Failure of available scoring systems to predict ongoing infection in patients with abdominal sepsis after their initial emergency laparotomy

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To examine commonly used scoring systems, designed to predict overall outcome in critically ill patients, for their ability to select patients with an abdominal sepsis that have ongoing infection needing relaparotomy.</p> <p...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: van Ruler Oddeke, Kiewiet Jordy JS, Boer Kimberley R, Lamme Bas, Gouma Dirk J, Boermeester Marja A, Reitsma Johannes B
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2011-12-01
Series:BMC Surgery
Online Access:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2482/11/38
id doaj-c46187162a6b4e4c8d51ab71ce1d4441
record_format Article
spelling doaj-c46187162a6b4e4c8d51ab71ce1d44412020-11-24T20:55:01ZengBMCBMC Surgery1471-24822011-12-011113810.1186/1471-2482-11-38Failure of available scoring systems to predict ongoing infection in patients with abdominal sepsis after their initial emergency laparotomyvan Ruler OddekeKiewiet Jordy JSBoer Kimberley RLamme BasGouma Dirk JBoermeester Marja AReitsma Johannes B<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To examine commonly used scoring systems, designed to predict overall outcome in critically ill patients, for their ability to select patients with an abdominal sepsis that have ongoing infection needing relaparotomy.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Data from a RCT comparing two surgical strategies was used. The study population consisted of 221 patients at risk for ongoing abdominal infection. The following scoring systems were evaluated with logistic regression analysis for their ability to select patients requiring a relaparotomy: APACHE-II score, SAPS-II, Mannheim Peritonitis Index (MPI), MODS, SOFA score, and the acute part of the APACHE-II score (APS).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The proportion of patients requiring a relaparotomy was 32% (71/221). Only 2 scores had a discriminatory ability in identifying patients with ongoing infection needing relaparotomy above chance: the APS on day 1 (AUC 0.61; 95%CI 0.52-0.69) and the SOFA score on day 2 (AUC 0.60; 95%CI 0.52-0.69). However, to correctly identify 90% of all patients needing a relaparotomy would require such a low cut-off value that around 80% of all patients identified by these scoring systems would have negative findings at relaparotomy.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>None of the widely-used scoring systems to predict overall outcome in critically ill patients are of clinical value for the identification of patients with ongoing infection needing relaparotomy. There is a need to develop more specific tools to assist physicians in their daily monitoring and selection of these patients after the initial emergency laparotomy.</p> <p>Trial registration number</p> <p>ISRCTN: <a href="http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN 51729393">ISRCTN 51729393</a></p> http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2482/11/38
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author van Ruler Oddeke
Kiewiet Jordy JS
Boer Kimberley R
Lamme Bas
Gouma Dirk J
Boermeester Marja A
Reitsma Johannes B
spellingShingle van Ruler Oddeke
Kiewiet Jordy JS
Boer Kimberley R
Lamme Bas
Gouma Dirk J
Boermeester Marja A
Reitsma Johannes B
Failure of available scoring systems to predict ongoing infection in patients with abdominal sepsis after their initial emergency laparotomy
BMC Surgery
author_facet van Ruler Oddeke
Kiewiet Jordy JS
Boer Kimberley R
Lamme Bas
Gouma Dirk J
Boermeester Marja A
Reitsma Johannes B
author_sort van Ruler Oddeke
title Failure of available scoring systems to predict ongoing infection in patients with abdominal sepsis after their initial emergency laparotomy
title_short Failure of available scoring systems to predict ongoing infection in patients with abdominal sepsis after their initial emergency laparotomy
title_full Failure of available scoring systems to predict ongoing infection in patients with abdominal sepsis after their initial emergency laparotomy
title_fullStr Failure of available scoring systems to predict ongoing infection in patients with abdominal sepsis after their initial emergency laparotomy
title_full_unstemmed Failure of available scoring systems to predict ongoing infection in patients with abdominal sepsis after their initial emergency laparotomy
title_sort failure of available scoring systems to predict ongoing infection in patients with abdominal sepsis after their initial emergency laparotomy
publisher BMC
series BMC Surgery
issn 1471-2482
publishDate 2011-12-01
description <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To examine commonly used scoring systems, designed to predict overall outcome in critically ill patients, for their ability to select patients with an abdominal sepsis that have ongoing infection needing relaparotomy.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Data from a RCT comparing two surgical strategies was used. The study population consisted of 221 patients at risk for ongoing abdominal infection. The following scoring systems were evaluated with logistic regression analysis for their ability to select patients requiring a relaparotomy: APACHE-II score, SAPS-II, Mannheim Peritonitis Index (MPI), MODS, SOFA score, and the acute part of the APACHE-II score (APS).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The proportion of patients requiring a relaparotomy was 32% (71/221). Only 2 scores had a discriminatory ability in identifying patients with ongoing infection needing relaparotomy above chance: the APS on day 1 (AUC 0.61; 95%CI 0.52-0.69) and the SOFA score on day 2 (AUC 0.60; 95%CI 0.52-0.69). However, to correctly identify 90% of all patients needing a relaparotomy would require such a low cut-off value that around 80% of all patients identified by these scoring systems would have negative findings at relaparotomy.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>None of the widely-used scoring systems to predict overall outcome in critically ill patients are of clinical value for the identification of patients with ongoing infection needing relaparotomy. There is a need to develop more specific tools to assist physicians in their daily monitoring and selection of these patients after the initial emergency laparotomy.</p> <p>Trial registration number</p> <p>ISRCTN: <a href="http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN 51729393">ISRCTN 51729393</a></p>
url http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2482/11/38
work_keys_str_mv AT vanruleroddeke failureofavailablescoringsystemstopredictongoinginfectioninpatientswithabdominalsepsisaftertheirinitialemergencylaparotomy
AT kiewietjordyjs failureofavailablescoringsystemstopredictongoinginfectioninpatientswithabdominalsepsisaftertheirinitialemergencylaparotomy
AT boerkimberleyr failureofavailablescoringsystemstopredictongoinginfectioninpatientswithabdominalsepsisaftertheirinitialemergencylaparotomy
AT lammebas failureofavailablescoringsystemstopredictongoinginfectioninpatientswithabdominalsepsisaftertheirinitialemergencylaparotomy
AT goumadirkj failureofavailablescoringsystemstopredictongoinginfectioninpatientswithabdominalsepsisaftertheirinitialemergencylaparotomy
AT boermeestermarjaa failureofavailablescoringsystemstopredictongoinginfectioninpatientswithabdominalsepsisaftertheirinitialemergencylaparotomy
AT reitsmajohannesb failureofavailablescoringsystemstopredictongoinginfectioninpatientswithabdominalsepsisaftertheirinitialemergencylaparotomy
_version_ 1716792934579306496