1. bookVolume 29 (2021): Issue 4 (October 2021)
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
First Published
08 Aug 2013
Publication timeframe
4 times per year
Languages
English
access type Open Access

Values of serum PCT, suPAR combined with severity scores for evaluating prognosis of septic shock patients

Published Online: 22 Oct 2021
Page range: 395 - 402
Received: 23 Jun 2021
Accepted: 10 Oct 2021
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
First Published
08 Aug 2013
Publication timeframe
4 times per year
Languages
English
Abstract

Background: To explore the values of serum procalcitonin (PCT), soluble urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) combined with APACHE II and SOFA scores for evaluating the prognosis of septic shock patients.

Materials and Methods: A total of 118 eligible patients admitted from August 2017 to January 2021 were divided into survival and death groups. Serum PCT and suPAR levels were detected. APACHE II and SOFA scores were evaluated. A combination predictor pre1 was constructed. The predictive efficacy of the indicator alone or in combination was compared using receiver operating characteristic curve. Risk factors leading to death were analyzed, and a predictive model was established.

Results: Serum PCT and suPAR levels as well as APACHE II and SOFA scores of death group significantly exceeded those of the survival group (P<0.05). PCT, suPAR, SOFA and APACHE II scores were valuable for predicting death. The area under curve (AUC) constructed by predictor pre1 for predicting death was largest. PCT, suPAR, APACHE II, and SOFA scores were independent risk factors for death. The model had AUC of 0.828, with the sensitivity of 86.54%, specificity of 89.03%, and accuracy of 82.47%. The death risk predicted by the model had a high concurrence with the actual one.

Conclusion: PCT, suPAR, APACHE II, and SOFA scores are closely related to the prognosis of septic shock patients. The combined predictor pre1 is more effective than a single index for predicting prognosis. The combined prediction model of septic shock based on PCT, suPAR, APACHE II, and SOFA scores has higher predictive efficiency.

Keywords

1. Shrestha GS, Srinivasan S. Role of Point-of-Care Ultrasonography for the Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock. Rev Recent Clin Trials. 2018;13(4):243-51. DOI: 10.2174/157488711366618041216540510.2174/1574887113666180412165405 Search in Google Scholar

2. Jiang Z, Liu Y, Ren J. [The application progress of fluid de-escalation therapy in abdominal infection-induced septic shock]. Zhonghua Wei Zhong Bing Ji Jiu Yi Xue. 2020;32(11):1403-8. Search in Google Scholar

3. Godinjak A, Iglica A, Rama A, Tančica I, Jusufović S, Ajanović A, et al. Predictive value of SAPS II and APACHE II scoring systems for patient outcome in a medical intensive care unit. Acta Med Acad. 2016;45(2):97-103. DOI: 10.5644/ama2006-124.16510.5644/ama2006-124.165 Search in Google Scholar

4. Matics TJ, Sanchez-Pinto LN. Adaptation and Validation of a Pediatric Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score and Evaluation of the Sepsis-3 Definitions in Critically Ill Children. JAMA Pediatr. 2017;171(10):e172352. DOI: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.235210.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.2352 Search in Google Scholar

5. Andriolo BN, Andriolo RB, Salomão R, Atallah ÁN. Effectiveness and safety of procalcitonin evaluation for reducing mortality in adults with sepsis, severe sepsis or septic shock. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;1(1):CD010959. DOI: 10.1002/14651858. CD010959.pub210.1002/14651858 Search in Google Scholar

6. Donadello K, Scolletta S, Taccone FS, Covajes C, Santonocito C, Cortes DO, et al. Soluble urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor as a prognostic biomarker in critically ill patients. J Crit Care. 2014;29(1):144-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2013.08.00510.1016/j.jcrc.2013.08.005 Search in Google Scholar

7. Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, Shankar-Hari M, Annane D, Bauer M, et al.The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA. 2016;315(8):801-10. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2016.028710.1001/jama.2016.0287 Search in Google Scholar

8. Wang MC, Li S. ROC analysis for multiple markers with tree-based classification. Lifetime Data Anal. 2013;19(2):257-77. DOI: 10.1007/s10985-012-9233-510.1007/s10985-012-9233-5 Search in Google Scholar

9. Lasko TA, Bhagwat JG, Zou KH, Ohno-Machado L. The use of receiver operating characteristic curves in biomedical informatics. J Biomed Inform. 2005;38(5):404-15. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbi.2005.02.00810.1016/j.jbi.2005.02.008 Search in Google Scholar

10. Chaimani A, Higgins JP, Mavridis D, Spyridonos P, Salanti G. Graphical tools for network meta-analysis in STATA. PLoS One. 2013;8(10):e76654. DOI: 10.1371/ journal.pone.007665410.1371/journal.pone.0076654 Search in Google Scholar

11. Angus DC, van der Poll T. Severe sepsis and septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(9):840-51. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMra120862310.1056/NEJMra1208623 Search in Google Scholar

12. Hu L, Shi Q, Shi M, Liu R, Wang C. Diagnostic Value of PCT and CRP for Detecting Serious Bacterial Infections in Patients With Fever of Unknown Origin: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2017;25(8):e61-9. DOI: 10.1097/ PAI.000000000000055210.1097/PAI.0000000000000552 Search in Google Scholar

13. Tang JH, Gao DP, Zou PF. Comparison of serum PCT and CRP levels in patients infected by different pathogenic microorganisms: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Braz J Med Biol Res. 2018;51(7):e6783. DOI: 10.1590/1414-431x2017678310.1590/1414-431x20176783 Search in Google Scholar

14. Sandquist M, Wong HR. Biomarkers of sepsis and their potential value in diagnosis, prognosis and treatment. Expert Rev Clin Immunol. 2014;10(10):1349-56. DOI: 10.1586/1744666X.2014.94967510.1586/1744666X.2014.949675 Search in Google Scholar

15. Georgescu AM, Szederjesi J, Voidazan S, Dobreanu M, Copotoiu SM, Hutanu A, et al. Soluble urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) - a possible biomarker for bacteremia in sepsis. Rev Romana Med Lab. 2015;23(1):59-73. DOI: 10.1515/rrlm-2015-000210.1515/rrlm-2015-0002 Search in Google Scholar

16. Huttunen R, Syrjänen J, Vuento R, Hurme M, Huhtala H, Laine J, et al. Plasma level of soluble urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor as a predictor of disease severity and case fatality in patients with bacteraemia: a prospective cohort study. J Intern Med. 2011;270(1):32-40. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2796.2011.02363.x10.1111/j.1365-2796.2011.02363.x Search in Google Scholar

17. Kuo WK, Hua CC, Yu CC, Liu YC, Huang CY. The cancer control status and APACHE II score are prognostic factors for critically ill patients with cancer and sepsis. J Formos Med Assoc. 2020;119(1 Pt 2):276-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.jfma.2019.05.01210.1016/j.jfma.2019.05.012 Search in Google Scholar

18. Liu Z, Meng Z, Li Y, Zhao J, Wu S, Gou S, et al. Prognostic accuracy of the serum lactate level, the SOFA score and the qSOFA score for mortality among adults with Sepsis. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2019;27(1):51. DOI: 10.1186/s13049-019-0609-310.1186/s13049-019-0609-3 Search in Google Scholar

19. Pepe MS, Cai T, Longton G. Combining Predictors for Classification Using the Area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve. Biometrics. Bio-metrics. 2006;62(1):221-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2005.00420.x10.1111/j.1541-0420.2005.00420.x Search in Google Scholar

20. Ma S, Duan J, Li W, Zhang H, Hou Z. Exploration of the value of MRCP combined with tumor marker CA19-9 in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Artif Cells Nanomed Biotechnol. 2016;44(2):717-21. DOI: 10.3109/21691401.2014.98280110.3109/21691401.2014.982801 Search in Google Scholar

21. Kruse JM, Enghard P, Schröder T, Hasper D, Kühnle Y, Jörres A, et al. Weak diagnostic performance of troponin, creatine kinase and creatine kinase-MB to diagnose or exclude myocardial infarction after successful resuscitation. Int J Cardiol. 2014;173(2):216-21. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2014.02.03310.1016/j.ijcard.2014.02.033 Search in Google Scholar

22. Porizka M, Volny L, Kopecky P, Kunstyr J, Waldauf P, Balik M. Immature granulocytes as a sepsis predictor in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2019;28(6):845-51. DOI: 10.1093/ icvts/ivy36010.1093/icvts/ivy360 Search in Google Scholar

Recommended articles from Trend MD

Plan your remote conference with Sciendo