RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The hospital management of patients diagnosed with COVID-19 can be hampered by heterogeneous characteristics at entry into the emergency department. We aimed to identify demographic, clinical and laboratory parameters associated with higher risks of hospitalisation, oxygen support, admission to intensive care and death, to build a risk score for clinical decision making at presentation to the emergency department. METHODS: We carried out a retrospective study using linked administrative data and laboratory parameters available in the initial phase of the pandemic at the emergency department of the regional reference hospital of Pescara, Abruzzo, Italy, March-June 2020. Logistic regression and Cox modelling were used to identify independent predictors for risk stratification. Validation was carried out collecting data from an extended timeframe covering other variants of concern, including Alpha (December 2020-January 2021) and Delta/Omicron (January-March 2022). RESULTS: Several clinical and laboratory parameters were significantly associated to the outcomes of interest, independently from age and gender. The strongest predictors were: for hospitalisation, monocyte distribution width ≥ 22 (4.09; 2.21-7.72) and diabetes (OR = 3.04; 1.09-9.84); for oxygen support: saturation < 95% (OR = 11.01; 3.75-41.14), lactate dehydrogenase≥237 U/L (OR = 5.93; 2.40-15.39) and lymphocytes< 1.2 × 103/µL (OR = 4.49; 1.84-11.53); for intensive care, end stage renal disease (OR = 59.42; 2.43-2230.60), lactate dehydrogenase≥334 U/L (OR = 5.59; 2.46-13.84), D-dimer≥2.37 mg/L (OR = 5.18; 1.14-26.36), monocyte distribution width ≥ 25 (OR = 3.32; 1.39-8.50); for death, procalcitonin≥0.2 ng/mL (HR = 2.86; 1.95-4.19) and saturation < 96% (HR = 2.74; 1.76-4.28). Risk scores derived from predictive models using optimal thresholds achieved values of the area under the curve between 81 and 91%. Validation of the scoring algorithm for the evolving virus achieved accuracy between 65 and 84%. CONCLUSIONS: A set of parameters that are normally available at emergency departments of any hospital can be used to stratify patients with COVID-19 at risk of severe conditions. The method shall be calibrated to support timely clinical decision during the first hours of admission with different variants of concern.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/epidemiología , Prueba de COVID-19 , Toma de Decisiones , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Hospitales , Humanos , Lactato Deshidrogenasas , Oxígeno , Pronóstico , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The absence of a rapidly available and sensitive diagnostic test represents an important limitation in the triage of patients with suspected stroke. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to investigate the triage accuracy of a novel test that measures blood-borne biomarkers (triage stroke panel, TSP) and to compare its accuracy with that of the Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Scale (CPSS). METHODS: Consecutive patients with suspected stroke presenting to the Emergency Departments of three Italian hospitals underwent triage by a trained nurse according to the CPSS and had blood drawn for TSP testing. The TSP simultaneously measures four markers (B-type natriuretic peptide, D-dimer, matrix metalloproteinase-9, and S100ß) presenting a single composite result, the Multimarker Index (MMX). Stroke diagnosis was established by an expert committee blinded to MMX and CPSS results. RESULTS: There were 155 patients enrolled, 87 (56%) of whom had a final diagnosis of stroke. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for CPSS was 0.77 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70-0.84) and that of MMX was 0.74 (95% CI 0.66-0.82) (p = 0.285). Thus, both tests, when used alone, failed to recognize approximately 25% of strokes. The area under the ROC curve of the combination of the two tests (0.86, 95% CI 0.79-0.91) was significantly greater than that of either single test (p = 0.01 vs. CPSS and p < 0.001 vs. TSP). CONCLUSIONS: In an emergency care setting, a panel test using multiple biochemical markers showed triage accuracy similar to that of CPSS. Further studies are needed before biomarkers can be introduced in the clinical work-up of patients with suspected stroke.