Sepsis is a critical condition. The key factor affecting the survival of patient is whether standard treatment can be obtained timely. Because of the complexity of its pathogenesis and high heterogeneity, there is no special diagnosis method currently. Early identification is difficult. Delayed diagnosis and treatment is closely related to the mortality of patients. With the continuous updating of the guidelines, sepsis has been included in the “time window” disease, putting forward a great challenge to the early screening and evaluation of sepsis. This article aims to review the application of Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment, sepsis biomarkers and artificial intelligence algorithms in early screening and evaluation of sepsis, so as to provide guidance tools for timely starting standardized treatment of sepsis.
The American Heart Association (AHA) released the 2017 American Heart Association Focused Update on Adult Basic Life Support and Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Quality (2017 AHA guidelines update) in November 2017. The 2017 AHA guidelines update was updated according to the rules named " the update of the guideline is no longer released every five years, but whenever new evidence is available” in the 2015 American Heart Association Guidelines Update for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care. The updated content in this guideline included five parts: dispatch-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), bystander CPR, emergency medical services - delivered CRP, CRP for cardiac arrest, and chest compression - to - ventilation ratio. This review will interpret the 2017 AHA guidelines update in detail.
ObjectiveTo investigate the clinical value of quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score in predicting the outcome of patients with septic shock. MethodsWe collected the clinical data of 170 patients with septic shock treated in the Emergency Intensive Care Unit between January 2013 and January 2014. According to the 28-day outcomes of the patients, they were recorded as survival group and non-survival group. We calculated the qSOFA score, acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE)Ⅱ score on patients' admission. Using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, we analyzed the qSOFA score, the effect of APACHE Ⅱ score in predicting the 28-day prognosis for patients with septic shock. The correlation between qSOFA score and APACHEⅡ score was also assessed. ResultsThe qSOFA and APACHEⅡ scores in non-survivors were higher than those in the survivors. According to ROC curve analysis, the area under the curve for qSOFA score and APACHE Ⅱ score was 0.666 and 0.791, respectively. For qSOFA score with 2 cut-off points to evaluate the prognosis of septic shock, the sensitivity was 62.7%, specificity was 61.1%, positive predictive value was 56.0%, negative predictive value was 67.4%, positive likelihood ratio was 1.61, and negative likelihood ratio was 0.61. For the APACHEⅡ score with 24 cut-off points to evaluate the prognosis of septic shock, the sensitivity was 70.7%, specificity was 80%, positive predictive value was 73.6%, negative predictive value was 67.3%, positive likelihood ratio was 3.54, and negative likelihood ratio was 0.37. The correlation coefficient of qSOFA score and APACHE Ⅱ score was 0.499. ConclusionThe qSOFA score is useful to evaluate the prognosis of the patients with septic shock early in Emergency Department.
ObjectiveTo investigate the effect of noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation for elderly patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) combined with left heart failure. MethodsA total of 152 patients (70-85 years old) diagnosed with COPD combined with left heart failure and treated in our hospital between June 2011 and January 2015 were randomly divided into trial group (noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation with routine treatment, n=76) and control group (routine treatment, n=76). Respiratory rate, heart rate, blood pressure, pH, arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2), arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were analyzed and compared between the two groups after treatment. We did t-test to analyze the difference of these indexes between the two groups statistically. ResultsRespiratory rate, heart rate and PaCO2 in both of the two groups after the treatment were significantly lower than those before the treatment (P<0.001), while PaO2 and LVEF in both of the two groups after the treatment were significantly higher than those before the treatment (P<0.001). The systolic pressure and diastolic pressure in both of the two groups after the treatment didn't differ much from those before the treatment (P>0.05). The pH value after the treatment increased only in the trial group compared with that before the treatment (P<0.05). The respiratory rate, heart rate, pH value, PaO2, PaCO2 and LVEF after the treatment in trial group were meliorated compared with those in the control group (P<0.05). ConclusionTreatment with noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation for elderly patients with COPD combined with left heart failure is more efficient than the routine treatment.
Objective To evaluate the predicting effect of quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) on septic shock, and investigate the probability of improving the predicting effect. Methods Patients with sepsis diagnosed in Emergency Department from July 2015 to June 2016 were enrolled. They were divided into shock group and non-shock group based on whether or not they had septic shock during 72 hours after admission. The multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to find out the independent risk factors affecting the incidence of septic shock. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to analyze those risk factors. Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis Score (MEDS), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), Acute Physiology and Chronic HealthEvaluation (APACHE)Ⅱ and qSOFA were also compared with ROC curve analysis. The possibility of improvement of qSOFA predicting effect was discussed. Results A total of 821 patients were enrolled, with 108 in septic shock group and 713 in non-septic shock. The result of multivariate logistic regression analysis indicated that respiratory rate, systolic blood pressure, pH value, oxygenation index, lactate, albumin, Glasgow Coma Score and procalcitonin were the independent risk factors (P<0.05). The result of ROC analysis showed that the area under curve (AUC) of pH value, lactate and procalcitonin was 0.695, 0.678 and 0.694, respectively. Lactate had the highest value of specificity (0.868), positive predictive value (0.356) and positive likelihood ratio (3.644), while the sensitivity (0.889) and negative predictive value (0.961) of procalcitonin were the highest. MEWS, MEDS, SOFA, APACHEⅡ and qSOFA were compared with ROC. SOFA had the best predicting effect with the statistical results of AUC (0.833), sensitivity (0.835), specificity (0.435), positive predictive value (0.971), negative predictive value (0.971), and positive likelihood ratio (5.048); and MEWS had the highest negative likelihood ratio (0.581). qSOFA did not show a best predicting value. Conclusion qSOFA is not the best choice to predict the possibility of septic shock, but its predicting value might be improved when combined with pH value, lactate and procalcitonin.