23. Prognostic value of the modified nutric score (mNUTRIC) in patients with septic shock
Main Article Content
Abstract
This cross -sectional descriptive study was conducted to investigate the prognostic value of malnutrition risk, assessed by the mNUTRIC score, in predicting refractory shock and mortality in septic shock 151 patients diagnosedwith septic shock, ( according to Sepsis-3 criteria), at the Intensive Care Unit of Hoan My Cuu Long Hospital from January 2023 to December 2024 were included in the study. A high risk of malnutrition (mNUTRIC ≥ 5) was observed in 61.6% of patients. The rates of refractory shock and 30-day mortality in the high-risk malnutrition group were 39.8% and 58.1%, respectively, compared to 19% and 13.8% in the low-risk malnutrition group (p < 0.05). In multivariate analysis, an mNUTRIC score ≥ 5 was associated with an increased odds of refractory shock (OR = 2.66, 95% CI: 1.06 – 6.67, p = 0.038) and an increased risk of 30-day mortality (HR = 2.88, 95% CI: 1.24 – 6.69, p = 0.014). This study suggested that a high risk of malnutrition, as indicated by the mNUTRIC score, was associated with an increased risk of refractory shock and 30-day mortality in patients with septic shock.
Article Details
Keywords
mNUTRIC, septic shock, refractory shock, prognostic value for mortality
References
2. Liu YC, Yao Y, Yu MM, et al. Frequency and mortality of sepsis and septic shock in China: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC infectious diseases. 2022; 22(1): 564.
3. Lew CCH, Yandell R, Fraser RJL, Chua AP, Chong MFF, Miller M. Association Between Malnutrition and Clinical Outcomes in the Intensive Care Unit: A Systematic Review [Formula: see text]. JPEN Journal of parenteral and enteral nutrition. 2017; 41(5): 744-758.
4. Heyland DK, Dhaliwal R, Jiang X, Day AG. Identifying critically ill patients who benefit the most from nutrition therapy: the development and initial validation of a novel risk assessment tool. Critical care (London, England). 2011; 15(6):R268.
5. Rahman A, Hasan RM, Agarwala R, Martin C, Day AG, Heyland DK. Identifying critically-ill patients who will benefit most from nutritional therapy: Further validation of the “modified NUTRIC” nutritional risk assessment tool. Clinical nutrition (Edinburgh, Scotland). 2016; 35(1): 158-162.
6. Prakash J, Verma S, Shrivastava P, et al. Modified NUTRIC Score as a Predictor of All-cause Mortality in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine. 2024; 28(5): 495-503.
7. Hai PD, Viet Hoa LT. The Prognostic Accuracy Evaluation of mNUTRIC, APACHE II, SOFA, and SAPS 2 Scores for Mortality Prediction in Patients with Sepsis. Critical care research and practice. 2022; 2022: 4666594.
8. Charlson ME, Carrozzino D, Guidi J, Patierno C. Charlson Comorbidity Index: A Critical Review of Clinimetric Properties. Psychotherapy and psychosomatics. 2022; 91(1):8-35.
9. Nandhabalan P, Ioannou N, Meadows C, Wyncoll D. Refractory septic shock: our pragmatic approach. Critical care (London, England). 2018; 22(1): 215.
10. Jeong DH, Hong SB, Lim CM, et al. Comparison of Accuracy of NUTRIC and Modified NUTRIC Scores in Predicting 28-Day Mortality in Patients with Sepsis: A Single Center Retrospective Study. Nutrients. 2018; 10(7).
11. Kim SM, Ryoo SM, Shin TG, et al. Early Mortality Stratification with Serum Albumin and the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score at Emergency Department Admission in Septic Shock Patients. Life (Basel, Switzerland). 2024; 14(10).
12. Zhu Y, Zhang R, Ye X, Liu H, Wei J. SAPS III is superior to SOFA for predicting 28-day mortality in sepsis patients based on Sepsis 3.0 criteria. International journal of infectious diseases: IJID: official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases. 2022; 114: 135-141.
13. Do SN, Dao CX, Nguyen TA, et al. Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) Score for predicting mortality in patients with sepsis in Vietnamese intensive care units: a multicentre, cross-sectional study. BMJ open. 2023; 13(3): e064870.