary to established severity of disease indices. Both a low nadir platelet count and a large fall of platelet count predict a poor vital outcome in adult ICU patients.     

Comparison of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) and Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II) scoring systems in a single Greek intensive care unit

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II and Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II scoring systems in a single intensive care unit (ICU), independent from the ICUs of the developmental sample; and to compare the performance of APACHE II and SAPS II by means of statistical analyses in such a clinical setting. DESIGN: Prospective, cohort study. SETTING: A single ICU in a Greek university hospital. PATIENTS: In a time interval of 5 yrs, data for 681 patients admitted to our ICU were collected. The original exclusion criteria of both systems were employed. Patients <17 yrs of age were dropped from the study to keep compatibility with both systems. Eventually, a total of 661 patients were included in the analysis. INTERVENTIONS: Demographics, clinical parameters essential for the calculation of APACHE II and SAPS II scores, and risk of hospital death were recorded. Patient vital status was followed up to hospital discharge. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Both systems showed poor calibration and underestimated mortality but had good discriminative power, with SAPS II performing better than APACHE II. The evaluation of uniformity of fit in various subgroups for both systems confirmed the pattern of underprediction of mortality from both models and the better performance of APACHE II over our data sample. CONCLUSIONS: APACHE II and SAPS II failed to predict mortality in a population sample other than the one used for their development. APACHE II performed better than SAPS II. Validation in such a population is essential. Because there is a great variation in clinical and other patient characteristics among ICUs, it is doubtful that one system can be validated in all types of populations to be used for comparisons among different ICUs.     

Pulse high-volume haemofiltration for treatment of severe sepsis: effects on hemodynamics and survival

Introduction

Severe sepsis is the leading cause of mortality in critically ill patients. Abnormal concentrations of inflammatory mediators appear to be involved in the pathogenesis of sepsis. Based on the humoral theory of sepsis, a potential therapeutic approach involves high-volume haemofiltration (HVHF), which has exhibited beneficial effects in severe sepsis, improving haemodynamics and unselectively removing proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory mediators. However, concerns have been expressed about the feasibility and costs of continuous HVHF. Here we evaluate a new modality, namely pulse HVHF (PHVHF; 24-hour schedule: HVHF 85 ml/kg per hour for 6–8 hours followed by continuous venovenous haemofiltration 35 ml/kg per hour for 16–18 hours).

Method

Fifteen critically ill patients (seven male; mean Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation [APACHE] II score 31.2, mean Simplified Acute Physiology Score [SAPS] II 62, and mean Sequential Organ Failure Assessment 14.2) with severe sepsis underwent daily PHVHF. We measured changes in haemodynamic variables and evaluated the dose of noradrenaline required to maintain mean arterial pressure above 70 mmHg during and after pulse therapy at 6 and 12 hours. PHVHF was performed with 250 ml/min blood flow rate. The bicarbonate-based replacement fluid was used at a 1:1 ratio in simultaneous pre-dilution and post-dilution.

Results

No treatment was prematurely discontinued. Haemodynamics were improved by PHVHF, allowing a significant reduction in noradrenaline dose during and at the end of the PHVHF session; this reduction was maintained at 6 and 12 hours after pulse treatment (P = 0.001). There was also an improvement in systolic blood pressure (P = 0.04). There were no changes in temperature, cardiac index, oxygenation, arterial pH or urine output during the period of observation. The mean daily Kt/V was 1.92. Predicted mortality rates were 72% (based on APACHE II score) and 68% (based on SAPS II score), and the observed 28-day mortality was 47%.

Conclusion

PHVHF is a feasible modality and improves haemodynamics both during and after therapy. It may be a beneficial adjuvant treatment for severe sepsis/septic shock in terms of patient survival, and it represents a compromise between continuous renal replacement therapy and HVHF.     

Comparison of acute physiology and chronic health evaluations II and III and simplified acute physiology score II: a prospective cohort study evaluating these methods to predict outcome in a German interdisciplinary intensive care unit

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of three scoring systems to predict hospital mortality in adult patients of an interdisciplinary intensive care unit in Germany. DESIGN: A prospective cohort study. SETTING: A mixed medical and surgical intensive care unit at a teaching hospital in Germany. PATIENTS: From a total of 3,108 patients, 2,795 patients (89.9%) for Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II and 2,661 patients (85.6%) for APACHE III and Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II could be enrolled to the study because of defined exclusion criteria. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Probabilities of hospital death for patients were estimated by applying APACHE II and III and SAPS II and compared with observed outcomes. The overall goodness-of-fit of the three models was assessed. Hospital death rates were equivalent to those predicted by APACHE II but higher than those predicted by APACHE III and SAPS II. Calibration was good for APACHE II. For the other systems, it was insufficient, but better for SAPS II than for APACHE III. The overall correct classification rate, applying a decision criterion of 50%, was 84% for APACHE II and 85% for APACHE III and SAPS II. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve were 0.832 for APACHE II and 0.846 for APACHE III and SAPS II. Risk estimates for surgical and medical admissions differed between the three systems. For all systems, risk predictions for diagnostic categories did not fit uniformly across the spectrum of disease categories. CONCLUSIONS: Our data more closely resemble those of the APACHE II database, demonstrating a higher degree of overall goodness-of-fit of APACHE II than APACHE III and SAPS II. Although discrimination was slightly better for the two new systems, calibration was good with a close fit for APACHE II only. Hospital mortality was higher than predicted for both new models but was underestimated to a greater degree by APACHE III. Both score systems demonstrated a considerable variation across the spectrum of diagnostic categories, which also differed between the two models.