• Oddeke van Ruler, Jordy J S Kiewiet, Kimberley R Boer, Bas Lamme, Dirk J Gouma, Marja A Boermeester, and Johannes B Reitsma.
• Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
• Bmc Surg. 2011 Dec 23; 11: 38.

BackgroundTo examine commonly used scoring systems, designed to predict overall outcome in critically ill patients, for their ability to select patients with an abdominal sepsis that have ongoing infection needing relaparotomy.MethodsData from a RCT comparing two surgical strategies was used. The study population consisted of 221 patients at risk for ongoing abdominal infection. The following scoring systems were evaluated with logistic regression analysis for their ability to select patients requiring a relaparotomy: APACHE-II score, SAPS-II, Mannheim Peritonitis Index (MPI), MODS, SOFA score, and the acute part of the APACHE-II score (APS).ResultsThe proportion of patients requiring a relaparotomy was 32% (71/221). Only 2 scores had a discriminatory ability in identifying patients with ongoing infection needing relaparotomy above chance: the APS on day 1 (AUC 0.61; 95%CI 0.52-0.69) and the SOFA score on day 2 (AUC 0.60; 95%CI 0.52-0.69). However, to correctly identify 90% of all patients needing a relaparotomy would require such a low cut-off value that around 80% of all patients identified by these scoring systems would have negative findings at relaparotomy.ConclusionsNone of the widely-used scoring systems to predict overall outcome in critically ill patients are of clinical value for the identification of patients with ongoing infection needing relaparotomy. There is a need to develop more specific tools to assist physicians in their daily monitoring and selection of these patients after the initial emergency laparotomy.

26 keywords...

hide…