L Mica1, E Furrer2, M Keel3, O Trentz4. 1. Division of Trauma Surgery, University Hospital of Zürich, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland. ladislav.mica@usz.ch. 2. Division of Biostatistics, University of Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland. 3. University Hospital of Orthopedic Surgery, Inselspital Bern, Bern, Switzerland. 4. Department of Trauma Surgery, University Hospital of Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) and sepsis as causes of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) remain challenging to treat in polytrauma patients. In this study, the focus was set on widely used scoring systems to assess their diagnostic quality. METHODS: A total of 512 patients (mean age: 39.2 ± 16.2, range: 16-88 years) who had an Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥17 were included in this retrospective study. The patients were subdivided into four groups: no SIRS, slight SIRS, severe SIRS, and sepsis. The ISS, New Injury Severity Score (NISS), Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) scores, and prothrombin time were collected at admission. The Kruskal-Wallis test and χ(2)-test, multinomial regression analysis, and kernel density estimates were performed. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis is reported as the area under the curve (AUC). Data were considered as significant if p < 0.05. RESULTS: All variables were significantly different in all groups (p < 0.001). The odds ratio increased with increasing SIRS severity for NISS (slight vs. no SIRS, 1.06, p = 0.07; severe vs. no SIRS, 1.07, p = 0.04; and sepsis vs. no SIRS, 1.11, p = 0.0028) and APACHE II score (slight vs. no SIRS, 0.97, p = 0.44; severe vs. no SIRS, 1.08, p = 0.02; and sepsis vs. no SIRS, 1.12, p = 0.0028). ROC analysis revealed that the NISS (slight vs. no SIRS, AUC 0.61; severe vs. no SIRS, AUC 0.67; and sepsis vs. no SIRS, AUC 0.77) and APACHE II score (slight vs. no SIRS, AUC 0.60; severe vs. no SIRS, AUC 0.74; and sepsis vs. no SIRS, AUC 0.82) had the best predictive ability for SIRS and sepsis. CONCLUSION: Quick assessment with the NISS or APACHE II score could preselect possible candidates for sepsis following polytrauma and provide guidance in trauma surgeons' decision-making.
PURPOSE: Systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) and sepsis as causes of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) remain challenging to treat in polytraumapatients. In this study, the focus was set on widely used scoring systems to assess their diagnostic quality. METHODS: A total of 512 patients (mean age: 39.2 ± 16.2, range: 16-88 years) who had an Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥17 were included in this retrospective study. The patients were subdivided into four groups: no SIRS, slight SIRS, severe SIRS, and sepsis. The ISS, New Injury Severity Score (NISS), Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) scores, and prothrombin time were collected at admission. The Kruskal-Wallis test and χ(2)-test, multinomial regression analysis, and kernel density estimates were performed. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis is reported as the area under the curve (AUC). Data were considered as significant if p < 0.05. RESULTS: All variables were significantly different in all groups (p < 0.001). The odds ratio increased with increasing SIRS severity for NISS (slight vs. no SIRS, 1.06, p = 0.07; severe vs. no SIRS, 1.07, p = 0.04; and sepsis vs. no SIRS, 1.11, p = 0.0028) and APACHE II score (slight vs. no SIRS, 0.97, p = 0.44; severe vs. no SIRS, 1.08, p = 0.02; and sepsis vs. no SIRS, 1.12, p = 0.0028). ROC analysis revealed that the NISS (slight vs. no SIRS, AUC 0.61; severe vs. no SIRS, AUC 0.67; and sepsis vs. no SIRS, AUC 0.77) and APACHE II score (slight vs. no SIRS, AUC 0.60; severe vs. no SIRS, AUC 0.74; and sepsis vs. no SIRS, AUC 0.82) had the best predictive ability for SIRS and sepsis. CONCLUSION: Quick assessment with the NISS or APACHE II score could preselect possible candidates for sepsis following polytrauma and provide guidance in trauma surgeons' decision-making.
Authors: Kai Sprengel; Hanspeter Simmen; Clément M L Werner; Simon Sulser; Michael Plecko; Catharina Keller; Ladislav Mica Journal: Eur J Med Res Date: 2016-10-13 Impact factor: 2.175
Authors: Sascha Halvachizadeh; Larissa Baradaran; Paolo Cinelli; Roman Pfeifer; Kai Sprengel; Hans-Christoph Pape Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-01-24 Impact factor: 3.240