A prediction rule for severe adverse events in all inpatients with community-acquired pneumonia: a multicenter observational study

Background Prediction of inpatients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) at high risk for severe adverse events (SAEs) requiring higher-intensity treatment is critical. However, evidence regarding prediction rules applicable to all patients with CAP including those with healthcare-associated pneumonia (HCAP) is limited. The objective of this study is to develop and validate a new prediction system for SAEs in inpatients with CAP. Methods Logistic regression analysis was performed in 1334 inpatients of a prospective multicenter study to develop a multivariate model predicting SAEs (death, requirement of mechanical ventilation, and vasopressor support within 30 days after diagnosis). The developed ALL-COP-SCORE rule based on the multivariate model was validated in 643 inpatients in another prospective multicenter study. Results The ALL-COP SCORE rule included albumin (< 2 g/dL, 2 points; 2–3 g/dL, 1 point), white blood cell (< 4000 cells/μL, 3 points), chronic lung disease (1 point), confusion (2 points), PaO2/FIO2 ratio (< 200 mmHg, 3 points; 200–300 mmHg, 1 point), potassium (≥ 5.0 mEq/L, 2 points), arterial pH (< 7.35, 2 points), systolic blood pressure (< 90 mmHg, 2 points), PaCO2 (> 45 mmHg, 2 points), HCO3− (< 20 mmol/L, 1 point), respiratory rate (≥ 30 breaths/min, 1 point), pleural effusion (1 point), and extent of chest radiographical infiltration in unilateral lung (> 2/3, 2 points; 1/2–2/3, 1 point). Patients with 4–5, 6–7, and ≥ 8 points had 17%, 35%, and 52% increase in the probability of SAEs, respectively, whereas the probability of SAEs was 3% in patients with ≤ 3 points. The ALL-COP SCORE rule exhibited a higher area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.85) compared with the other predictive models, and an ALL-COP SCORE threshold of ≥ 4 points exhibited 92% sensitivity and 60% specificity. Conclusions ALL-COP SCORE rule can be useful to predict SAEs and aid in decision-making on treatment intensity for all inpatients with CAP including those with HCAP. Higher-intensity treatment should be considered in patients with CAP and an ALL-COP SCORE threshold of ≥ 4 points. Trial registration This study was registered with the University Medical Information Network in Japan, registration numbers UMIN000003306 and UMIN000009837.

Endovascular therapy versus microsurgical clipping of unruptured wide-neck aneurysms: a prospective multicenter study with propensity score analysis

OBJECTIVE Numerous techniques have been developed to treat wide-neck aneurysms (WNAs), each with different safety and efficacy profiles. Few studies have compared endovascular therapy (EVT) with microsurgery (MS). The authors’ objective was to perform a prospective multicenter study of a WNA registry using rigorous outcome assessments and to compare EVT and MS using propensity score analysis (PSA). METHODS Unruptured, saccular, not previously treated WNAs were included. WNA was defined as an aneurysm with a neck width ≥ 4 mm or a dome-to-neck ratio (DTNR) < 2. The primary outcome was modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 1 year after treatment (good outcome was defined as mRS score 0–2), as assessed by blinded research nurses and compared with PSA. Angiographic outcome was assessed using the Raymond scale with core laboratory review (adequate occlusion was defined as Raymond scale score 1–2). RESULTS The analysis included 224 unruptured aneurysms in the EVT cohort (n = 140) and MS cohort (n = 84). There were no differences in baseline demographic characteristics, such as proportion of patients with good baseline mRS score (94.3% of the EVT cohort vs 94.0% of the MS cohort, p = 0.941). WNA inclusion criteria were similar between cohorts, with the most common being both neck width ≥ 4 mm and DTNR < 2 (50.7% of the EVT cohort vs 50.0% of the MS cohort, p = 0.228). More paraclinoid (32.1% vs 9.5%) and basilar tip (7.1% vs 3.6%) aneurysms were treated with EVT, whereas more middle cerebral artery (13.6% vs 42.9%) and pericallosal (1.4% vs 4.8%) aneurysms were treated with MS (p < 0.001). EVT aneurysms were slightly larger (p = 0.040), and MS aneurysms had a slightly lower mean DTNR (1.4 for the EVT cohort vs 1.3 for the MS cohort, p = 0.010). Within the EVT cohort, 9.3% of patients underwent stand-alone coiling, 17.1% balloon-assisted coiling, 34.3% stent-assisted coiling, 37.1% flow diversion, and 2.1% PulseRider-assisted coiling. Neurological morbidity secondary to a procedural complication was more common in the MS cohort (10.3% vs 1.4%, p = 0.003). One-year mRS scores were assessed for 218 patients (97.3%), and no significantly increased risk of poor clinical outcome was found for the MS cohort (OR 2.17, 95% CI 0.84–5.60, p = 0.110). In an unadjusted direct comparison, more patients in the EVT cohort achieved a good clinical outcome at 1 year (93.4% vs 84.1%, p = 0.048). Final adequate angiographic outcome was superior in the MS cohort (97.6% of the MS cohort vs 86.5% of the EVT cohort, p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS Although the treatments for unruptured WNA had similar clinical outcomes according to PSA, there were fewer complications and superior clinical outcome in the EVT cohort and superior angiographic outcomes in the MS cohort according to the unadjusted analysis. These results may be considered when selecting treatment modalities for patients with unruptured WNAs.