Clinical Characteristics and Laboratory Biomarkers in ICU-admitted Septic Patients with and without Bacteremia: A Predictive Analysis

Sangwon Baek, Seungjun Lee
{"title":"Clinical Characteristics and Laboratory Biomarkers in ICU-admitted Septic Patients with and without Bacteremia: A Predictive Analysis","authors":"Sangwon Baek, Seungjun Lee","doi":"10.1101/2023.11.16.23298625","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Few studies have investigated the diagnostic utilities of biomarkers for predicting bacteremia among septic patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU). Therefore, this study evaluated the prediction power of laboratory biomarkers to utilize those markers with high performance to optimize the predictive model for bacteremia. Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted at the ICU department of Gyeongsang National University Changwon Hospital in 2019. Adult patients qualifying SEPSIS—3 (increase in sequential organ failure score ≥ 2) criteria with at least two sets of blood culture were selected. Collected data was initially analyzed independently to identify the significant predictors, which was then used to build the multivariable logistic regression (MLR) model.\nResults: A total of 218 patients with 48 cases of true bacteremia were analyzed in this research. Both CRP and PCT showed a substantial area under the curve (AUC) value for discriminating bacteremia among septic patients (0.757 and 0.845, respectively). To further enhance the predictive accuracy, we combined PCT, bilirubin, neutrophil—lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelets, lactic acid, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score to build the predictive model with an AUC of 0.907 [0.843–0.956]. In addition, a high association between bacteremia and mortality rate was discovered through the survival analysis (P=0.004).\nConclusions: While PCT is certainly a useful index for distinguishing patients with and without bacteremia by itself, our MLR model indicates that the accuracy of bacteremia prediction substantially improves by the combined use of PCT, bilirubin, NLR, platelets, lactic acid, ESR, and GCS score.","PeriodicalId":501249,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine","volume":"119 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.11.16.23298625","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Few studies have investigated the diagnostic utilities of biomarkers for predicting bacteremia among septic patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU). Therefore, this study evaluated the prediction power of laboratory biomarkers to utilize those markers with high performance to optimize the predictive model for bacteremia. Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted at the ICU department of Gyeongsang National University Changwon Hospital in 2019. Adult patients qualifying SEPSIS—3 (increase in sequential organ failure score ≥ 2) criteria with at least two sets of blood culture were selected. Collected data was initially analyzed independently to identify the significant predictors, which was then used to build the multivariable logistic regression (MLR) model. Results: A total of 218 patients with 48 cases of true bacteremia were analyzed in this research. Both CRP and PCT showed a substantial area under the curve (AUC) value for discriminating bacteremia among septic patients (0.757 and 0.845, respectively). To further enhance the predictive accuracy, we combined PCT, bilirubin, neutrophil—lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelets, lactic acid, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score to build the predictive model with an AUC of 0.907 [0.843–0.956]. In addition, a high association between bacteremia and mortality rate was discovered through the survival analysis (P=0.004). Conclusions: While PCT is certainly a useful index for distinguishing patients with and without bacteremia by itself, our MLR model indicates that the accuracy of bacteremia prediction substantially improves by the combined use of PCT, bilirubin, NLR, platelets, lactic acid, ESR, and GCS score.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
icu收治脓毒症患者伴或不伴菌血症的临床特征和实验室生物标志物:一项预测性分析
背景:很少有研究调查生物标志物在预测重症监护病房(ICU)脓毒症患者菌血症中的诊断效用。因此,本研究评估了实验室生物标志物的预测能力,利用这些高性能的标志物来优化菌血症的预测模型。方法:回顾性横断面研究于2019年在庆尚道国立大学昌原医院重症监护室进行。选择符合脓毒症- 3(序贯器官衰竭评分增加≥2)标准且至少有两组血培养的成年患者。收集到的数据首先进行独立分析,以确定显著的预测因子,然后用于构建多变量逻辑回归(MLR)模型。结果:本研究共分析了218例真菌血症48例。CRP和PCT鉴别脓毒症患者菌血症的曲线下面积(AUC)值均较大(分别为0.757和0.845)。为进一步提高预测准确性,我们结合PCT、胆红素、中性粒细胞-淋巴细胞比值(NLR)、血小板、乳酸、红细胞沉降率(ESR)、格拉斯哥昏迷量表(GCS)评分建立预测模型,AUC为0.907[0.843-0.956]。此外,通过生存分析发现菌血症与死亡率之间存在高度关联(P=0.004)。结论:虽然PCT本身确实是区分有无菌血症患者的有用指标,但我们的MLR模型表明,PCT、胆红素、NLR、血小板、乳酸、ESR和GCS评分联合使用可以显著提高菌血症预测的准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Postoperative 20% Albumin and Cardiac Surgery Associated Kidney Injury, Statistical Analysis Plan and Updated Protocol Exploring the impact of a context-adapted decision aid and online training about shared decision making about goals of care with elderly patients in the intensive care unit: a mixed-methods study Pulmonary inflammation in severe pneumonia is characterised by compartmentalised and mechanistically distinct sub-phenotypes Perioperative albumin versus other fluids to prevent cardiac surgery associated kidney injury: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials The impact of burn trauma on glycocalyx derangement
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1