Prediction of sepsis in the burn intensive care unit patient

Sepsis is a significant cause for multiple organ failure and death in the burn patient, yet identification in this population is confounded by chronic hypermetabolism and impaired immune function. The purpose of this study was twofold: 1) determine the ability of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) and American Burn Association (ABA) criteria to predict sepsis in the burn patient; and 2) develop a model representing the best combination of clinical predictors associated with sepsis in the same population. A retrospective, case-controlled, within-patient comparison of burn patients admitted to a single intensive care unit (ICU) was conducted for the period January 2005 to September 2010. Blood culture results were paired with clinical condition: "positive-sick"; "negative-sick", and "screening-not sick". Data were collected for the 72 hours prior to each blood culture. The most significant predictors were evaluated using logistic regression, Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) and ROC area under the curve (AUC) analyses to assess model predictive ability. Bootstrapping methods were employed to evaluate potential model over-fitting. Fifty-nine subjects were included, representing 177 culture periods. SIRS criteria were not found to be associated with culture type, with an average of 98% of subjects meeting criteria in the 3 days prior. ABA sepsis criteria were significantly different among culture type only on the day prior (p = 0.004). The variables identified for the model included: heart rate>130 beats/min, mean blood pressure<60 mmHg, base deficit<-6 mEq/L, temperature>36°C, use of vasoactive medications, and glucose>150 mg/d1. The model was significant in predicting "positive culture-sick" and sepsis state, with AUC of 0.775 (p < 0.001) and 0.714 (p < .001), respectively; comparatively, the ABA criteria AUC was 0.619 (p = 0.028) and 0.597 (p = .035), respectively. SIRS criteria are not appropriate for identifying sepsis in the burn population. The ABA criteria perform better, but only for the day prior to positive blood culture results. The time period useful to diagnose sepsis using clinical criteria may be limited to 24 hours. A combination of predictors is superior to individual variable trends, yet algorithms or computer support will be necessary for the clinician to find such models useful. ^

Performance of HbA1c for classifying diabetes and diagnostic threshold for diabetes among the Mexican American border community

Objective. In 2009, the International Expert Committee recommended the use of HbA1c test for diagnosis of diabetes. Although it has been recommended for the diagnosis of diabetes, its precise test performance among Mexican Americans is uncertain. A strong “gold standard” would rely on repeated blood glucose measurement on different days, which is the recommended method for diagnosing diabetes in clinical practice. Our objective was to assess test performance of HbA1c in detecting diabetes and pre-diabetes against repeated fasting blood glucose measurement for the Mexican American population living in United States-Mexico border. Moreover, we wanted to find out a specific and precise threshold value of HbA1c for Diabetes Mellitus (DM) and pre-diabetes for this high-risk population which might assist in better diagnosis and better management of patient diabetes. ^ Research design and methods. We used CCHC dataset for our study. In 2004, the Cameron County Hispanic Cohort (CCHC), now numbering 2,574, was established drawn from randomly selected households on the basis of 2000 Census tract data. The CCHC study randomly selected a subset of people (aged 18-64 years) in CCHC cohort households to determine the influence of SES on diabetes and obesity. Among the participants in Cohort-2000, 67.15% are female; all are Hispanic. ^ Individuals were defined as having diabetes mellitus (Fasting plasma glucose [FPG] ≥ 126 mg/dL or pre-diabetes (100 ≤ FPG < 126 mg/dL). HbA1c test performance was evaluated using receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves. Moreover, change-point models were used to determine HbA1c thresholds compatible with FPG thresholds for diabetes and pre-diabetes. ^ Results. When assessing Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) is used to detect diabetes, the sensitivity and specificity of HbA1c≥ 6.5% was 75% and 87% respectively (area under the curve 0.895). Additionally, when assessing FPG to detect pre-diabetes, the sensitivity and specificity of HbA1c≥ 6.0% (ADA recommended threshold) was 18% and 90% respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of HbA1c≥ 5.7% (International Expert Committee recommended threshold) for detecting pre-diabetes was 31% and 78% respectively. ROC analyses suggest HbA1c as a sound predictor of diabetes mellitus (area under the curve 0.895) but a poorer predictor for pre-diabetes (area under the curve 0.632). ^ Conclusions. Our data support the current recommendations for use of HbA1c in the diagnosis of diabetes for the Mexican American population as it has shown reasonable sensitivity, specificity and accuracy against repeated FPG measures. However, use of HbA1c may be premature for detecting pre-diabetes in this specific population because of the poor sensitivity with FPG. It might be the case that HbA1c is differentiating the cases more effectively who are at risk of developing diabetes. Following these pre-diabetic individuals for a longer-term for the detection of incident diabetes may lead to more confirmatory result.^

Comparison of Bispectral Index (BIS) and Patient State Index (PSI) as objective measures of sedation and analgesia in critically ill/injured patients

Critically ill and injured patients require pain relief and sedation to reduce the body's stress response and to facilitate painful diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. Presently, the level of sedation and analgesia is guided by the use of clinical scores which can be unreliable. There is therefore, a need for an objective measure of sedation and analgesia. The Bispectral Index (BIS) and Patient State Index (PSI) were recently introduced into clinical practice as objective measures of the depth of analgesia and sedation. ^ Aim. To compare the different measures of sedation and analgesia (BIS and PSI) to the standard and commonly used modified Ramsay Score (MRS) and determine if the monitors can be used interchangeably. ^ Methods. MRS, BIS and PSI values were obtained in 50 postoperative cardiac surgery patients requiring analgesia and sedation from June to December 2004. The MRS, BIS and PSI values were assessed hourly for up to 6-h by a single observer. ^ The relationship between BIS and PSI values were explored using scatter plots and correlation between MRS, BIS and PSI was determined using Spearman's correlation coefficient. Intra-class correlation (ICC) was used to determine the inter-rater reliability of MRS, BIS and PSI. Kappa statistics was used to further evaluate the agreement between BIS and PSI at light, moderate and deep levels of sedation. ^ Results. There was a positive correlation between BIS and PSI values (Rho = 0.731, p<0.001). Intra-class correlation between BIS and PSI was 0.58, MRS and BIS 0.43 and MRS and PSI 0.27. Using Kappa statistics, agreement between MRS and BIS was 0.35 (95% CI: 0.27–0.43) and for MRS and PSI was 0.21 (95% CI: 0.15–0.28). The kappa statistic for BIS and PSI was 0.45 (95% CI: 0.37–0.52). Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves constructed to detect undersedation indicated an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.91 (95% CI = 0.87 to 0.94) for the BIS and 0.84 (95% CI = 0.79 to 0.88) for the PSI. For detection of oversedation, AUC for the BIS was 0.89 (95% CI = 0.84 to 0.92) and 0.80 (95% CI = 0.75 to 0.85) for the PSI. ^ Conclusions. There is a statistically significant positive correlation between the BIS and PSI but poor correlation and poor test agreement between the MRS and BIS as well as MRS and PSI. Both the BIS and PSI demonstrated a high level of prediction for undersedation and oversedation; however, the BIS and PSI can not be considered interchangeable monitors of sedation. ^

The performance of human papillomavirus high-risk DNA testing in the screening and diagnostic settings.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the performance of the human papillomavirus high-risk DNA test in patients 30 years and older. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Screening (n=835) and diagnosis (n=518) groups were defined based on prior Papanicolaou smear results as part of a clinical trial for cervical cancer detection. We compared the Hybrid Capture II (HCII) test result with the worst histologic report. We used cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2/3 or worse as the reference of disease. We calculated sensitivities, specificities, positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR-), receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, and areas under the ROC curves for the HCII test. We also considered alternative strategies, including Papanicolaou smear, a combination of Papanicolaou smear and the HCII test, a sequence of Papanicolaou smear followed by the HCII test, and a sequence of the HCII test followed by Papanicolaou smear. RESULTS: For the screening group, the sensitivity was 0.69 and the specificity was 0.93; the area under the ROC curve was 0.81. The LR+ and LR- were 10.24 and 0.34, respectively. For the diagnosis group, the sensitivity was 0.88 and the specificity was 0.78; the area under the ROC curve was 0.83. The LR+ and LR- were 4.06 and 0.14, respectively. Sequential testing showed little or no improvement over the combination testing. CONCLUSIONS: The HCII test in the screening group had a greater LR+ for the detection of CIN 2/3 or worse. HCII testing may be an additional screening tool for cervical cancer in women 30 years and older.

The risk prediction for SPM and its impact on the survival in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma (HNSCC) is the sixth common malignancy in the world, with high rates of developing second primary malignancy (SPM) and moderately low survival rates. This disease has become an enormous challenge in the cancer research and treatments. For HNSCC patients, a highly significant cause of post-treatment mortality and morbidity is the development of SPM. Hence, assessment of predicting the risk for the development of SPM would be very helpful for patients, clinicians and policy makers to estimate the survival of patients with HNSCC. In this study, we built a prognostic model to predict the risk of developing SPM in patients with newly diagnosed HNSCC. The dataset used in this research was obtained from The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. For the first aim, we used stepwise logistic regression to identify the prognostic factors for the development of SPM. Our final model contained cancer site and overall cancer stage as our risk factors for SPM. The Hosmer-Lemeshow test (p-value= 0.15>0.05) showed the final prognostic model fit the data well. The area under the ROC curve was 0.72 that suggested the discrimination ability of our model was acceptable. The internal validation confirmed the prognostic model was a good fit and the final prognostic model would not over optimistically predict the risk of SPM. This model needs external validation by using large data sample size before it can be generalized to predict SPM risk for other HNSCC patients. For the second aim, we utilized a multistate survival analysis approach to estimate the probability of death for HNSCC patients taking into consideration of the possibility of SPM. Patients without SPM were associated with longer survival. These findings suggest that the development of SPM could be a predictor of survival rates among the patients with HNSCC.^

The influence of antibacterial susceptibility and pharmacodynamics on the therapeutic response of infection

This prospective cohort study estimated how antibacterial resistance affected the time until clinical response. Relative rates of improvement and cure were estimated by proportional-hazards regression for 391 patients with culture-confirmed bacterial keratitis who had the ciprofloxacin minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) measured of the principal corneal isolate and who were treated with ciprofloxacin 0.3% solution or ointment. After adjusting for age and hypopyon status and stratifying by ulcer size, clinic, and ciprofloxacin formulation, the summary rate of clinical improvement with ciprofloxacin therapy was reduced by 42% (95% confidence limits [CL], 3%, 65%) among patients whose corneal isolate's ciprofloxacin MIC exceeded 1.0 μg/mL compared to those with more sensitive isolates. The summary rate of resolution to improvement and cure was reduced by 36% (95% CL, 11%, 53%) among corneal infections having a higher ciprofloxacin MIC. Rate ratios were modified by the size of the presenting corneal ulceration; for ulcer diameters of 4 mm or less and of more than 4 mm, improvement rate ratios were 0.56 (95% CL, 0.31, 1.02) and 0.65 (95% CL, 0.23, 1.80), respectively; resolution rate ratios were 0.63 (95% CL, 0.44, 0.91) and 0.67 (95% CL, 0.32, 1.39), respectively. Sensitivity analysis showed that the summary improvement rate ratio could be maximally overestimated by 24% (95% CL, −29%, 114%) because of informative censoring or by 33% (95% CL, −21%, 126%) from loss to follow up. Based on reported corneal pharmacokinetics of topical ciprofloxacin, the probability of clinical improvement was 90% or more if the ratio of the achievable corneal ciprofloxacin concentration to the corneal isolate's ciprofloxacin MIC was above 8 or the ratio of the area under the 24-hour corneal concentration curve to the ciprofloxacin MIC was greater than 151. This study suggests that corneal infections by bacteria having a higher ciprofloxacin MIC respond more slowly to ciprofloxacin treatment than those with a lower MIC. While the rate of clinical resolution is affected by patient age and clinical severity, antimicrobial susceptibility testing of corneal cultures can indicate the relative effectiveness of antibacterial therapy. A pharmacodynamic approach to treating bacterial keratitis offers the prospect of optimal antimicrobial selection and modification. ^