» Articles » PMID: 27513358

Lung Injury Prediction Score in Hospitalized Patients at Risk of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Abstract

Objective: The Lung Injury Prediction Score identifies patients at risk for acute respiratory distress syndrome in the emergency department, but it has not been validated in non-emergency department hospitalized patients. We aimed to evaluate whether Lung Injury Prediction Score identifies non-emergency department hospitalized patients at risk of developing acute respiratory distress syndrome at the time of critical care contact.

Design: Retrospective study.

Setting: Five academic medical centers.

Patients: Nine hundred consecutive patients (≥ 18 yr old) with at least one acute respiratory distress syndrome risk factor at the time of critical care contact.

Interventions: None.

Measurements And Main Results: Lung Injury Prediction Score was calculated using the worst values within the 12 hours before initial critical care contact. Patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome at the time of initial contact were excluded. Acute respiratory distress syndrome developed in 124 patients (13.7%) a median of 2 days (interquartile range, 2-3) after critical care contact. Hospital mortality was 22% and was significantly higher in acute respiratory distress syndrome than non-acute respiratory distress syndrome patients (48% vs 18%; p < 0.001). Increasing Lung Injury Prediction Score was significantly associated with development of acute respiratory distress syndrome (odds ratio, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.21-1.42) and the composite outcome of acute respiratory distress syndrome or death (odds ratio, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.18-1.34). A Lung Injury Prediction Score greater than or equal to 4 was associated with the development of acute respiratory distress syndrome (odds ratio, 4.17; 95% CI, 2.26-7.72), composite outcome of acute respiratory distress syndrome or death (odds ratio, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.68-3.49), and acute respiratory distress syndrome after accounting for the competing risk of death (hazard ratio, 3.71; 95% CI, 2.05-6.72). For acute respiratory distress syndrome development, the Lung Injury Prediction Score has an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.70 and a Lung Injury Prediction Score greater than or equal to 4 has 90% sensitivity (misses only 10% of acute respiratory distress syndrome cases), 31% specificity, 17% positive predictive value, and 95% negative predictive value.

Conclusions: In a cohort of non-emergency department hospitalized patients, the Lung Injury Prediction Score and Lung Injury Prediction Score greater than or equal to 4 can identify patients at increased risk of acute respiratory distress syndrome and/or death at the time of critical care contact but it does not perform as well as in the original emergency department cohort.

Citing Articles

Using a clinical decision support system to reduce excess driving pressure: the ALARM trial.

Burger-Klepp U, Maleczek M, Ristl R, Kroyer B, Raudner M, Krenn C BMC Med. 2025; 23(1):52.

PMID: 39875856 PMC: 11776331. DOI: 10.1186/s12916-025-03898-2.


Establishment and validation of predictive model of ARDS in critically ill patients.

Wei S, Zhang H, Li H, Li C, Shen Z, Yin Y J Transl Med. 2025; 23(1):64.

PMID: 39806409 PMC: 11730794. DOI: 10.1186/s12967-024-06054-1.


Evaluation of Preventive Pentoxifylline Effect on Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) Incidence in Traumatic Patients: A Randomized Triple-Blind Placebo-Controlled Trial.

Shirzadeh S, Omidkhoda N, Mohammadpour A, Mannani R, Jomehzadeh V Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2024; 38:64.

PMID: 39399618 PMC: 11469711. DOI: 10.47176/mjiri.38.64.


Development and validation of a deep learning-based framework for automated lung CT segmentation and acute respiratory distress syndrome prediction: a multicenter cohort study.

Zhou Y, Mei S, Wang J, Xu Q, Zhang Z, Qin S EClinicalMedicine. 2024; 75:102772.

PMID: 39170939 PMC: 11338113. DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102772.


Predictive value of combination of lung injury prediction score and receptor for advanced glycation end‑products for the occurrence of acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Yang J, Wei A, Wu B, Deng J Exp Ther Med. 2024; 27(1):4.

PMID: 38223323 PMC: 10785033. DOI: 10.3892/etm.2023.12291.


References
1.
Harris P, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde J . Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2008; 42(2):377-81. PMC: 2700030. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010. View

2.
Gajic O, Dabbagh O, Park P, Adesanya A, Chang S, Hou P . Early identification of patients at risk of acute lung injury: evaluation of lung injury prediction score in a multicenter cohort study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2010; 183(4):462-70. PMC: 3056224. DOI: 10.1164/rccm.201004-0549OC. View

3.
Ranieri V, Rubenfeld G, Thompson B, Ferguson N, Caldwell E, Fan E . Acute respiratory distress syndrome: the Berlin Definition. JAMA. 2012; 307(23):2526-33. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2012.5669. View

4.
Li G, Malinchoc M, Cartin-Ceba R, Venkata C, Kor D, Peters S . Eight-year trend of acute respiratory distress syndrome: a population-based study in Olmsted County, Minnesota. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2010; 183(1):59-66. PMC: 3040394. DOI: 10.1164/rccm.201003-0436OC. View

5.
Trillo-Alvarez C, Cartin-Ceba R, Kor D, Kojicic M, Kashyap R, Thakur S . Acute lung injury prediction score: derivation and validation in a population-based sample. Eur Respir J. 2010; 37(3):604-9. DOI: 10.1183/09031936.00036810. View