Cargando…

Decision support tool for differential diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) vs Cardiogenic Pulmonary Edema (CPE): a prospective validation and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION: We recently presented a prediction score providing decision support with the often-challenging early differential diagnosis of acute lung injury (ALI) vs cardiogenic pulmonary edema (CPE). To facilitate clinical adoption, our objective was to prospectively validate its performance in a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schmickl, Christopher N, Pannu, Sonal, Al-Qadi, Mazen O, Alsara, Anas, Kashyap, Rahul, Dhokarh, Rajanigandha, Herasevich, Vitaly, Gajic, Ognjen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4277656/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25432274
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-014-0659-x
_version_ 1782350421197586432
author Schmickl, Christopher N
Pannu, Sonal
Al-Qadi, Mazen O
Alsara, Anas
Kashyap, Rahul
Dhokarh, Rajanigandha
Herasevich, Vitaly
Gajic, Ognjen
author_facet Schmickl, Christopher N
Pannu, Sonal
Al-Qadi, Mazen O
Alsara, Anas
Kashyap, Rahul
Dhokarh, Rajanigandha
Herasevich, Vitaly
Gajic, Ognjen
author_sort Schmickl, Christopher N
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: We recently presented a prediction score providing decision support with the often-challenging early differential diagnosis of acute lung injury (ALI) vs cardiogenic pulmonary edema (CPE). To facilitate clinical adoption, our objective was to prospectively validate its performance in an independent cohort. METHODS: Over 9 months, adult patients consecutively admitted to any intensive care unit of a tertiary-care center developing acute pulmonary edema were identified in real-time using validated electronic surveillance. For eligible patients, predictors were abstracted from medical records within 48 hours of the alert. Post-hoc expert review blinded to the prediction score established gold standard diagnosis. RESULTS: Of 1,516 patients identified by electronic surveillance, data were abstracted for 249 patients (93% within 48 hours of disease onset), of which expert review (kappa 0.93) classified 72 as ALI, 73 as CPE and excluded 104 as “other”. With an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.81 (95% confidence interval =0.73 to 0.88) the prediction score showed similar discrimination as in prior cohorts (development AUC = 0.81, P = 0.91; retrospective validation AUC = 0.80, P = 0.92). Hosmer-Lemeshow test was significant (P = 0.01), but across eight previously defined score ranges probabilities of ALI vs CPE were the same as in the development cohort (P = 0.60). Results were the same when comparing acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS, Berlin definition) vs CPE. CONCLUSION: The clinical prediction score reliably differentiates ARDS/ALI vs CPE. Pooled results provide precise estimates of the score’s performance which can be used to screen patient populations or to assess the probability of ALI/ARDS vs CPE in specific patients. The score may thus facilitate early inclusion into research studies and expedite prompt treatment. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13054-014-0659-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4277656
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42776562015-01-16 Decision support tool for differential diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) vs Cardiogenic Pulmonary Edema (CPE): a prospective validation and meta-analysis Schmickl, Christopher N Pannu, Sonal Al-Qadi, Mazen O Alsara, Anas Kashyap, Rahul Dhokarh, Rajanigandha Herasevich, Vitaly Gajic, Ognjen Crit Care Research INTRODUCTION: We recently presented a prediction score providing decision support with the often-challenging early differential diagnosis of acute lung injury (ALI) vs cardiogenic pulmonary edema (CPE). To facilitate clinical adoption, our objective was to prospectively validate its performance in an independent cohort. METHODS: Over 9 months, adult patients consecutively admitted to any intensive care unit of a tertiary-care center developing acute pulmonary edema were identified in real-time using validated electronic surveillance. For eligible patients, predictors were abstracted from medical records within 48 hours of the alert. Post-hoc expert review blinded to the prediction score established gold standard diagnosis. RESULTS: Of 1,516 patients identified by electronic surveillance, data were abstracted for 249 patients (93% within 48 hours of disease onset), of which expert review (kappa 0.93) classified 72 as ALI, 73 as CPE and excluded 104 as “other”. With an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.81 (95% confidence interval =0.73 to 0.88) the prediction score showed similar discrimination as in prior cohorts (development AUC = 0.81, P = 0.91; retrospective validation AUC = 0.80, P = 0.92). Hosmer-Lemeshow test was significant (P = 0.01), but across eight previously defined score ranges probabilities of ALI vs CPE were the same as in the development cohort (P = 0.60). Results were the same when comparing acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS, Berlin definition) vs CPE. CONCLUSION: The clinical prediction score reliably differentiates ARDS/ALI vs CPE. Pooled results provide precise estimates of the score’s performance which can be used to screen patient populations or to assess the probability of ALI/ARDS vs CPE in specific patients. The score may thus facilitate early inclusion into research studies and expedite prompt treatment. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13054-014-0659-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2014-11-29 2014 /pmc/articles/PMC4277656/ /pubmed/25432274 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-014-0659-x Text en © Schmickl et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2014 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Schmickl, Christopher N
Pannu, Sonal
Al-Qadi, Mazen O
Alsara, Anas
Kashyap, Rahul
Dhokarh, Rajanigandha
Herasevich, Vitaly
Gajic, Ognjen
Decision support tool for differential diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) vs Cardiogenic Pulmonary Edema (CPE): a prospective validation and meta-analysis
title Decision support tool for differential diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) vs Cardiogenic Pulmonary Edema (CPE): a prospective validation and meta-analysis
title_full Decision support tool for differential diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) vs Cardiogenic Pulmonary Edema (CPE): a prospective validation and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Decision support tool for differential diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) vs Cardiogenic Pulmonary Edema (CPE): a prospective validation and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Decision support tool for differential diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) vs Cardiogenic Pulmonary Edema (CPE): a prospective validation and meta-analysis
title_short Decision support tool for differential diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) vs Cardiogenic Pulmonary Edema (CPE): a prospective validation and meta-analysis
title_sort decision support tool for differential diagnosis of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ards) vs cardiogenic pulmonary edema (cpe): a prospective validation and meta-analysis
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4277656/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25432274
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-014-0659-x
work_keys_str_mv AT schmicklchristophern decisionsupporttoolfordifferentialdiagnosisofacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeardsvscardiogenicpulmonaryedemacpeaprospectivevalidationandmetaanalysis
AT pannusonal decisionsupporttoolfordifferentialdiagnosisofacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeardsvscardiogenicpulmonaryedemacpeaprospectivevalidationandmetaanalysis
AT alqadimazeno decisionsupporttoolfordifferentialdiagnosisofacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeardsvscardiogenicpulmonaryedemacpeaprospectivevalidationandmetaanalysis
AT alsaraanas decisionsupporttoolfordifferentialdiagnosisofacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeardsvscardiogenicpulmonaryedemacpeaprospectivevalidationandmetaanalysis
AT kashyaprahul decisionsupporttoolfordifferentialdiagnosisofacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeardsvscardiogenicpulmonaryedemacpeaprospectivevalidationandmetaanalysis
AT dhokarhrajanigandha decisionsupporttoolfordifferentialdiagnosisofacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeardsvscardiogenicpulmonaryedemacpeaprospectivevalidationandmetaanalysis
AT herasevichvitaly decisionsupporttoolfordifferentialdiagnosisofacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeardsvscardiogenicpulmonaryedemacpeaprospectivevalidationandmetaanalysis
AT gajicognjen decisionsupporttoolfordifferentialdiagnosisofacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeardsvscardiogenicpulmonaryedemacpeaprospectivevalidationandmetaanalysis