6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Inpatient Mortality Among Solid Organ Transplant Recipients Hospitalized for Sepsis and Severe Sepsis

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          <p class="first" id="d1167100e277">This study shows that among 903 816 severe sepsis and 410 623 sepsis hospitalizations at academic medical center–affiliated hospitals during 2012–2014, prior receipt of a solid organ transplant (kidney, liver, or co-transplant) was associated with reduced inpatient mortality. </p><p class="first" id="d1167100e280"> <b> <i>Background.</i> </b> Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are at elevated risk of sepsis. The impact of SOT on outcomes following sepsis is unclear. </p><p id="d1167100e288"> <b> <i>Methods.</i> </b> We performed a retrospective cohort study using data from University HealthSystem Consortium, a consortium of academic medical center affiliates. We examined the association between SOT and mortality among patients hospitalized with severe sepsis or explicitly coded sepsis in 2012–2014. We used <i>International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision</i> ( <i>ICD-9</i>) codes to identify severe sepsis, explicitly coded sepsis, and SOT (kidney, liver, heart, lung, pancreas, or intestine transplants). We fit random-intercept logistic regression models to account for clustering by hospital. </p><p id="d1167100e302"> <b> <i>Results.</i> </b> There were 903 816 severe sepsis hospitalizations (39 618 [4.4%] with SOT) and 410 623 sepsis hospitalizations (14 526 [3.9%] with SOT) in 250 hospitals. SOT recipients were younger and more likely to be insured by Medicare than those without SOT. Among hospitalizations for severe sepsis and sepsis, in-hospital mortality was lower among those with vs those without SOT (5.5% vs 9.4% for severe sepsis; 8.7% vs 12.7% for sepsis). After adjustment, the odds ratio for mortality comparing SOT patients vs non-SOT was 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI], .79–.87) for severe sepsis and 0.78 (95% CI, .73–.84) for sepsis. Compared to non-SOT patients, kidney, liver, and co-transplant (kidney-pancreas/kidney-liver) recipients demonstrated lower mortality. No association was present for heart transplant, and lung transplant was associated with higher mortality. </p><p id="d1167100e310"> <b> <i>Conclusions.</i> </b> Among patients hospitalized for severe sepsis or sepsis, those with SOT had lower inpatient mortality than those without SOT. Identifying the specific strategies employed for populations with improved mortality could inform best practices for sepsis among SOT and non-SOT populations. </p>

          Related collections

          Most cited references24

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Benchmarking the incidence and mortality of severe sepsis in the United States.

          In 1992, the first consensus definition of severe sepsis was published. Subsequent epidemiologic estimates were collected using administrative data, but ongoing discrepancies in the definition of severe sepsis produced large differences in estimates. We seek to describe the variations in incidence and mortality of severe sepsis in the United States using four methods of database abstraction. We hypothesized that different methodologies of capturing cases of severe sepsis would result in disparate estimates of incidence and mortality. Using a nationally representative sample, four previously published methods (Angus et al, Martin et al, Dombrovskiy et al, and Wang et al) were used to gather cases of severe sepsis over a 6-year period (2004-2009). In addition, the use of new International Statistical Classification of Diseases, 9th Edition (ICD-9), sepsis codes was compared with previous methods. Annual national incidence and in-hospital mortality of severe sepsis. The average annual incidence varied by as much as 3.5-fold depending on method used and ranged from 894,013 (300/100,000 population) to 3,110,630 (1,031/100,000) using the methods of Dombrovskiy et al and Wang et al, respectively. Average annual increase in the incidence of severe sepsis was similar (13.0% to 13.3%) across all methods. In-hospital mortality ranged from 14.7% to 29.9% using abstraction methods of Wang et al and Dombrovskiy et al. Using all methods, there was a decrease in in-hospital mortality across the 6-year period (35.2% to 25.6% [Dombrovskiy et al] and 17.8% to 12.1% [Wang et al]). Use of ICD-9 sepsis codes more than doubled over the 6-year period (158,722 - 489,632 [995.92 severe sepsis], 131,719 - 303,615 [785.52 septic shock]). There is substantial variability in incidence and mortality of severe sepsis depending on the method of database abstraction used. A uniform, consistent method is needed for use in national registries to facilitate accurate assessment of clinical interventions and outcome comparisons between hospitals and regions.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Mortality caused by sepsis in patients with end-stage renal disease compared with the general population.

            In the United States, infection is second to cardiovascular disease as the leading cause of death in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD), and septicemia accounts for more than 75% of this category. This increased susceptibility to infections is partly due to uremia, old age, and comorbid conditions. Although it is intuitive to believe that mortality caused by sepsis may be higher in patients with ESRD compared with the general population (GP), no such data are currently available. We compared annual mortality rates caused by sepsis in patients with ESRD (U.S. Health Care Financing Administration 2746 death notification form) with those in the GP (death certificate). Data were abstracted from the U.S. Renal Data System (1994 through 1996 Special Data request) and the National Center for Health Statistics. Data were stratified by age, gender, race, and diabetes mellitus (DM). Sensitivity analyses were performed to account for potential limitations of the data sources. Overall, the annual percentage mortality secondary to sepsis was approximately 100- to 300-fold higher in dialysis patients and 20-fold higher in renal transplant recipients (RTRs) compared with the GP. Mortality caused by sepsis was higher among diabetic patients across all populations. After stratification for age, differences between groups decreased but retained their magnitude. These findings remained robust despite a wide range of sensitivity analyses. Indeed, mortality secondary to sepsis remained approximately 50-fold higher in dialysis patients compared with the GP, using multiple cause-of-death analyses; was approximately 50-fold higher in diabetic patients with ESRD compared with diabetic patients in the GP, when accounting for underreporting of DM on death certificates in the GP; and was approximately 30-fold higher in RTRs compared with the GP, when accounting for the incomplete ascertainment of cause of death among RTRs. Furthermore, despite assignment of primary cause-of-death to major organ infections in the GP, annual mortality secondary to sepsis remained 30- to 45-fold higher in the dialysis population. Patients with ESRD treated by dialysis have higher annual mortality rates caused by sepsis compared with the GP, even after stratification for age, race, and DM. Consequently, this patient population should be considered at high-risk for the development of lethal sepsis.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Kidney transplantation as primary therapy for end-stage renal disease: a National Kidney Foundation/Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (NKF/KDOQITM) conference.

              Kidney transplantation is the most desired and cost-effective modality of renal replacement therapy for patients with irreversible chronic kidney failure (end-stage renal disease, stage 5 chronic kidney disease). Despite emerging evidence that the best outcomes accrue to patients who receive a transplant early in the course of renal replacement therapy, only 2.5% of incident patients with end-stage renal disease undergo transplantation as their initial modality of treatment, a figure largely unchanged for at least a decade. The National Kidney Foundation convened a Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) conference in Washington, DC, March 19 through 20, 2007, to examine the issue. Fifty-two participants representing transplant centers, dialysis providers, and payers were divided into three work groups to address the impact of early transplantation on the chronic kidney disease paradigm, educational needs of patients and professionals, and finances of renal replacement therapy. Participants explored the benefits of early transplantation on costs and outcomes, identified current barriers (at multiple levels) that impede access to early transplantation, and recommended specific interventions to overcome those barriers. With implementation of early education, referral to a transplant center coincident with creation of vascular access, timely transplant evaluation, and identification of potential living donors, early transplantation can be an option for substantially more patients with chronic kidney disease.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Clinical Infectious Diseases
                Clin Infect Dis.
                Oxford University Press (OUP)
                1058-4838
                1537-6591
                June 30 2016
                July 15 2016
                July 15 2016
                May 23 2016
                : 63
                : 2
                : 186-194
                Article
                10.1093/cid/ciw295
                4928388
                27217215
                aa7caa0f-fdf3-4265-8a02-56323a542876
                © 2016
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article