How common are acute kidney abnormalities in patients with Covid-19?

Although early reports suggested a low incidence (3-9%) of AKI among Covid-19 patients, more recent studies have shown higher frequencies of renal abnormalities, including albuminuria and hematuria (1).

 
A study of 59 patients with Covid-19 reported that 34% had “massive albuminuria” on the first day of admission, and 63% developed proteinuria during their hospitalization (2 [unpublished]). BUN was elevated in 27% of patients and in two-thirds of those who died. In another study involving 710 patients with Covid-19, nearly one-half had proteinuria and hematuria and a quarter had hematuria on admission. Overall, around 15% of patients had an elevated serum creatinine and BUN (3).

 
Possible explanations for renal manifestations of Covid-19 include sepsis, cytokine storm, secondary infections, and direct cellular injury due to the virus itself (1, 4). Interestingly, SARS-CoV-2 has been reportedly isolated from the urine sample of a Covid-19 patient (1). This should not be surprising given the presence of ACE2 receptors in the proximal tubules and, at lower concentrations, in the glomeruli (5).

 
An autopsy study of patients with Covid-19 found evidence of diffuse proximal tubule injury with the loss of brush border, vascular degeneration but no vasculitis, interstitial inflammation or hemorrhage. Coronavirus particles were found in the tubular epithelium and podocytes (6).

 
Bonus Pearl: Did you know that proteinuria (2-3+) and hematuria are independent risk factors for in-hospital mortality (3)?

Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

References
1. Naicker S, Yang CW, Hwang SJ. The novel coronavirus 2019 epidemic and kidneys. Kidney International 2020, May. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kint.2020.03.001
2. Li Z, Wu M, Guo J, et al. Caution on kidney dysfunctions of 2019-nCoV patients . medRxiv 2020.02.08.20021212
3. Cheng Y, Luo R, Wang K, et al. Kidney disease is associated with in-hospital death of patients with COVID-19. Kidney International 2020;97:829-38.
4. Su H, Yang M, Wan C, et al. Renal histopathological analysis of 26 postmortem findings of patients with COVID-19 in China. Kidney International 2020, April 9. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0085253820303690  
5. Mizuiri S, Ohashi Y. ACE and ACE2 in kidney disease. World J Nephrol 2015;4:74-82. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4317630/
6. Cheng N, Zhou M, Dong X, et al. Kidney impairment is associated with in-hospital death of COVID-19 patients. medRxive 2020 .0218.20023242. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.02.18.20023242.

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Catalyst, Harvard University, its affiliate academic healthcare centers, or its contributors. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

 
.

How common are acute kidney abnormalities in patients with Covid-19?

Key clinical pearls in the medical management of hospitalized patients with coronavirus (Covid-19) infection

First, a shout-out to dedicated healthcare workers everywhere who have selflessly given of themselves to care for the sick during this pandemic. Thank you! Together, I know we will get through it!

Although our understanding of Covid-19 infection is far from complete, in the spirit of clarity and brevity of my posts on Pearls4Peers, here are some key points I have gleaned from review of existing literature and the CDC that may be useful as we care for our hospitalized patients with suspected or confirmed Covid-19 infection.

  • Isolation precautions.1 Per CDC, follow a combination of airborne (particularly when aerosol generating procedures is anticipated, including nebulizer treatment) and contact precaution protocols. Routinely use masks or respirators, such as N-95s (subject to local availability and policy) and eye protection. Don gowns (subject to local availability and policy) and gloves and adhere to strict hand hygiene practices.

 

  • Diagnostic tests1-9
    • Laboratory tests. Routine admission labs include CBC, electrolytes, coagulation panels and liver and renal tests. Other frequently reported labs include LDH, C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin. Testing for high sensitivity troponin I has also been performed in some patients, presumably due to concern over ischemic cardiac injury or myocarditis.2 Check other labs as clinically indicated.
    • Chest radiograph/CT chest. One or both have been obtained in virtually all reported cases with CT having higher sensitivity for detection of lung abnormalities.
    • EKG. Frequency of checking EKGs not reported in many published reports thought 1 study reported “acute cardiac injury” in some patients, based in part on EKG findings.4 Suspect we will be checking EKGs in many patients, particularly those who are older or are at risk of heart disease.
    • Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS). This relatively new technology appears promising in Covid-19 infections, including in rapid assessment of the severity of pneumonia or ARDS at presentation and tracking the evolution of the disease. 9 Don’t forget to disinfect the probe between uses!

 

  • Treatment 1-8
    • Specific therapies are not currently available for treatment of Covid-19 infections, but studies are underway.
    • Supportive care includes IV fluids, 02 supplementation and nutrition, as needed. Plenty of emotional support for patients and their families will likely be needed during these times.
    • Antibiotics have been used in the majority of reported cases, either on admission or during hospitalization when superimposed bacterial pneumonia or sepsis could not be excluded.
      • Prescribe antibiotics against common community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) pathogens, including those associated with post-viral/influenza pneumonia such as Streptococcus pneumoniae (eg, ceftriaxone), and Staphylococcus aureus (eg, vancomycin or linezolid if MRSA is suspected) when concurrent CAP is suspected.
      • Prescribe antibiotics against common hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) (eg, vancomycin plus cefepime) when HAP is suspected.
    • Corticosteroids should be avoided because of the potential for prolonging viral replication, unless indicated for other reasons such as COPD exacerbation or septic shock. 1
    • Monitor for deterioration in clinical status even when your hospitalized patient has relatively minor symptoms. This is because progression to lower respiratory tract disease due to Covid-19 often develops during the 2nd week of illness (average 9 days).
    • ICU transfer may be necessary in up to 30% of hospitalized patients due to complications such as ARDS, secondary infections, and multi-organ failure.

 

Again, thank you for caring for the sick and be safe! Feel free to leave comments or questions.

 

 Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

 

References

  1. CDC. Interim clinical guidance for management of patients with confirmed coronavirus disease (COVID-19). https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/clinical-guidance-management-patients.html
  2. Ruan Q, Yang K, Wang W, Jiang L, et al. Clinical predictors of mortality due to COVID-19 based on analysis of data of 150 patients with Wuhan, China. Intensive Care Med 2020. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00134-020-05991-x
  3. Holshue ML, BeBohlt C, Lindquist S, et al. First case of 2019 novel coronavirus in the United States. N Engl J Med 2020;382:929-36. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2001191
  4. Huang C, Wang Y, Li Xingwang, et al. Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China. Lancet 2020;395:497-506. https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(20)30183-5.pdf
  5. Young BE, Ong SWX, Kalimuddin S, et al. Epideomiologic features and clinical course of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 Singapore. JAMA, March 3, 2020. Doi.10.1001/jama.2020.3204 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32125362
  6. Chen N, Zhou M, Dong X, et al. Epidemiological and clinical chacteristics of 99 cases of 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia in Wuhan, China: a descriptive study. Lancet 2020;395:507-13. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30211-7/fulltext
  7. Guan W, Ni Z, Hu Y, et al. Clinical characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 in China. N Engl Med 2020, Feb 28, 2020. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2002032
  8. Zhang J, Zhou L, Yang Y, et al. Therapeutic and triage strategies for 2019 novel coronavirus disease in fever clinics. Lancet 2020;8: e11-e12. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(20)30071-0/fulltext 9.
  9. Peng QY, Wang XT, Zhang LN, et al. Findings of lung ultrasonography of novel corona virus pneumonia during the 2019-2020 epidemic. Intensive Care Med 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-020-05996-
Key clinical pearls in the medical management of hospitalized patients with coronavirus (Covid-19) infection

Should I consider acute acalculous cholecystitis in my elderly ambulatory patient admitted with right upper quadrant pain?

Short answer: Yes! Although we usually associate acute acalculous cholecystitis (AAC) with critically ill patients (eg, with sepsis, trauma, shock, major burns) in ICUs, AAC is not as rare as we might think in ambulatory patients. In fact, a 7 year study of AAC involving multiple centers reported that AAC among outpatients was increasing in prevalence and accounted for 77% of all cases (1)!

 
Although the pathophysiology of ACC is not fully understood, bile stasis and ischemia of the gallbladder either due to microvascular or macrovascular pathology have been implicated as potential causes (2). One study found that 72% of outpatients who developed ACC had atherosclerotic disease associated with hypertension, coronary, peripheral or cerebral vascular disease, diabetes or congestive heart failure (1). Interestingly, in contrast to calculous cholecystitis, “multiple arterial occlusions” have been observed on pathological examination of the gallbladder in at least some patients with ACC and accordingly a name change to “acute ischemic cholecystitis” has been proposed (3).

 
AAC can also complicate acute mesenteric ischemia and may herald critical ischemia and mesenteric infarction (3). The fact that cystic artery is a terminal branch artery probably doesn’t help and leaves the gallbladder more vulnerable to ischemia when arterial blood flow is compromised irrespective of the cause (4).

 
Of course, besides vascular ischemia there are numerous other causes of ACC, including infectious (eg, viral hepatitis, cytomegalovirus, Epstein-Barr virus, Salmonella, brucellosis, malaria, Rickettsia and enteroviruses), as well as many non-infectious causes such as vasculitides and, more recently, check-point inhibitor toxicity (1,5-8).

 
Bonus Pearl: Did you know that in contrast to cholecystitis associated with gallstones (where females and 4th and 5th decade age groups predominate), ACC in ambulatory patients is generally more common among males and older age groups (mean age 65 y) (1)?

 

If you liked this post, download the app and sign up under MENU to catch future pearls straight into your inbox, all for free! 

 

References
1. Savoca PE, Longo WE, Zucker KA, et al. The increasing prevalence of acalculous cholecystitis in outpatients: Result of a 7-year study. Ann Surg 1990;211: 433-37. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1358029/pdf/annsurg00170-0061.pdf
2. Huffman JL, Schenker S. Acute acalculous cholecystitis: A review. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010;8:15-22. https://www.cghjournal.org/article/S1542-3565(09)00880-5/pdf
3. Hakala T, Nuutinene PJO, Ruokonen ET, et al. Microangiopathy in acute acalculous cholecystitis Br J Surg 1997;84:1249-52. https://bjssjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1046/j.1365-2168.1997.02775.x?sid=nlm%3Apubmed
4. Melo R, Pedro LM, Silvestre L, et al. Acute acalculous cholecystitis as a rare manifestation of chronic mesenteric ischemia. A case report. Int J Surg Case Rep 2016;25:207-11. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4941110/
5. Aguilera-Alonso D, Median EVL, Del Rosal T, et al. Acalculous cholecystitis in a pediatric patient with Plasmodium falciparum infection: A case report and literature review. Ped Infect Dis J 2018;37: e43-e45. https://journals.lww.com/pidj/pages/articleviewer.aspx?year=2018&issue=02000&article=00020&type=Fulltext  
6. Kaya S, Eskazan AE, Ay N, et al. Acute acalculous cholecystitis due to viral hepatitis A. Case Rep Infect Dis 2013;Article ID 407182. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3784234/pdf/CRIM.ID2013-407182.pdf
7. Simoes AS, Marinhas A, Coelho P, et al. Acalculous acute cholecystitis during the course of an enteroviral infection. BMJ Case Rep 2013;12. https://casereports.bmj.com/content/12/4/e228306
8. Abu-Sbeih H, Tran CN, Ge PS, et al. Case series of cancer patients who developed cholecystitis related to immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment. J ImmunoTherapy of Cancer 2019;7:118. https://jitc.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40425-019-0604-2

 

 

Should I consider acute acalculous cholecystitis in my elderly ambulatory patient admitted with right upper quadrant pain?

My hospitalized patient with sepsis has persistently elevated lactic acid despite volume resuscitation, source control, and adequate oxygenation. What could I be missing?

Although the causes of lactic acidosis are legion (eg, sepsis, tissue hypoperfusion, ischemic bowel, malignancy, medications, liver dysfunction), thiamine deficiency (TD) is an often-overlooked cause of persistently elevated serum lactic acid (LA) in critically ill hospitalized patients,1 reported in 20-70% of septic patients.2  Septic shock patients may be particularly at risk of TD because of increased mitochondrial oxidative stress, decreased nutritional intake and presence of comorbid conditions (eg,  alcoholism, persistent vomiting).3

Early recognition of TD in hospitalized patients may be particularly difficult because of the frequent absence of the “classic” signs and symptoms of Wernicke’s encephalopathy (eg, ataxia, cranial nerve palsies and confusion) and lack of readily available confirmatory laboratory tests.4

TD-related lactic acidosis should be suspected when an elevated LA persists despite adequate treatment of its putative cause(s) (4,5). Administration of IV thiamine in this setting may result in rapid clearance of LA.3-5

TD causes lactic acidosis type B which is due to the generation of excess LA, not impairment in tissue oxygenation, as is the case for lactic acidosis type A. Thiamine is an essential co-factor in aerobic metabolism, facilitating the conversion of pyruvate to acetyl-CoA which enters the citric acid (Krebs) cycle within the mitochondria. In TD, pyruvate does not undergo aerobic metabolism and is converted to LA instead, leading to lactic acidosis.

Bonus pearl: Did you know that because of its limited tissue storage, thiamine stores may be depleted within only 3 weeks of reduced oral intake!

References

  1. O’Donnell K. Lactic acidosis: a lesser known side effect of thiamine deficiency. Practical Gastroenterol March 2017:24.   https://www.practicalgastro.com/article/176921/Lactic-Acidosis-Lesser-Known-Side-Effect-of-Thiamine-Deficiency
  2. Marik PE. Thiamine: an essential component of the metabolic resuscitation protocol. Crit Care Med 2018;46:1869-70. https://journals.lww.com/ccmjournal/Fulltext/2018/11000/Thiamine___An_Essential_Component_of_the_Metabolic.23.aspx
  3. Woolum JA, Abner EL, Kelly A, et al. Effect of thiamine administration on lactate clearance and mortality in patients with septic shock. Crit Care Med 2018;46:1747-52. https://journals.lww.com/ccmjournal/Fulltext/2018/11000/Effect_of_Thiamine_Administration_on_Lactate.5.aspx
  4. Kourouni I, Pirrotta S, Mathew J, et al. Thiamine: an underutilized agent in refractory lactic acidosis. Chest 2016; 150:247A. https://journal.chestnet.org/article/S0012-3692(16)56459-9/pdf
  5. Shah S, Wald E. Type B lactic acidosis secondary to thiamine deficiency in a child with malignancy. Pediatrics 2015; 135:e221-e224. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/135/1/e221

If you like this post, sign up under MENU and get future pearls straight into your mailbox!

My hospitalized patient with sepsis has persistently elevated lactic acid despite volume resuscitation, source control, and adequate oxygenation. What could I be missing?

Should I continue nadolol in my patient with cirrhosis and refractory ascites?

Under certain circumstances, you may need to! Although nonselective beta blockers (NSBBs), such as nadolol and propranolol, have been the cornerstone of medical treatment of portal hypertension in preventing variceal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis for decades, recent reports of their association with worsening survival, increased risk of hepatorenal syndrome and acute kidney injury in patients with refractory ascites or spontaneous bacterial peritonitis [SBP]) 1,2 have added controversy to their routine use in end-stage cirrhosis.

This is because patients with end-stage cirrhosis may be highly dependent on their cardiac output (particularly the heart rate) in maintaining an adequate arterial blood pressure 3-5 and the negative inotropic and chronotropic effects of NSBBs blunt this compensatory mechanism. The result is a drop in the cardiac output that may be particularly significant in the presence of conditions already associated with hypotension, such as sepsis, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP), or hemorrhage, further increasing the risk of renal hypoperfusion and hepatorenal syndrome.3

Although 2 meta-analysis studies failed to find an association between NSBBs and increased mortality among patients with cirrhosis and ascites, 6,7 serious concerns over the adverse effects of these drugs in at least a subset of patients has not waned.  Some have recommended reducing NSBB dose or discontinuing treatment in patients with refractory ascites or SBP and any of the following parameters: 4

  • Systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg
  • Serum creatinine >1.5 mg/dL
  • Hyponatremia <130 mmol/L

Similar recommendations were made by a 2015 consensus conference on individualizing the care of patients with portal hypertension.

In the absence of randomized-controlled studies, it seems prudent to proceed with more caution when using NSBBs in patients with end-stage cirrhosis and watch closely for any signs of hypotension or renal function deterioration.

References

  1. Serste T, Njimi H, Degre D, et al. The use of beta-lackers is associated with the occurrence of acute kidney injury in severe hepatitis. Liver In 2015;35:1974-82. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25611961
  2. Mandorfer M, Bota S, Schwabl P, et al. Nonselective beta blockers increase risk of hepatorenal syndrome and death in patients with cirrhosis and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. Gastroenterol 2014;146:1680-90. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016508514003060?via%3Dihub
  3. Garcia-Tsao G. The use of nonselective beta blockers for treatment of portal hypertension. Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017;13: 617-19. http://www.gastroenterologyandhepatology.net/archives/october-2017/the-use-of-nonselective-beta-blockers-for-treatment-of-portal-hypertension/
  4. Reiberger T, Mandorfer M. Beta adrenergic blockade and decompensated cirrhosis. J Hepatol 2017;66: 849-59. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27864004
  5. Giannelli V, Lattanzi, Thalheimer U, et al. Beta-blockers in liver cirrhosis. Ann Gastroenterol 2014;27:20-26. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24714633
  6. Facciorusso A, Roy S, Livadas S, et al. Nonselective beta-blockers do not affect survival in cirrhotic patients with ascites. Digest Dis Sci 2018;63:1737-46. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10620-018-5092-6
  7. Njei B, McCarty TR, Garcia-Tsao G. Beta-blockers in patients with cirrhosis and ascites: type of betablocker matters. Gut 206;65:1393-4. https://gut.bmj.com/content/gutjnl/65/8/1393.full.pdf
  8. De Franchis R. Expanding consensus in portal hypertension. Report of the Baveno VI Consensus Workshop: stratifying risk and individualizing care for portal hypertension.  J Hepatol 2015;63:743-52.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26047908  

If you like this post, sign up under MENU and get future pearls straight into your mailbox! 

Should I continue nadolol in my patient with cirrhosis and refractory ascites?

When should surgery be considered in my hospitalized patient with divertculitis?

Severe diffuse abdominal pain, fever, tachycardia, leukocytosis or other signs of sepsis and diffuse peritonitis indicative of free perforation requires emergent surgery. Urgent surgery should be considered when your patient fails to improve (eg, abdominal pain or the inability to tolerate enteral nutrition, bowel obstruction, or infection-related ileus) despite medical therapy or percutaneous drainage. 1,2

Lower threshold for surgical intervention is also needed in transplant patients, patients on chronic corticosteroid therapy, other immunosuppressed patients and those with chronic renal failure or collagen-vascular disease because these patients have a significantly greater risk of recurrent, complicated diverticulitis requiring emergency surgery. Overall, up to 20% of patients with acute diverticulitis undergo surgery during the same hospitalization.2

For patients with recurrent uncomplicated diverticulitis, decision regarding future elective surgery should be individualized. Although older guidelines recommended surgery after 2 attacks of uncomplicated diverticulitis, more recent guidelines place less emphasis on the number of episodes and stress the importance of considering the severity of the attacks, chronic or lingering symptoms, inability to exclude carcinoma, overall medical condition of the patient, risks of surgery, and the impact of diverticulitis on the patient’s lifestyle.1,2

Of interest, a decision analysis model suggests that elective resection after a fourth episode may be as safe as earlier resection.3

 

References

  1. Young-Fadok TM. Diverticulitis. N Eng J Med 2018;397:1635-42 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMcp1800468
  2. Feingold D, Steele SM, Lee S, et al. Practice parameters for the treatment of sigmoid diverticulitis. Dis Colon Rectum 2014;57:284-94. https://www.fascrs.org/sites/default/files/downloads/publication/practice_parameters_for_the_treatment_of_sigmoid.2.pdf
  3. Salem L, Veenstra DL, Sullivan SD, et al. The timing of elective colectomy in diverticulitis: A decision analysis. J Am Coll Surg 2004;199:904-12. https://www.journalacs.org/article/S1072-7515(04)01000-2/fulltext

If you liked this post, sign up under menu and receive future pearls straight into your mailbox!

When should surgery be considered in my hospitalized patient with divertculitis?

200 pearls and counting! Take the Pearls4Peers quiz #2!

Multiple choice (choose 1 answer)
1. Which of the following classes of antibiotics is associated with peripheral neuropathy?
a. Penicillins
b. Cephalosporins
c. Macrolides
d. Quinolones

 

 

2. The best time to test for inherited thrombophilia in a patient with acute deep venous thrombosis is…
a. At least 1 week after stopping anticoagulants and a minimum of 3 months of anticoagulation
b. Just before initiating anticoagulants
c. Once anticoagulation takes full effect
d. Any time, if suspected

 

 

3. All the following is true regarding brain MRI abnormalities following a seizure, except…
a. They are observed following status epilepticus only
b. They are often unilateral
c. They may occasionally be associated with leptomeningeal contrast enhancement
d. Abnormalities may persist for weeks or months

 

 

4. Which of the following is included in the quick SOFA criteria for sepsis?
a. Heart rate
b. Serum lactate
c. Temperature
d. Confusion

 

 

5. All of the following regarding iron replacement and infection is true, except…
a. Many common pathogens such as E.coli and Staphylococcus sp. depend on iron for their growth
b. Association of IV iron replacement and increased risk of infection has not been consistently demonstrated
c. A single randomized-controlled trial of IV iron in patients with active infection failed to show increased infectious complications or mortality with replacement
d. All of the above is true

 

True or false

1. Constipation may precede typical manifestations of Parkinson’s disease by 10 years or more
2. Urine Legionella antigen testing is >90% sensitive in legionnaire’s disease
3. Spontaneous coronary artery dissection should be particularly suspected in males over 50 years of age presenting with acute chest pain
4. Urine dipstick for detection of blood is >90% sensitive in identifying patients with rhabdomyolysis and CK >10,000 U/L
5. Diabetes is an independent risk factor for venous thrombophlebitis

 

 

 

Answer key
Multiple choice questions:1=d; 2=a;3=a;4=d;5=c
True or false questions:1=True; 2,3,4,5=False

 

200 pearls and counting! Take the Pearls4Peers quiz #2!

Should I use qSOFA to screen for severe infections in my non-ICU patient?

Sepsis-3 qSOFA criteria—systolic BP ≤100 mg Hg, altered mental state, and RR≥22, with ≥2 considered positive— should NOT be used as either a screening or diagnostic tool for sepsis until properly designed prospective studies validate its utility.1

An important issue with qSOFA is its poor sensitivity for identifying patients with sepsis and its complications.  In a retrospective study of over 30,000 hospitalized patients suspected of infection in the emergency department or hospital wards, qSOFA ≥2 had a sensitivity of only 54% and specificity of 67% for in-hospital mortality or ICU transfer vs a much higher sensitivity of 91% but lower specificity of 13% for SIRS ≥2. Interestingly, most patients in this study met qSOFA criteria only 5 h before the studied outcome vs 17 h for SIRS ≥2 criteria.2

In another retrospective study of over 15,000 patients presenting to the Emergency Department with suspected infection, qSOFA ≥2 had a sensitivity of  49% and a specificity of 79% for hospital mortality vs  84% and 35% for SIRS≥2, and 65% and 74% for “severe sepsis” (Sepsis-2), respectively.3

So, using qSOFA alone to decide who needs prompt management of their infection (eg, blood cultures, serum lactate, antibiotics, fluids) may delay timely intervention in a substantial proportion of patients with infection that may become complicated by ICU transfer or death.  As is usually the case in medicine, it pays to look at the entire picture!

References

  1. Machado FR, Nsutebu E, AbDulaziz S, et al. Sepsis 3 from the perspective of clinicians and quality improvement initiatives. J Crit Care 2017:40: 315-17. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28478045
  2. Churpek MM, Synder A, Han X, et al. Quick sepsis-related organ failure assessment, systemic inflammatory response syndrome, and early warning scores for detecting clinical deterioration n infected patients outside the intensive care unit. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2017; 195: 906-11. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27649072
  3. Lembke K, Parashar S, Simpson S. Sensitivity and specificity of SIRS, qSOFA, and severe sepsis for mortality of patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected infection. Chest Annual Meeting, Toronto, October 29, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2017.08.427
Should I use qSOFA to screen for severe infections in my non-ICU patient?

In my patient with sepsis, is administration of proper antibiotics within an hour compared to 1-3 hours associated with better outcome?

The weight of the evidence based on observational studies suggests that the earlier the antibiotics are administered even within the first 3 hrs of the diagnosis of sepsis,  the better the patient outcome.

A 2017 study analyzing data from 37 studies (primarily observational) involving ~20,000 patients with severe sepsis and/or shock found a 10% increase in hospital mortality for every 1 hr delay in initiation of antibiotic therapy1. Two multicenter studies (1 in Pennsylvania2 and another in California3) and a New York State data base study involving patients with severe sepsis or septic shock4 similarly reported decreased survival with each 1- hr delay in antibiotic therapy. Another study of patients with severe sepsis found that each hour delay in first antibiotic dose administration was associated with an 8% increased risk of progression to shock5.

Despite the emphasis on the timing of the first dose of antibiotics, let’s not forget that the second dose of antibiotics should also be given on time in sepsis; a >25% delay is associated with increased mortality, length of stay and requirement for mechanical ventilation6.

So, yes, antibiotics should be given within 3 hours of diagnosis of sepsis, but within an hour followed by a timely second dose is even better!

Final Pearl: Did you know that sepsis is the 3rd leading cause of death in the US and contributes to 1 in every 2 to 3 hospital deaths7?

If you enjoyed this pearl, sign up under MENU to get future pearls right into your mailbox! 

References

  1. Kalil AC, Johnson DW, Lisco SJ, et al. Early goal-directed therapy for sepsis: a novel solution for discordant survival outcomes in clinical trials. Crit Care Med 2017;45:607-14. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28067711
  2. Seymour CW, Kahn JM, Martin-Gill, et al. Delays from first medical contact to antibiotic administration for sepsis. Crit Care Med 2017;45:759-65. https://insights.ovid.com/pubmed?pmid=28234754
  3. Liu VX, Fielding-Singh V, Greene JD, et al. Th timing of early antibiotics and hospital mortality in sepsis. Am J Respir Crit care Med 2017; 196;858-63. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28345952
  4. Seymour CW, Gesten F, Prescott HC, et al. Time to treatment and mortality during mandated emergency care for sepsis. N Engl J Med 2017;376:2235-44. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1703058
  5. Whiles BB, Deis AS, Simpson SQ. Increased time to initial antimicrobial administration is associated with progression to septic shock in severe sepsis patients. Crit Care Med 2017; 45:623-29. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28169944
  6. Leisman D, Huang V, Zhou Q, et al. Delayed second dose antibiotics for patients admitted from the emergency department with sepsis: prevalence, risk factors, and outcomes. Crit Care Med 2017;45:956-65. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28328652
  7. https://www.ecri.org/components/HRC/Documents/Sepsis%20at%20a%20Glance.pdf

 

 

In my patient with sepsis, is administration of proper antibiotics within an hour compared to 1-3 hours associated with better outcome?

Are two sets of blood cultures adequate for evaluation of bacteremia in my febrile patient?

For great majority of patients, more than 2 sets of blood culture obtained closely apart is not likely to significantly improve the yield of detecting bacteremia. 

Although a 2004 report suggested that 2 sets of blood cultures over 24 h period had a sensitivity of only 80% for bacteremia, several other studies have found much higher sensitivities, ranging from ~90%- 99% 2-3. When broken down by organism, sensitivity of 2 sets of blood cultures may be highest for Staphylococcus aureus (97%), followed by E. coli (91%), and Klebsiella pneumoniae (90%) 2.  The Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines recommend paired blood culture sets (each set with 2 bottles, 10 ml of blood in each) to detect about 90-95% of patients with documented bacteremia, and 3 sets for 95-99% detection rate 4.

It seems prudent to strike a balance between drawing more than 2 sets of blood cultures—with its attendant risk of picking up contaminants— and what may be a definite but small incremental increase in the rate of detection of true bacteremia. 

If you are concerned about “continuous” bacteremia (eg, in endocarditis) or a common blood culture contaminant causing true disease (eg, Staphylococcus epidermidis prosthetic valve infection), you may consider a 3rd or 4th set of blood cultures drawn 4-6 hrs after the initial sets.

Whatever you do,  please don’t order only 1 set of blood cultures! Aside from its generally low yield, when positive it may be difficult to distinguish contaminants from true invaders.

 

References

  1. Cockerill FR, Reed GS, Hughes JG, et al. Clinical comparison of BACTEC 9240 Plus Aerobic/F resin bottles and the Isolator aerobic cultures. Clin Infect Dis 2004;38:1724-30. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9163464
  2. Lee A, Mirrett S, Reller LB, et al. Detection of bloodstream infections in adults: how many cultures are needed? J Clin Microbiol 2007; 45:3546-48. http://jcm.asm.org/content/45/11/3546
  3. Towns ML, Jarvis WR, Hsueh PR. Guidelines on blood cultures. J Microbiol Immunol Infect 2010;43:347-49. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20688297
  4. Weinstein MP, Reller LB, Murphy JR, et al. The clinical significance of positive blood cultures: a comprehensive analysis of 500 episodes of bacteremia and fungemia in adults. I. Laboratory and eipidemiologic observations. Rev Infect Dis 1982;5:35-53. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6828811
Are two sets of blood cultures adequate for evaluation of bacteremia in my febrile patient?