Research Article

Which hemogram-derived indices might be useful in predicting the clinical outcomes of sepsis patients in the intensive care unit?

Volume: 46 Number: 2 June 30, 2021
EN TR

Which hemogram-derived indices might be useful in predicting the clinical outcomes of sepsis patients in the intensive care unit?

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of our study is to investigate the prognostic value of Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) in determining mortality in patients hospitalized for intensive care unit (ICU) sepsis. Materials and Methods: This study retrospectively evaluates all patients hospitalized with sepsis in our ICU between February 2017 and April 2018. In addition to the demographic and clinical characteristics of the patients, complete blood count parameters were also recorded. Demographic and clinical characteristics, mainly NLR, MLR and PLR results, and other laboratory results of patients with sepsis were compared between the ones with and without mortality. Results: Four hundred and eleven patients were included in the study. 55.7% (229/411) of patients with sepsis died and 44.3% (182/411) were discharged alive. NLR, MLR and PLR were higher in the group with mortality compared to the survivor group. The cut-off value for predicting mortality in patients with sepsis was 9.2 for NLR, ≥0.8 for MLR, and ≥187.3 for PLR. The area under the curve (AUC) value for NLR was 0.825, the AUC value for MLR 0.835 and the AUC value for PLR was 0.720. Conclusion: High NLR, MLR and PLR values are associated with mortality in sepsis patients hospitalized in ICU, and the most significant parameter for mortality indicator among the three rates was found to be MLR with the highest AUC value.

Keywords

neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio , monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio , platelet-to lymphocyte ratio , sepsis , intensive care unit

References

  1. Referans 1 Chen CM, Cheng KC, Chan KS, Yu WL. Age May Not Influence the Outcome of Patients with Severe Sepsis in Intensive Care Units. International Journal of Gerontology. 2014; 8: 22-26.
  2. Referans 2 Nasa P, Juneja D, Singh O, Dang R, Arora V. Severe sepsis and its impact on outcome in elderly and very elderly patients admitted in intensive care unit. J Intensive Care Med. 2012;27:179-83. 21436163.
  3. Referans 3 Martin GS, Mannino DM, Moss M. The effect of age on the development and outcome of adult sepsis. Crit Care Med. 2006;34:15-21.
  4. Referans 4 Armstrong BA, Betzold RD, May AK. Sepsis and Septic Shock Strategies. Surg Clin North Am. 2017;97:1339-1379.
  5. Referans 5 Geyik FD, Yuce, Y, Erkal KH, Cevik B, Citak N. The use of quick sofa (qsofa) in elderly patients with sepsis in the intensive care unit. Turkish Journal of Geriatrics. 2018;21:143-149.
  6. Referans 6 Yu W, Ash AS, Levinsky NG, Moskowitz MA. Intensive care unit use and mortality in the elderly. J Gen Intern Med. 2000;15:97-102.
  7. Referans 7 Rowe T, Araujo KLB, Van Ness PH, Pisani MA, Juthani-Mehta M. Outcomes of Older Adults With Sepsis at Admission to an Intensive Care Unit. Open Forum Infectious Diseases. 2016;3: ofw010.
  8. Referans 8 Westerdijk K, Simons KS, Zegers M, Wever PC, Pickkers P, de Jager CPC. The value of the neutrophil-lymphocyte count ratio in the diagnosis of sepsis in patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit: A retrospective cohort study. PLoS One. 2019;14:e0212861.
  9. Referans 9 Sarı R, Karakurt Z, Ay M, Çelik ME, Yalaz Tekan Ü, Çiyiltepe F et al. Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio as a predictor of treatment response and mortality in septic shock patients in the intensive care unit. Turk J Med Sci. 2019;49:1336-1349.
  10. Referans 10 Liu Y, Zheng J, Zhang D, Jing L. Neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio and plasma lactate predict 28-day mortality in patients with sepsis. J Clin Lab Anal. 2019;33:e22942.
MLA
Çakır, Esra, and Işıl Özkoçak Turan. “Which Hemogram-Derived Indices Might Be Useful in Predicting the Clinical Outcomes of Sepsis Patients in the Intensive Care Unit?”. Cukurova Medical Journal, vol. 46, no. 2, June 2021, pp. 532-9, doi:10.17826/cumj.856741.

Cited By