Cargando…
Head-to-head comparison of qSOFA and SIRS criteria in predicting the mortality of infected patients in the emergency department: a meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: Recently, the concept of sepsis was redefined by an international task force. This international task force of experts recommended using the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) criteria instead of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria to classify patie...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6042435/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29996880 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-018-0527-9 |
_version_ | 1783339153545494528 |
---|---|
author | Jiang, Jianjun Yang, Jin Mei, Jing Jin, Yongmei Lu, Youjin |
author_facet | Jiang, Jianjun Yang, Jin Mei, Jing Jin, Yongmei Lu, Youjin |
author_sort | Jiang, Jianjun |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Recently, the concept of sepsis was redefined by an international task force. This international task force of experts recommended using the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) criteria instead of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria to classify patients at high risk for death. However, the added value of these new criteria in the emergency department (ED) remains unclear. Thus, we performed this meta-analysis to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the qSOFA criteria in predicting mortality in ED patients with infections and compared the performance with that of the SIRS criteria. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE and Google Scholar (up to April 2018) were searched for related articles. A 2 × 2 contingency table was constructed according to mortality and qSOFA score (< 2 and ≥ 2) or SIRS score (< 2 and ≥ 2) in ED patients with infections. Two investigators independently assessed study eligibility and extracted data. We used a bivariate meta-analysis model to determine the prognostic value of qSOFA and SIRS in predicting mortality. We used the I(2) index to test heterogeneity. The bivariate random-effects regression model was used to pool the individual sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), and negative likelihood ratio (NLR). The summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) was constructed to assess the overall diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: Eight studies with a total of 52,849 patients were included. A qSOFA score ≥ 2 was associated with a higher risk of mortality in ED patients with infections, with a pooled risk ratio (RR) of 4.55 (95% CI, 3.38–6.14) using a random-effects model (I(2) = 91.1%). A SIRS score ≥ 2 was a prognostic marker of mortality in ED patients with infections, with a pooled RR of 2.75 (95% CI, 1.96–3.86) using a random-effects model (I(2) = 89%). When comparing the performance of qSOFA and SIRS in predicting mortality, a qSOFA score ≥ 2 was more specific; however a SIRS score ≥ 2 was more sensitive. The initial qSOFA values were of limited prognostic value in ED patients with infections. CONCLUSIONS: A qSOFA score ≥ 2 and SIRS score ≥ 2 are strongly associated with mortality in ED patients with infections. However, it is also clear that qSOFA and SIRS have limitations as risk stratification tools for ED patients with infections. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13049-018-0527-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6042435 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-60424352018-07-13 Head-to-head comparison of qSOFA and SIRS criteria in predicting the mortality of infected patients in the emergency department: a meta-analysis Jiang, Jianjun Yang, Jin Mei, Jing Jin, Yongmei Lu, Youjin Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Original Research BACKGROUND: Recently, the concept of sepsis was redefined by an international task force. This international task force of experts recommended using the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) criteria instead of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria to classify patients at high risk for death. However, the added value of these new criteria in the emergency department (ED) remains unclear. Thus, we performed this meta-analysis to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the qSOFA criteria in predicting mortality in ED patients with infections and compared the performance with that of the SIRS criteria. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE and Google Scholar (up to April 2018) were searched for related articles. A 2 × 2 contingency table was constructed according to mortality and qSOFA score (< 2 and ≥ 2) or SIRS score (< 2 and ≥ 2) in ED patients with infections. Two investigators independently assessed study eligibility and extracted data. We used a bivariate meta-analysis model to determine the prognostic value of qSOFA and SIRS in predicting mortality. We used the I(2) index to test heterogeneity. The bivariate random-effects regression model was used to pool the individual sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), and negative likelihood ratio (NLR). The summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) was constructed to assess the overall diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: Eight studies with a total of 52,849 patients were included. A qSOFA score ≥ 2 was associated with a higher risk of mortality in ED patients with infections, with a pooled risk ratio (RR) of 4.55 (95% CI, 3.38–6.14) using a random-effects model (I(2) = 91.1%). A SIRS score ≥ 2 was a prognostic marker of mortality in ED patients with infections, with a pooled RR of 2.75 (95% CI, 1.96–3.86) using a random-effects model (I(2) = 89%). When comparing the performance of qSOFA and SIRS in predicting mortality, a qSOFA score ≥ 2 was more specific; however a SIRS score ≥ 2 was more sensitive. The initial qSOFA values were of limited prognostic value in ED patients with infections. CONCLUSIONS: A qSOFA score ≥ 2 and SIRS score ≥ 2 are strongly associated with mortality in ED patients with infections. However, it is also clear that qSOFA and SIRS have limitations as risk stratification tools for ED patients with infections. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13049-018-0527-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-07-11 /pmc/articles/PMC6042435/ /pubmed/29996880 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-018-0527-9 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. 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 | Original Research Jiang, Jianjun Yang, Jin Mei, Jing Jin, Yongmei Lu, Youjin Head-to-head comparison of qSOFA and SIRS criteria in predicting the mortality of infected patients in the emergency department: a meta-analysis |
title | Head-to-head comparison of qSOFA and SIRS criteria in predicting the mortality of infected patients in the emergency department: a meta-analysis |
title_full | Head-to-head comparison of qSOFA and SIRS criteria in predicting the mortality of infected patients in the emergency department: a meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Head-to-head comparison of qSOFA and SIRS criteria in predicting the mortality of infected patients in the emergency department: a meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Head-to-head comparison of qSOFA and SIRS criteria in predicting the mortality of infected patients in the emergency department: a meta-analysis |
title_short | Head-to-head comparison of qSOFA and SIRS criteria in predicting the mortality of infected patients in the emergency department: a meta-analysis |
title_sort | head-to-head comparison of qsofa and sirs criteria in predicting the mortality of infected patients in the emergency department: a meta-analysis |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6042435/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29996880 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-018-0527-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jiangjianjun headtoheadcomparisonofqsofaandsirscriteriainpredictingthemortalityofinfectedpatientsintheemergencydepartmentametaanalysis AT yangjin headtoheadcomparisonofqsofaandsirscriteriainpredictingthemortalityofinfectedpatientsintheemergencydepartmentametaanalysis AT meijing headtoheadcomparisonofqsofaandsirscriteriainpredictingthemortalityofinfectedpatientsintheemergencydepartmentametaanalysis AT jinyongmei headtoheadcomparisonofqsofaandsirscriteriainpredictingthemortalityofinfectedpatientsintheemergencydepartmentametaanalysis AT luyoujin headtoheadcomparisonofqsofaandsirscriteriainpredictingthemortalityofinfectedpatientsintheemergencydepartmentametaanalysis |