Prognostic factors for 28-day survival following treatment in individuals with septic shock

Authors

  • Thanawadee Chalongkulsak Department of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University
  • Theerapon Tangsuwanaruk Department of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University
  • Parinya Tianwibool Department of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University
  • Borwon Wittayachamnankul Department of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University
  • Chanon Changrattanakorn Department of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University

Keywords:

septic shock, shock, survival, treatment process, vasopressors

Abstract

Septic shock is a condition commonly encountered in emergency rooms, and the survival of patients in this state depends on various factors, including both patient-related factors and emergency room treatment processes. From the research study, data were collected from November 1, 2022, to July 31, 2023, focusing on patients with septic shock who were aged 18 years or older and received treatment in the emergency department. A total of 111 individuals were included, comprising 68 survivors and 43 non-survivors. The data were analyzed using univariable logistic regression to identify factors influencing the 28-day survival outcome. It was found that age under 60 years OR=3.17 (95% CI=1.09-9.22, p-value 0.034), lower weight OR=0.96 (95% CI=0.92-0.99, p-value 0.036), lower initial NEWS score OR=0.88  (95% CI=0.79-0.99, p-value 0.028), and lower initial lactate level OR=0.90  (95% CI=0.81-0.99, p-value 0.028), as well as not requiring mechanical ventilation OR=0.29 (95% CI=0.13-0.65, p-value 0.003) and not receiving central venous catheterization for vasopressor administration OR=0.28 (95% CI=0.10-0.73, p-value 0.010), were statistically significant predictors of survival. These factors could be utilized for prognosticating 28-day survival significantly. However, when analyzed using multivariable logistic regression, only the factor of not requiring central venous catheterization for vasopressor administration remained statistically significant adjusted odds ratio 0.24 (95% CI=0.07-0.87, p-value = 0.029). Therefore, it can be concluded that patients who do not require central venous catheterization for vasopressor administration have a better prognosis compared to the other group.

References

Silva EPD, Duarte VDC, Soares MM, et al. Survival analysis of patients with sepsis in Brazil. Rev Soc Bras Med Trop. 2019;52:e20180121.

Linnér A, Sundén-Cullberg J, Johansson L, et al. Short- and long-term mortality in severe sepsis/septic shock in a setting with low antibiotic resistance: a prospective observational study in a Swedish university hospital. Front Public Health. 2013;1:51.

Bauer M, Gerlach H, Vogelmann T, Preissing F, et al. Mortality in sepsis and septic shock in Europe, North America and Australia between 2009 and 2019— results from a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care. 2020;24(1):239.

Adrie C, Francais A, Alvarez-Gonzalez A, et al. Model for predicting short-term mortality of severe sepsis. Crit Care. 2009;13(3):R72.

Yao L, Zhang L, Zhou C. Analysis of Prognostic Risk Factors of Sepsis Patients in Intensive Care Unit Based on Data Analysis. Khan R, editor. J Healthc Eng. 2022;7;2022:1–8.

Song JE, Kim MH, Jeong WY, et al. Mortality Risk Factors for Patients with Septic Shock after Implementation of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign Bundles. Infect Chemother. 2016;48(3):199.

Gai X, Wang Y, Gao D, et al. Risk factors for the prognosis of patients with sepsis in intensive care units. Cartelle Gestal M, editor. PLoS ONE. 2022;6;17(9):e0273377.

Badin RC, Manaças LRA, De Souza IA. Sepsis and septic shock: epidemiology, clinical parameters, and prognostic factors in a Brazilian intensive care unit. Arq Ciênc Saúde Unipar. 2023;24;27(7):3844–61.

Namendys-Silva SA, Texcocano-Becerra J, Herrera-Gómez A. Prognostic factors in critically ill patients with septic shock admitted to an oncological intensive care unit. Chest. 2009;136(4):131S.

Wagner DP, Draper EA. Acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE II) and Medicare reimbursement. Health Care Financ Rev. 1984;Suppl(Suppl):91–105.

Raghavendran K, Napolitano LM. Definition of ALI/ARDS. Crit Care Clin. 2011;27(3):429–37.

Julián-Jiménez A, González-del-Castillo J, Martínez-Ortiz-de-Zárate M, et al. Short-term prognostic factors in the elderly patients seen in emergency departments due to infections. Enfermedades infecciosas y microbiologia clinica (English ed). 2017 Apr;35(4):214–9.

Halabi S, Owzar K. The importance of identifying and validating prognostic factors in oncology. Semin Oncol. 2010;37(2):e9-18.

Traeger AC, Hübscher M, McAuley JH. Understanding the usefulness of prognostic models in clinical decision-making. Journal of Physiotherapy. 2017;63(2):121–5.

Hayes DF. Clinical importance of prognostic factors. In: Bronchud MH, Foote M, Giaccone G, Olopade OI, Workman P, editors. Principles of molecular oncology [Internet]. Totowa, NJ: Humana Press; 2004 [cited 2024 Jan 26]. p. 51–72. Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-1-59259-664-5_2

Sterling SA, Miller WR, Pryor J, et al. The impact of timing of antibiotics on outcomes in severe sepsis and septic shock: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care Medicine. 2015;43(9):1907–15.

Yang T, Shen Y, Park JG, et al. Outcome after intubation for septic shock with respiratory distress and hemodynamic compromise: an observational study. BMC Anesthesiol. 2021;21(1):253.

Prescott HC, Cooke CR. Trends in mortality and early central line placement in septic shock: true, true, and related?*. Crit Care Med. 2013;41(6):1577–8.

Annane D, Pastores SM, Rochwerg B, et al. Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency (CIRCI) in critically Ill patients (Part I): Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) and European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) 2017. Crit Care Med. 2017 Dec;45(12):2078–88.

Permpikul C, Tongyoo S, Viarasilpa T, et al. Early use of norepinephrine in septic shock resuscitation (CENSER). A randomized trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2019;199(9):1097–105.

Almutary A, Althunayyan S, Alenazi K, et al. National Early Warning Score (NEWS) as prognostic triage tool for septic patients. Infect Drug Resist. 2020;13:3843–51.

Riley RD, Ensor J, Snell KIE, et al. Calculating the sample size required for developing a clinical prediction model. BMJ. 2020;368:m441.

Evans L, Rhodes A, Alhazzani W, et al. Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock 2021. Intensive Care Med. 2021;47(11):1181–247.

Nguyen HB, Jaehne AK, Jayaprakash N, et al. Early goal-directed therapy in severe sepsis and septic shock: insights and comparisons to ProCESS, ProMISe, and ARISE. Crit Care. 2016;20(1):160.

Shah P, Louis MA. Physiology, Central venous pressure. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024 [cited 2024 Jan 29]. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK519493/

Boyd JH, Forbes J, Nakada T aki, et al. Fluid resuscitation in septic shock: a positive fluid balance and elevated central venous pressure are associated with increased mortality. Crit Care Med. 2011;39(2):259–65.

Walkey AJ, Wiener RS, Lindenauer PK. Utilization Patterns and Outcomes Associated With Central Venous Catheter in Septic Shock: A Population-Based Study. Crit Care Med. 2013 Jun;41(6):1450–7.

Gahlot R, Nigam C, Kumar V, et al. Catheter-related bloodstream infections. Int J Crit Illn Inj Sci. 2014;4(2):162–7.

Edakubo S, Inoue N, Fushimi K. Effect of early central venous catheterization on mortality among patients with severe sepsis: A nationwide inpatient database study. Shock (Augusta, Ga). 2020;Publish Ahead of Print.

Thodphetch M, Chenthanakij B, Wittayachamnankul B, et al. A comparison of scoring systems for predicting mortality and sepsis in the emergency department patients with a suspected infection. Clin Exp Emerg Med. 2021;8(4):289–95.

Bernhard M, Lichtenstern C, Eckmann C, et al. The early antibiotic therapy in septic patients - milestone or sticking point? Crit Care. 2014 Dec;18(6):671.

Mouncey PR, Osborn TM, Power GS, et al. Protocolised Management In Sepsis (ProMISe): A multicentre randomised controlled trial of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of early, goal-directed, protocolised resuscitation for emerging septic shock. Health Technol Assess. 2015;19(97):1–150.

Belletti A, Benedetto U, Biondi-Zoccai G, et al. The effect of vasoactive drugs on mortality in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. A network meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Crit Care. 2017 Feb;37:91–8.

Lewis SR, Pritchard MW, Evans DJ, et al. Colloids versus crystalloids for fluid resuscitation in critically ill people. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;8(8):CD000567.

Cardoso LT, Grion CM, Matsuo T, et al. Impact of delayed admission to intensive care units on mortality of critically ill patients: A cohort study. Crit Care. 2011;15(1):R28.

Herwanto V, Lie KC, Suwarto S, et al. Role of 6-hour, 12-hour, and 24-hour lactate clearance in mortality of severe sepsis and septic shock patients. Crit Care 2014;18(Suppl 2):P2.

Downloads

Published

2024-08-31

How to Cite

1.
Chalongkulsak T, Tangsuwanaruk T, Tianwibool P, Wittayachamnankul B, Changrattanakorn C. Prognostic factors for 28-day survival following treatment in individuals with septic shock. J Med Health Sci [Internet]. 2024 Aug. 31 [cited 2024 Dec. 21];31(2):60-76. Available from: https://he01.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/jmhs/article/view/269353

Issue

Section

Original article (บทความวิจัย)