Four Assessment Tools for Predicting Mortality and Adverse Events in Surgical Patients With Sepsis and Septic Shock: A Comparative Study.

Abstract

Background: The mortality rate for sepsis and septic shock in surgical patients is approximately 36%, which is higher than that of other medical patients. Predisposition, infection/injury, response, and organ dysfunction (PIRO) is currently the most widely used tool for assessing patients with surgical sepsis. However, it is not a standardized assessment tool for surgical patients in general.

Purpose: The purposes of this study were to (a) create a modified PIRO (mPIRO) that adds a count of platelets and does not include a body temperature reading; (b) test the sensitivity and specificity of the mPIRO for predicting mortality and adverse events among patients with surgical sepsis; and (c) compare the predictive accuracy of the mPIRO, sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA), quick SOFA, and PIRO tools.

Methods: A retrospective observational cohort study was conducted. Two thousand fifty-five patient medical records were reviewed, with 103 identified as meeting the inclusion criteria.

Results: Compared with the other tools, mPIRO ≥ 4 achieved better sensitivity (90.5%) in predicting mortality and high sensitivity (72%) and specificity (80%) in predicting adverse events. mPIRO was the most accurate predictor of mortality (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] = 0.83) among the tools considered. SOFA and mPIRO were the first and second most accurate predictor of adverse events, respectively, with respective AUC values of 0.86 and 0.82.

Conclusions/implications for practice: mPIRO, which employs an easy-to-use scoring system, is a valid assessment tool with good sensitivity and AUC for predicting both mortality and adverse events in patients with surgical sepsis. We recommend using mPIRO ≥ 3 as an indicator of potential adverse events.