American Society of Anesthesiologists Score: Still Useful After 60 Years? Results of the EuSOS Study

OBJECTIVE: The European Surgical Outcomes Study described mortality following in-patient surgery. Several factors were identified that were able to predict poor outcomes in a multivariate analysis. These included age, procedure urgency, severity and type and the American Association of Anaesthesia score. This study describes in greater detail the relationship between the American Association of Anaesthesia score and postoperative mortality. METHODS: Patients in this 7-day cohort study were enrolled in April 2011. Consecutive patients aged 16 years and older undergoing inpatient non-cardiac surgery with a recorded American Association of Anaesthesia score in 498 hospitals across 28 European nations were included and followed up for a maximum of 60 days. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality. Decision tree analysis with the CHAID (SPSS) system was used to delineate nodes associated with mortality. RESULTS: The study enrolled 46,539 patients. Due to missing values, 873 patients were excluded, resulting in the analysis of 45,666 patients. Increasing American Association of Anaesthesia scores were associated with increased admission rates to intensive care and higher mortality rates. Despite a progressive relationship with mortality, discrimination was poor, with an area under the ROC curve of 0.658 (95% CI 0.642 - 0.6775). Using regression trees (CHAID), we identified four discrete American Association of Anaesthesia nodes associated with mortality, with American Association of Anaesthesia 1 and American Association of Anaesthesia 2 compressed into the same node. CONCLUSION: The American Association of Anaesthesia score can be used to determine higher risk groups of surgical patients, but clinicians cannot use the score to discriminate between grades 1 and 2. Overall, the discriminatory power of the model was less than acceptable for widespread use.

CURB-65 and Other Markers of Illness Severity in Community-Acquired Pneumonia Among HIV-Positive Patients

As the relative burden of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia among HIV-positive patients increases, adequate prediction of case severity on presentation is crucial. We sought to determine what characteristics measurable on presentation are predictive of worse outcomes. We studied all admissions for community-acquired bacterial pneumonia over one year at a tertiary centre. Patient demographics, comorbidities, HIV-specific markers and CURB-65 scores on Emergency Department presentation were reviewed. Outcomes of interest included mortality, bacteraemia, intensive care unit admission and orotracheal intubation. A total of 396 patients were included: 49 HIV-positive and 347 HIV-negative. Mean CURB-65 score was 1.3 for HIV-positive and 2.2 for HIV-negative patients (p < 0.0001), its predictive value for mortality being maintained in both groups (p = 0.03 and p < 0.001, respectively). Adjusting for CURB-65 scores, HIV infection by itself was only associated with bacteraemia (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 7.1, 95% CI [2.6-19.5]). Patients with < 200 CD4 cells/µL presented similar CURB-65 adjusted mortality (aOR 1.7, 95% CI [0.2-15.2]), but higher risk of intensive care unit admission (aOR 5.7, 95% CI [1.5-22.0]) and orotracheal intubation (aOR 9.1, 95% CI [2.2-37.1]), compared to HIV-negative patients. These two associations were not observed in the > 200 CD4 cells/µL subgroup (aOR 2.2, 95% CI [0.7-7.6] and aOR 0.8, 95% CI [0.1-6.5], respectively). Antiretroviral therapy and viral load suppression were not associated with different outcomes (p > 0.05). High CURB-65 scores and CD4 counts < 200 cells/µL were both associated with worse outcomes. Severity assessment scales and CD4 counts may both be helpful in predicting severity in HIV-positive patients presenting with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia.