Skip to content
Open access · CC-BY via OpenAlex

Score performance of SAPS 2 and SAPS 3 in combination with biomarkers IL-6, PCT or CRP

Michael Jahn, Jan Rekowski, Rolf Alexander Jánosi, Andreas Kribben, Ali E. Canbay, Antonios Katsounas

PLoS ONE · 2020 · ▲ 11 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the effects of combining the Simplified-Acute-Physiology-Score (SAPS) 2 or the SAPS 3 with Interleukin-6 (IL-6) or Procalcitonin (PCT) or C-Reactive Protein (CRP) concentrations for predicting in-hospital mortality. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted in an interdisciplinary 22-bed intensive care unit (ICU) at a German university hospital. Within an 18-month period, SAPS 2 and SAPS 3 were calculated for 514 critically ill patients that were admitted to the internal medicine department. To evaluate discrimination performance, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) and the 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated for each score, exclusively or in combination with IL-6 or PCT or CRP. DeLong test was used to compare different AUROCs. RESULTS: The SAPS 2 exhibited a better discrimination performance than SAPS 3 with AUROCs of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.76-0.86) and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.66-0.78), respectively. Overall, combination of the SAPS 2 with IL-6 showed the best discrimination performance (AUROC 0.82; 95% CI, 0.77-0.87), albeit not significantly different from SAPS2. IL-6 performed better than PCT and CRP with AUROCs of 0.75 (95% CI, 0.69-0.81), 0.72 (95% CI, 0.66-0.77) and 0.65 (95% CI, 0.59-0.72), respectively. Performance of the SAPS 3 improved significantly when combined with IL-6 (AUROC 0.76; 95% CI, 0.69-0.81) or PCT (AUROC 0.73; 95% CI, 0.67-0.78). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis provided evidence that the risk stratification performance of the SAPS 3 and, to a lesser degree, also of the SAPS 2 can increase when combined with IL-6. A more accurate detection of aberrant or dysregulated systemic immunological responses (by IL-6) may explain the higher performance achieved by SAPS 3 + IL-6 vs. SAPS 3. Thus, implementation of IL-6 in critical care scores can improve prediction outcomes, especially in patients experiencing acute inflammatory conditions; however, statistical results may vary across hospital types and/or patient populations with different case mix.

◌ CITATION ONLY
Full text is not openly licensed for redistribution here. Read it at the source:

Read at source →

Provenance

Source
OpenAlex
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0238587
Canonical
link ↗
Fetched
2026-10-15 MST

Cite this

APA
Jahn, M., Rekowski, J., Jánosi, R.A., Kribben, A., Canbay, A.E., &amp; Katsounas, A. (2020). Score performance of SAPS 2 and SAPS 3 in combination with biomarkers IL-6, PCT or CRP. <em>PLoS ONE</em>. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0238587
Vancouver
Jahn M, Rekowski J, Jánosi RA, Kribben A, Canbay AE, Katsounas A. Score performance of SAPS 2 and SAPS 3 in combination with biomarkers IL-6, PCT or CRP. PLoS ONE. 2020. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0238587.
BibTeX
@article{michael2020Scorep, title = {Score performance of SAPS 2 and SAPS 3 in combination with biomarkers IL-6, PCT or CRP}, author = {Michael Jahn and Jan Rekowski and Rolf Alexander Jánosi and Andreas Kribben and Ali E. Canbay and Antonios Katsounas}, journal = {PLoS ONE}, year = {2020}, doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0238587}, }

Research neighborhood

References, citing works, and semantically nearest findings. Click a node to open it.

Related findings