Why the study?
The comparative performance of PESI/sPESI versus APACHE-IV in predicting mortality for ICU patients with pulmonary embolism, and the potential value of adding acute clinical variables to sPESI, was unclear.
Does the novel ICU-sPESI score improve in-hospital mortality prediction compared to APACHE-IV, PESI, and sPESI in adult patients admitted to the ICU with pulmonary embolism?
Does the novel ICU-sPESI score improve in-hospital mortality prediction compared to APACHE-IV, PESI, and sPESI in adult patients admitted to the ICU with pulmonary embolism?
The novel ICU-sPESI score, which incorporates intubation, confusion, and vasoactive infusions, provides excellent discrimination for in-hospital mortality risk in ICU patients with pulmonary embolism, outperforming the standard sPESI score.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May aid mortality risk stratification in ICU PE patients; leaves open prospective validation versus APACHE-IV and PESI.
OBJECTIVE: The Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI) and simplified PESI (sPESI) predict mortality for patients with PE. We compared PESI/sPESI to the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation IV (APACHE-IV) in predicting mortality in patients with PE admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Additionally, we assessed the performance of a novel ICU-sPESI score created by adding three clinical variables associated with acuity of PE presentation (intubation, confusion [altered mental status], use of vasoactive infusions) to sPESI. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the eICU Collaborative Research Database from 2014 to 2015, we conducted a large retrospective cohort study of adult patients admitted to the ICU with a primary diagnosis of PE. We calculated APACHE-IV, PESI, sPESI, and ICU-sPESI scores and compared their performance for predicting in-hospital mortality using area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve. Score thresholds for >99% negative predictive values (NPV) were calculated for each score. Survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: We included 1424 PE cases. In-hospital mortality was 6.3% [95% CI: 5.1%-7.6%]. AUROC for APACHE-IV, PESI, and sPESI were 0.870, 0.848, and 0.777, respectively. APACHE-IV and PESI outperformed sPESI (P < 0.01 for both comparisons), while APACHE-IV and PESI demonstrated similar performance (P = 0.322). The ICU-sPESI performance was similar to APACHE-IV and PESI (AUROC = 0.847; AUROC comparison: APACHE-IV vs ICU-sPESI: P = 0.396; PESI vs ICU-sPESI: P = 0.945). Hospital mortality for ICU-sPESI scores 0-2 was 1.1%, and for scores 3, 4, 5, 6, and ≥7 was 8.6%, 11.7%, 29.2%, 37.5%, and 76.9%, respectively. Score thresholds for >99% NPV were ≤48 for APACHE-IV, ≤115 for PESI, and 0 points for sPESI and ICU-sPESI. CONCLUSIONS: By accounting for severity of PE presentation, our newly proposed ICU-sPESI score provided improved PE mortality prediction compared to the original sPESI score and offered excellent discrimination of mortality risk.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ryll et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: