APACHE II, SAPS II, and SOFA were better at predicting mortality than the Child-Pugh score. With three or more organ failures, the ICU mortality was > 90%. APACHE II > 30, SAPS II > 60, and SOFA at day 1 > 12 were all associated with a mortality of > 90%. Referral criteria of patients suffering from decompensated alcoholic liver disease should be revised.
Background: The benefits of near-patient, point-of-care tests have not been fully examined. We have assessed the clinical, organizational, and economic outcomes of implementing a near-patient test for C-reactive protein (CRP) in general practice.
Methods: In a randomized crossover trial during intervention periods, general practitioners (GPs) were allowed to measure CRP within 3 min, using NycoCard® CRP. During control periods, they had to mail blood samples for CRP measurements to the hospital laboratory and received test results 24–48 h later. Twenty-nine general practice clinics participated (64 GPs), and 1853 patients were included in the study. Results were evaluated at both the level of participating GPs and the level of included patients.
Results: For participating GPs, the overall use of erythrocyte sedimentation rates (ESRs) decreased by 8% (95% confidence interval, 1–14%) during intervention periods, and the number of blood samples mailed to the hospital laboratory decreased by 6% (1–10%). No reduction in the prescription of antibiotics was seen. The proportion of study patients having a follow-up telephone consultation was reduced from 63% to 53% (P = 0.0001), and patients with CRP concentrations >50 mg/L had their antibiotic treatments started earlier when CRP was measured in general practices (P = 0.0161).
Conclusion: The implementation of the near-patient CRP test was cost-effective mainly on the basis of a reduction in the use of services from the hospital laboratory by GPs. If the implementation is followed by education and clinical guidelines, opportunities exist for additional reduction in the use of ESR and for a more appropriate use of antibiotics.
BackgroundSecondary peritonitis is a condition associated with high morbidity and mortality. Continuous postoperative monitoring of patients to ensure timely intervention to treat complications without delay is important for survival and outcome. We aimed to (1) investigate potential differences in postoperative intraperitoneal biomarker levels between patients with upper and lower gastrointestinal tract lesion, and (2) compare postoperative biomarker levels between complicated and uncomplicated patients.MethodsWe included a total of 15 consecutive patients operated for upper (n = 7) and lower (n = 8) gastrointestinal tract perforation. We registered postoperative complications during a 30 days follow up-period. Complications were defined as intraabdominal complications, septic shock, and mortality. 5 patients were complicated. A microdialysis catheter was placed intraperitoneally in each patient. Samples were collected every 4th hour for up to 7 postoperative days. Samples were analysed for concentrations of glucose, lactate, pyruvate and glycerol.ResultsMicrodialysis results showed that patients with upper gastrointestinal tract lesions had significantly higher levels of postoperative intraperitoneal glucose and glycerol concentrations, as well as lower lactate/pyruvate ratios and lactate/glucose ratios. In the group with perforation of the lower gastrointestinal tract, those patients with a complicated course showed lower levels of postoperative intraperitoneal glucose concentration and glycerol concentration and higher lactate/pyruvate ratios and lactate/glucose ratios than those patients with an uncomplicated course.ConclusionPatients with upper and lower gastrointestinal tract lesions showed differences in postoperative biomarker levels. A difference was also seen between patients with complicated and uncomplicated postoperative courses.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.