Intensive Care Unit, Queen Elizabeth II Jubilee Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Crit Care Resusc. 2011 Sep;13(3):146-50.
The systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) concept lacks sensitivity and specificity for guiding clinical practice and sepsis research.
To assess the performance of a weighted SIRS score, with emphasis on white cell count and temperature criteria in predicting microbiologically confirmed infection.
Prospective cohort study at Princess Alexandra Hospital, a tertiary teaching hospital in Queensland, Australia.
Patients aged 18 years or older who were hospitalised with suspected infection and started on antimicrobial therapy.
The utility of each SIRS criterion, the 1992 consensus conference recommendation (≤ 2 SIRS criteria) and a weighted SIRS score in predicting microbiologically confirmed infection were compared.
2085 patients were included in the analysis. All criteria performed poorly, with low sensitivities (27.3%-70.6%), low specificities (37.5%-77.5%), low positive predictive values (61.5%-65.3%), low negative predictive values (39.8%-45.1%), and likelihood ratios close to 1.0. Both SIRS and weighted SIRS scores did not perform better than clinicians' suspicion for infection.
Both SIRS and weighted SIRS score had low predictive ability for microbiologically confirmed infection. A more robust conceptual framework incorporating clinical, biochemical and immunological markers must be formulated and validated to better guide clinical practice and research. Clinicians' suspicions may be as good as any scoring system at identifying patients with infection and sepsis.
全身炎症反应综合征(SIRS)的概念缺乏敏感性和特异性,无法指导临床实践和脓毒症研究。
评估加权 SIRS 评分的表现,重点关注白细胞计数和温度标准,以预测微生物学证实的感染。
在澳大利亚昆士兰州的三级教学医院亚历山德拉公主医院进行的前瞻性队列研究。
年龄在 18 岁或以上,因疑似感染住院并开始接受抗菌治疗的患者。
比较每个 SIRS 标准、1992 年共识会议推荐(≤2 个 SIRS 标准)和加权 SIRS 评分在预测微生物学证实感染方面的作用。
共纳入 2085 例患者进行分析。所有标准的敏感性(27.3%-70.6%)、特异性(37.5%-77.5%)、阳性预测值(61.5%-65.3%)、阴性预测值(39.8%-45.1%)均较低,且似然比接近 1.0。SIRS 和加权 SIRS 评分均不如临床医生对感染的怀疑具有预测价值。
SIRS 和加权 SIRS 评分对微生物学证实的感染均具有较低的预测能力。必须制定和验证更稳健的概念框架,纳入临床、生化和免疫标志物,以更好地指导临床实践和研究。临床医生的怀疑可能与任何评分系统一样,能够识别感染和脓毒症患者。