Abstract

IntroductionThe discrimination and calibration accuracy of prediction models tends to become poor over time. The performance of predictive models should be reevaluated periodically. The aim of this study was to reassess the discrimination of the six commonly used models for predicting 28-day mortality in patients with sepsis based on the Sepsis 3.0 criteria. MethodsPatient data were extracted from the fourth edition of the Medical Information Mart for Critical Care (MIMIC IV) database. The systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), Oxford Acute Severity of Illness Score (OASIS), Logistic Organ Dysfunction System (LODS), and Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II) and III (SAPS III) scores were calculated and collected. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was used to compare the discrimination abilities of the models using non-parametric Wilcoxon statistics. The Delong method was used to perform pairwise comparisons of the AUROCs of the models. Multiple subgroup analyses for age, body mass index, and sex were performed with regard to the 28-day mortality prediction of the models. ResultsA total of 12 691 patients were included. The mean age of the patients was 65.97 ± 15.77 years; 7673 patients (60.50%) were male. The mean SIRS, SOFA, OASIS, SAPS II, LODS, and SAPS III scores were higher in the non-survivor group than in the survivor group. The discrimination for 28-day mortality with the SAPS III (AUROC 0.812, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.802–0.822) and LODS (AUROC 0.804, 95% CI 0.743–0.765) models was superior to that of the SIRS (AUROC 0.575, 95% CI 0.562–0.589), SOFA (AUROC 0.612, 95% CI 0.598–0.626), OASIS (AUROC 0.753, 95% CI 0.742–0.764), and SAPS II (AUROC 0.754, 95% CI 0.743–0.765) models. The Youden index of the SAPS III model was 0.484, which was the highest among the models. Subgroup analyses showed similar results to the overall results. ConclusionsThe discrimination for 28-day mortality with the SAPS III and LODS models was superior to that of the SIRS, SOFA, OASIS, and SAPS II models. The SAPS III model showed the best discrimination capacity for 28-day mortality compared with the other models.

Highlights

  • The discrimination and calibration accuracy of prediction models tends to become poor over time

  • This appears to be the largest study to compare the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), OASIS, Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II), Logistic Organ Dysfunction System (LODS), and Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) III models for the discrimination of 28-day mortality in patients with sepsis according to Sepsis 3.0

  • The mean scores of the SIRS, SOFA, OASIS, SAPS II, LODS, and SAPS III models were significantly higher in the nonsurvivor group than in the survivor group

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The discrimination and calibration accuracy of prediction models tends to become poor over time. The discrimination for 28-day mortality with the SAPS III (AUROC 0.812, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.802–0.822) and LODS (AUROC 0.804, 95% CI 0.743–0.765) models was superior to that of the SIRS (AUROC 0.575, 95% CI 0.562–0.589), SOFA (AUROC 0.612, 95% CI 0.598–0.626), OASIS (AUROC 0.753, 95% CI 0.742–0.764), and SAPS II (AUROC 0.754, 95% CI 0.743–0.765) models. Conclusions: The discrimination for 28-day mortality with the SAPS III and LODS models was superior to that of the SIRS, SOFA, OASIS, and SAPS II models. The systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) scoring system was used initially; many studies have shown this system to have a poor predictive value for mortality in sepsis patients (Maitra et al, 2018; Ahc et al, 2018; Kaukonen et al, 2015). Johnson et al reported that the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of the OASIS model was 0.88 for predicting intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (Johnson et al, 2013)

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call