Prospective cohort study reports bilirubin is not an independent predictor of mortality in sepsis patients, implying the importance of severity indices.
Background: Hyperbilirubinemia is frequently observed in critically ill patients with sepsis and is proposed as a prognostic marker for mortality. However, its independent predictive value, particularly when accounting for established severity indices, remains unclear. Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study in the intensive care unit (ICU) of a tertiary care center in South India from April 2021 to April 2022. Adults (≥18 years) with sepsis were enrolled, excluding those with preexisting liver disease or alternative causes for hyperbilirubinemia. Serum total bilirubin was measured within 48 h of ICU admission and categorized as normal (≤1.2 mg/dL), mildly elevated (1.21–2 mg/dL), or significantly elevated (>2 mg/dL). Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data were collected. The primary outcome was ICU mortality. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses identified the independent predictors of mortality. Results: Among 110 patients, ICU mortality was 29.1%. Nonsurvivors had significantly higher bilirubin levels (6.2 ± 5.5 mg/dL vs. 1.8 ± 2.3 mg/dL, P < 0.001) and higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE-II) scores. Elevated bilirubin was associated with mortality in univariate analysis (univariate odds ratio [OR] 1.3/1 mg/dL increase, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2–1.5, P < 0.001). However, after adjusting for APACHE-II score and comorbidity burden, bilirubin was not an independent predictor of mortality (adjusted OR [aOR] 1.3, 95% CI 0.8–2.2, P = 0.266). APACHE-II score remained the only independent predictor (aOR 1.8, 95% CI 1.1–2.9, P = 0.02). Conclusion: While hyperbilirubinemia is associated with increased ICU mortality in sepsis, it is not an independent predictor after accounting for disease severity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
John et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: