Sepsis Mortality Prediction Based on Predisposition, Infection and Response

OBJECTIVE: To empirically test, based on a large multicenter, multinational database, whether a modified PIRO (predisposition, insult, response, and organ dysfunction) concept could be applied to predict mortality in patients with infection and sepsis. DESIGN: Substudy of a multicenter multinational cohort study (SAPS 3). PATIENTS: A total of 2,628 patients with signs of infection or sepsis who stayed in the ICU for >48 h. Three boxes of variables were defined, according to the PIRO concept. Box 1 (Predisposition) contained information about the patient's condition before ICU admission. Box 2 (Injury) contained information about the infection at ICU admission. Box 3 (Response) was defined as the response to the infection, expressed as a Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score after 48 h. INTERVENTIONS: None. MAIN MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Most of the infections were community acquired (59.6%); 32.5% were hospital acquired. The median age of the patients was 65 (50-75) years, and 41.1% were female. About 22% (n=576) of the patients presented with infection only, 36.3% (n=953) with signs of sepsis, 23.6% (n=619) with severe sepsis, and 18.3% (n=480) with septic shock. Hospital mortality was 40.6% overall, greater in those with septic shock (52.5%) than in those with infection (34.7%). Several factors related to predisposition, infection and response were associated with hospital mortality. CONCLUSION: The proposed three-level system, by using objectively defined criteria for risk of mortality in sepsis, could be used by physicians to stratify patients at ICU admission or shortly thereafter, contributing to a better selection of management according to the risk of death.

A Review of National Guidelines for Management of COPD in Europe

The quality of care can be improved by the development and implementation of evidence-based treatment guidelines. Different national guidelines for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exist in Europe and relevant differences may exist among them.This was an evaluation of COPD treatment guidelines published in Europe and Russia in the past 7 years. Each guideline was reviewed in detail and information about the most important aspects of patient diagnosis, risk stratification and pharmacotherapy was extracted following a standardised process. Guidelines were available from the Czech Republic, England and Wales, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Spain and Sweden. The treatment goals, criteria for COPD diagnosis, consideration of comorbidities in treatment selection and support for use of long-acting bronchodilators, were similar across treatment guidelines. There were differences in measures used for stratification of disease severity, consideration of patient phenotypes, criteria for the use of inhaled corticosteroids and recommendations for other medications (e.g. theophylline and mucolytics) in addition to bronchodilators.There is generally good agreement on treatment goals, criteria for diagnosis of COPD and use of long-acting bronchodilators as the cornerstone of treatment among guidelines for COPD management in Europe and Russia. However, there are differences in the definitions of patient subgroups and other recommended treatments.