Culture-Negative and Culture-Positive Sepsis: A Comparison of Characteristics and Outcomes.


Journal

Anesthesia and analgesia
ISSN: 1526-7598
Titre abrégé: Anesth Analg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 1310650

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 2019
Historique:
pubmed: 5 3 2019
medline: 11 4 2020
entrez: 5 3 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The primary objective of this study was to compare the characteristics of culture-positive and culture-negative status in septic patients. We also determined whether culture status is associated with mortality and whether unique variables are associated with mortality in culture-positive and culture-negative patients separately. Utilizing patient records from intensive care units, emergency department, and general care wards in a large academic medical center, we identified adult patients with suspected infection and ≥2 systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria between January 1, 2007, and May 31, 2014. We compared the characteristics between culture-positive and culture-negative patients and used binary logistic regression to identify variables independently associated with culture status and mortality. We also did sensitivity analyses using patients with Sequential Organ Failure Assessment and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment criteria for sepsis. The study population included 9288 culture-negative patients (89%) and 1105 culture-positive patients (11%). Culture-negative patients received more antibiotics during the 48 hours preceding diagnosis but otherwise demonstrated similar characteristics as culture-positive patients. After adjusting for illness severity, a positive culture was not independently associated with mortality (odds ratio = 1.01 [95% CI, 0.81-1.26]; P = .945). The models predicting mortality separately in culture-negative and culture-positive patients demonstrated very good and excellent discrimination (C-statistic ± SD, 0.87 ± 0.01 and 0.92 ± 0.01), respectively. In the sensitivity analyses using patients with sepsis by Sequential Organ Failure Assessment and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment criteria, after adjustments for illness severity, positive cultures were still not associated with mortality (odds ratio = 1.13 [95% CI, 0.86-1.43]; P = .303; and odds ratio = 1.05 [95% CI, 0.83-1.33]; P = .665), respectively. In all models, physiological derangements were associated with mortality. While culture status is important for tailoring antibiotics, culture-negative and culture-positive patients with sepsis demonstrate similar characteristics and, after adjusting for severity of illness, similar mortality. The most important factor associated with negative cultures is receipt of antibiotics during the preceding 48 hours. The risk of death in patients suspected of having an infection is most associated with severity of illness. This is aligned with the Sepsis-3 definition using Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score to better identify those suspected of infection at highest risk of a poor outcome.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
The primary objective of this study was to compare the characteristics of culture-positive and culture-negative status in septic patients. We also determined whether culture status is associated with mortality and whether unique variables are associated with mortality in culture-positive and culture-negative patients separately.
METHODS
Utilizing patient records from intensive care units, emergency department, and general care wards in a large academic medical center, we identified adult patients with suspected infection and ≥2 systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria between January 1, 2007, and May 31, 2014. We compared the characteristics between culture-positive and culture-negative patients and used binary logistic regression to identify variables independently associated with culture status and mortality. We also did sensitivity analyses using patients with Sequential Organ Failure Assessment and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment criteria for sepsis.
RESULTS
The study population included 9288 culture-negative patients (89%) and 1105 culture-positive patients (11%). Culture-negative patients received more antibiotics during the 48 hours preceding diagnosis but otherwise demonstrated similar characteristics as culture-positive patients. After adjusting for illness severity, a positive culture was not independently associated with mortality (odds ratio = 1.01 [95% CI, 0.81-1.26]; P = .945). The models predicting mortality separately in culture-negative and culture-positive patients demonstrated very good and excellent discrimination (C-statistic ± SD, 0.87 ± 0.01 and 0.92 ± 0.01), respectively. In the sensitivity analyses using patients with sepsis by Sequential Organ Failure Assessment and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment criteria, after adjustments for illness severity, positive cultures were still not associated with mortality (odds ratio = 1.13 [95% CI, 0.86-1.43]; P = .303; and odds ratio = 1.05 [95% CI, 0.83-1.33]; P = .665), respectively. In all models, physiological derangements were associated with mortality.
CONCLUSIONS
While culture status is important for tailoring antibiotics, culture-negative and culture-positive patients with sepsis demonstrate similar characteristics and, after adjusting for severity of illness, similar mortality. The most important factor associated with negative cultures is receipt of antibiotics during the preceding 48 hours. The risk of death in patients suspected of having an infection is most associated with severity of illness. This is aligned with the Sepsis-3 definition using Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score to better identify those suspected of infection at highest risk of a poor outcome.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30829670
doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000004072
pmc: PMC7577261
mid: NIHMS1624520
doi:

Types de publication

Comparative Study Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1300-1309

Subventions

Organisme : NCATS NIH HHS
ID : KL2 TR002241
Pays : United States

Références

Respirology. 2013 Nov;18(8):1210-6
pubmed: 23692513
Emerg Infect Dis. 2012 Jun;18(6):979-81
pubmed: 22607707
JAMA. 1995 Sep 27;274(12):968-74
pubmed: 7674528
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2015 Aug;34(8):1539-41
pubmed: 25877009
BMJ. 2014 May 02;348:g2979
pubmed: 25134102
Crit Care Med. 2006 Feb;34(2):344-53
pubmed: 16424713
Am J Epidemiol. 1999 Feb 1;149(3):282-9
pubmed: 9927225
JAMA. 1995 Jan 11;273(2):117-23
pubmed: 7799491
Chest. 1992 Jun;101(6):1644-55
pubmed: 1303622
Crit Care Med. 2006 Jun;34(6):1589-96
pubmed: 16625125
Anesthesiology. 2010 Nov;113(5):1126-33
pubmed: 20966666
Crit Care. 2013 Sep 12;17(5):R202
pubmed: 24028771
Chest. 2016 May;149(5):1117-8
pubmed: 26927525
N Engl J Med. 2014 Oct 9;371(15):1381-91
pubmed: 25270275
Crit Care. 2013 Sep 26;17(5):1001
pubmed: 24074289
Crit Care Med. 2018 Apr;46(4):506-512
pubmed: 29293143
J Oral Microbiol. 2013 May 23;5:
pubmed: 23717756
JAMA. 2016 Feb 23;315(8):801-10
pubmed: 26903338
Chest. 2016 Dec;150(6):1251-1259
pubmed: 27615024
JAMA. 2014 Apr 2;311(13):1308-16
pubmed: 24638143
Med Care. 2014 Jun;52(6):e39-43
pubmed: 23001437
Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent). 2015 Jan;28(1):10-3
pubmed: 25552786
JAMA. 2017 Oct 3;318(13):1241-1249
pubmed: 28903154
N Engl J Med. 2014 Oct 16;371(16):1496-506
pubmed: 25272316
Ann Intensive Care. 2011 Nov 08;1(1):46
pubmed: 22067279
N Engl J Med. 2015 Apr 23;372(17):1629-38
pubmed: 25776936
Chest. 2011 Nov;140(5):1223-1231
pubmed: 21852297
N Engl J Med. 1999 Feb 11;340(6):409-17
pubmed: 9971864
J R Soc Med. 2002 Feb;95(2):81-3
pubmed: 11823550
Arch Intern Med. 1992 Mar;152(3):529-35
pubmed: 1546915
Microbiol Rev. 1995 Mar;59(1):143-69
pubmed: 7535888
N Engl J Med. 2015 Apr 2;372(14):1301-11
pubmed: 25776532

Auteurs

Matthew J G Sigakis (MJG)

From the Division of Critical Care Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Elizabeth Jewell (E)

From the Division of Critical Care Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Michael D Maile (MD)

From the Division of Critical Care Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Sandro K Cinti (SK)

Division of Infectious Disease, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Brian T Bateman (BT)

Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.

Milo Engoren (M)

From the Division of Critical Care Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH