Clinical significance of thrombocytopenia in patients with septic shock: An observational retrospective study

Péju, Edwige; Fouqué, Gaëlle; Charpentier, Julien; Vigneron, C.; Jozwiak, Mathieu; Cariou, Alain; Mira, Jean‐Paul; Jamme, Matthieu; Pène, Frédéric

doi:10.1016/j.jcrc.2023.154293

Cited by 7 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Ratzinger et al found that neutrophils were the best individual variable to predict bacteremia, with an AUC of 0.694 [31]. Thrombocytopenia has also been known to be a prognostic marker for bacteremia and associated with bacteremia [32][33][34][35]. Lac, a prognostic biomarker for sepsis, is not considered to be specific for diagnosing sepsis [36]; however, several studies have shown that Lac is a biomarker for diagnosing bacterial sepsis [25].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Simple Bacteremia Score for Predicting Bacteremia in Patients with Suspected Infection in the Emergency Department: A Cohort Study

Han,

Kim,

Kim

et al. 2023

JPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bacteremia is a life-threatening condition that has increased in prevalence over the past two decades. Prompt recognition of bacteremia is important; however, identification of bacteremia requires 1 to 2 days. This retrospective cohort study, conducted from 10 November 2014 to November 2019, among patients with suspected infection who visited the emergency department (ED), aimed to develop and validate a simple tool for predicting bacteremia. The study population was randomly divided into derivation and development cohorts. Predictors of bacteremia based on the literature and logistic regression were assessed. A weighted value was assigned to predictors to develop a prediction model for bacteremia using the derivation cohort; discrimination was then assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Among the 22,519 patients enrolled, 18,015 were assigned to the derivation group and 4504 to the validation group. Sixteen candidate variables were selected, and all sixteen were used as significant predictors of bacteremia (model 1). Among the sixteen variables, the top five with higher odds ratio, including procalcitonin, neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio (NLR), lactate level, platelet count, and body temperature, were used for the simple bacteremia score (model 2). The proportion of bacteremia increased according to the simple bacteremia score in both cohorts. The AUC for model 1 was 0.805 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.785–0.824) and model 2 was 0.791 (95% CI 0.772–0.810). The simple bacteremia prediction score using only five variables demonstrated a comparable performance with the model including sixteen variables using all laboratory results and vital signs. This simple score is useful for predicting bacteremia-assisted clinical decisions.

show abstract