ABSTRACT
Purpose Sepsis is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide and is characterized by vascular leak syndrome. Treatment for sepsis, specifically intravenous fluids, may worsen deterioration in the context of vascular leak.
Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study of sepsis patients in four ICU databases in North America, Europe, and Asia. We developed an intuitive vascular leak index (VLI) and determined the relationship between VLI and in-hospital death and 36h-84h fluid balance using generalized additive models (GAM).
Results Using GAM, we found that increased VLI is associated with an increased risk of in-hospital death. Patients with a VLI in the highest quartile (Q4), across the four datasets, had a 1.61-2.31 times increased odds of dying in the hospital compared to patients with a VLI in the lowest quartile (Q1). VLI Q2 and Q3 were also associated with increased odds of dying. The relationship between VLI, treated as a continuous variable, and in-hospital death and 36h-84h death was statistically significant in the three datasets with a large number of patients. Specifically, we observed that as VLI increased, there was increase in the risk for in-hospital death and 36h-84h fluid balance. For the few patients with a positive VLI, this relationship differed across databases.
Conclusions Our VLI identifies groups of patients who may be at higher risk for in-hospital death and for fluid accumulation early in the ICU course. This relationship persisted in models developed to control for severity of illness and chronic comorbidity burden.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Leo Anthony Celi is funded by the National Institute of Health through R01 EB017205.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The eICU study was exempt from institutional review board approval due to the retrospective design, lack of direct patient intervention, and the security schema, for which the re-identification risk was certified as meeting safe harbor standards by an independent privacy expert (Privacert, Cambridge, MA) (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act Certification no. 1031219-2). The data in MIMIC-III and MIMIC-CXR have been de-identified, and the institutional review boards of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (No. 0403000206) and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (2001-P-001699/14) both approved the use of the database for research. The Medical Research Ethics Committee of VU university medical center determined that the AmsterdamUMCdb study was exempt from their review and was not subject to the Dutch Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (WMO). The process of developing AmsterdamUMCdb was audited by an external team led by a member of the privacy expert group at the Netherlands Federation of UMCs. The Ethics in Intensive Care Medicine group provided external ethics review and appraisal. The use of AmsterdamUMCdb is exempt from institutional review board approval due to a combination of de-identification, contractual and governance strategies where re-identification is not reasonably likely and can therefore be considered as anonymous information in the context of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The data in the SNUH dataset have been de-identified, and the institutional review boards of the Seoul National University Hospital have approved the use of this data for our research (SNUH 2106-118-1228).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Code can be found at https://github.com/theonesp/vol_leak_index
