Computed tomography in patients with sepsis presenting to the emergency department: exploring its role in light of patient outcomes.
CT
Diagnostic accuracy
Emergency department
Mortality
Sepsis
Journal
European radiology
ISSN: 1432-1084
Titre abrégé: Eur Radiol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9114774
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 Apr 2024
09 Apr 2024
Historique:
received:
31
10
2023
accepted:
17
02
2024
revised:
25
01
2024
medline:
9
4
2024
pubmed:
9
4
2024
entrez:
9
4
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
This study aimed to explore the role of CT in septic patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). We performed a retrospective secondary analysis of 192 septic patients from a prospective observational study, i.e., the "LIFE POC" study. Sepsis was diagnosed in accordance with the Sepsis-3 definition. Clinical and radiological data were collected from the hospital administration and radiological systems. Information on mortality and morbidity was collected. Time-to-CT between CT scan and sepsis diagnosis (ttCTsd) was calculated. Diagnostic accuracy was assessed with the final sepsis source as reference standard. The reference standard was established through the treating team of the patient based on all available clinical, imaging, and microbiological data. Sixty-two of 192 patients underwent a CT examination for sepsis focus detection. The final septic source was identified by CT in 69.4% (n = 43). CT detected septic foci with 81.1% sensitivity (95% CI, 68.0-90.6%) and 55.6% specificity (95% CI, 21.2-86.3%). Patients with short versus long ttCTsd did not differ in terms of mortality (16.1%, n = 5 vs 9.7, n = 3; p = 0.449), length of hospital stay (median 16 d, IQR 9 d 12 h-23 d 18 h vs median 13 d, IQR 10 d 00 h-24 d 00 h; p = 0.863), or duration of intensive care (median 3d 12 h, IQR 2 d 6 h-7 d 18 h vs median 5d, IQR 2 d-11 d; p = 0.800). Our findings show a high sensitivity of CT in ED patients with sepsis, confirming its relevance in guiding treatment decisions. The low specificity suggests that a negative CT requires further ancillary diagnostic tests for focus detection. The timing of CT did not affect morbidity or mortality outcomes. In patients with sepsis who present to the ED, CT can be used to identify infectious foci on the basis of clinical suspicion, but should not be used as a rule-out test. Scientific evidence for the optimal timing of CT beyond clinical decision-making is currently missing, as potential mortality benefits are clouded by differences in clinical severity at the time of ED presentation. • In patients with sepsis who present to the ED, CT for focus identification has a high sensitivity and can thereby be valuable for patient management. • As the specificity is considerably lower, a thorough microbiological assessment is important in these cases. • The timing of CT did not affect morbidity and mortality outcomes in this study, which might be due to variability in clinical severity at the time of ED presentation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38592420
doi: 10.1007/s00330-024-10701-y
pii: 10.1007/s00330-024-10701-y
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW et al (2016) The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA 315(8):801–810
doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.0287
pubmed: 26903338
pmcid: 4968574
Bolanaki M, Möckel M, Winning J et al (2021) Diagnostic performance of procalcitonin for the early identification of sepsis in patients with elevated qSOFA score at emergency admission. J Clin Med 10(17):3869. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10173869
doi: 10.3390/jcm10173869
pubmed: 34501324
pmcid: 8432218
Ferrer R, Martin-Loeches I, Phillips G et al (2014) Empiric antibiotic treatment reduces mortality in severe sepsis and septic shock from the first hour: results from a guideline-based performance improvement program. Crit Care Med 42(8):1749–1755
doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000000330
pubmed: 24717459
Evans L, Rhodes A, Alhazzani W et al (2021) Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock 2021. Intensive Care Med 47(11):1181–1247
doi: 10.1007/s00134-021-06506-y
pubmed: 34599691
pmcid: 8486643
Eidelman LA, Putterman D, Putterman C, Sprung CL (1996) The spectrum of septic encephalopathy: definitions, etiologies, and mortalities. JAMA 275(6):470–473
doi: 10.1001/jama.1996.03530300054040
pubmed: 8627969
Davies NWS, Sharief MK, Howard RS (2006) Infection–associated encephalopathies—their investigation, diagnosis, and treatment. J Neurol 253(7):833–845
doi: 10.1007/s00415-006-0092-4
pubmed: 16715200
Pien BC, Sundaram P, Raoof N et al (2010) The clinical and prognostic importance of positive blood cultures in adults. Am J Med 123(9):819–828
doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2010.03.021
pubmed: 20800151
Pohlan J, Witham D, Muench G et al (2021) Computed tomography for detection of septic foci: retrospective analysis of patients presenting to the emergency department. Clin Imaging 69:223–227
doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2020.09.004
pubmed: 32971451
Pohlan J, Witham D, Farkic L et al (2022) Body computed tomography in sepsis: predictors of CT findings and patient outcomes in a retrospective medical ICU cohort study. Emerg Radiol 29(6):979–985. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10140-022-02083-9
doi: 10.1007/s10140-022-02083-9
pubmed: 35922682
pmcid: 9643202
van den Berk IAH, Lejeune EH, Kanglie MMNP et al (2023) The yield of chest X-ray or ultra-low-dose chest-CT in emergency department patients suspected of pulmonary infection without respiratory symptoms or signs. Eur Radiol 33(10):7294–7302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-023-09664-3
doi: 10.1007/s00330-023-09664-3
pubmed: 37115214
pmcid: 10511555
Arruzza E, Milanese S, Li LSK, Dizon J (2022) Diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography and ultrasound for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiography (Lond) 28(4):1127–41
pubmed: 36130469
Barkhausen J, Stöblen F, Dominguez-Fernandez E, Henseke P, Müller RD (1999) Impact of CT in patients with sepsis of unknown origin. Acta Radiol 40(5):552–5. https://doi.org/10.3109/02841859909175583
doi: 10.3109/02841859909175583
pubmed: 10485247
Schleder S, Luerken L, Dendl LM et al (2017) Impact of multidetector computed tomography on the diagnosis and treatment of patients with systemic inflammatory response syndrome or sepsis. Eur Radiol 27(11):4544–4551
doi: 10.1007/s00330-017-4897-6
pubmed: 28608164
Shaish H, Ream J, Huang C et al (2023) Diagnostic accuracy of unenhanced computed tomography for evaluation of acute abdominal pain in the emergency department. JAMA Surg 158(7):e231112
doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2023.1112
pubmed: 37133836
Hsu YC, Su HY, Sun CK, Liang CY, Chen TB, Hsu CW (2019) Risk of post-contrast acute kidney injury in emergency department patients with sepsis. Hong Kong Med J 25(6):429–37
pubmed: 31796644
Pohlan J, Hernando MIO, Hogrebe A et al (2020) The role of body computed tomography in hospitalized patients with obscure infection: retrospective consecutive cohort study. Eur J Radiol 132:109325
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.109325
pubmed: 33027726
Pohlan J, Witham D, Opper Hernando MI et al (2021) Relevance of CT for the detection of septic foci: diagnostic performance in a retrospective cohort of medical intensive care patients. Clin Radiol 77(3):203–209
Pohlan J, Nawabi J (2022) Witham D et al Cerebrovascular events in suspected sepsis: retrospective prevalence study in critically Ill patients undergoing full-body computed tomography. Front Neurol 13:811022
doi: 10.3389/fneur.2022.811022
pubmed: 35614926
pmcid: 9125158
Just KS, Defosse JM, Grensemann J, Wappler F, Sakka SG (2015) Computed tomography for the identification of a potential infectious source in critically ill surgical patients. J Crit Care 30(2):386–389
doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2014.10.013
pubmed: 25468363
Opper Hernando MI, Witham D, Steinhagen PR et al (2023) Interdisciplinary perspectives on computed tomography in sepsis: survey among medical doctors at a large university medical center. Eur Radiol 33(12):9296–9308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-023-09842-3
doi: 10.1007/s00330-023-09842-3
pubmed: 37450054
pmcid: 10667150