Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, School of Medicine in Katowice, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland.
Students' Scientific Society, Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, School of Medicine in Katowice, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland.
BMC Anesthesiol. 2020 Dec 2;20(1):296. doi: 10.1186/s12871-020-01203-7.
There are several scores used for in-hospital mortality prediction in critical illness. Their application in a local scenario requires validation to ensure appropriate diagnostic accuracy. Moreover, their use in assessing post-discharge mortality in intensive care unit (ICU) survivors has not been extensively studied. We aimed to validate APACHE II, APACHE III and SAPS II scores in short- and long-term mortality prediction in a mixed adult ICU in Poland. APACHE II, APACHE III and SAPS II scores, with corresponding predicted mortality ratios, were calculated for 303 consecutive patients admitted to a 10-bed ICU in 2016. Short-term (in-hospital) and long-term (12-month post-discharge) mortality was assessed.
Median APACHE II, APACHE III and SAPS II scores were 19 (IQR 12-24), 67 (36.5-88) and 44 (27-56) points, with corresponding in-hospital mortality ratios of 25.8% (IQR 12.1-46.0), 18.5% (IQR 3.8-41.8) and 34.8% (IQR 7.9-59.8). Observed in-hospital mortality was 35.6%. Moreover, 12-month post-discharge mortality reached 17.4%. All the scores predicted in-hospital mortality (p < 0.05): APACHE II (AUC = 0.78; 95%CI 0.73-0.83), APACHE III (AUC = 0.79; 95%CI 0.74-0.84) and SAPS II (AUC = 0.79; 95%CI 0.74-0.84); as well as mortality after hospital discharge (p < 0.05): APACHE II (AUC = 0.71; 95%CI 0.64-0.78), APACHE III (AUC = 0.72; 95%CI 0.65-0.78) and SAPS II (AUC = 0.69; 95%CI 0.62-0.76), with no statistically significant difference between the scores (p > 0.05). The calibration of the scores was good.
All the scores are acceptable predictors of in-hospital mortality. In the case of post-discharge mortality, their diagnostic accuracy is lower and of borderline clinical relevance. Further studies are needed to create scores estimating the long-term prognosis of subjects successfully discharged from the ICU.
有几种评分系统用于危重病患者的院内死亡率预测。在当地情况下应用这些评分系统需要进行验证,以确保其具有适当的诊断准确性。此外,这些评分系统在评估 ICU 幸存者出院后的死亡率方面的应用尚未得到广泛研究。我们旨在验证 APACHE II、APACHE III 和 SAPS II 评分在波兰混合成人 ICU 中的短期和长期死亡率预测中的适用性。我们为 2016 年入住 10 张床位 ICU 的 303 例连续患者计算了 APACHE II、APACHE III 和 SAPS II 评分及其相应的预测死亡率比值。评估了短期(院内)和长期(出院后 12 个月)死亡率。
中位 APACHE II、APACHE III 和 SAPS II 评分为 19(IQR 12-24)、67(36.5-88)和 44(27-56)分,相应的院内死亡率比值分别为 25.8%(IQR 12.1-46.0)、18.5%(IQR 3.8-41.8)和 34.8%(IQR 7.9-59.8)。观察到的院内死亡率为 35.6%。此外,出院后 12 个月的死亡率达到 17.4%。所有评分均能预测院内死亡率(p<0.05):APACHE II(AUC=0.78;95%CI 0.73-0.83)、APACHE III(AUC=0.79;95%CI 0.74-0.84)和 SAPS II(AUC=0.79;95%CI 0.74-0.84);以及出院后的死亡率(p<0.05):APACHE II(AUC=0.71;95%CI 0.64-0.78)、APACHE III(AUC=0.72;95%CI 0.65-0.78)和 SAPS II(AUC=0.69;95%CI 0.62-0.76),评分之间无统计学差异(p>0.05)。评分的校准效果良好。
所有评分都是院内死亡率的可接受预测因子。对于出院后的死亡率,其诊断准确性较低,具有边缘临床意义。需要进一步研究来创建评分,以估计从 ICU 成功出院的患者的长期预后。