Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27366324›Full record

ArticleJournal of intensive care2016

A comparison of prognostic significance of strong ion gap (SIG) with other acid-base markers in the critically ill: a cohort study.

Kwok M Ho, Norris S H Lan, Teresa A Williams, Yusra Harahsheh, Andrew R Chapman, Geoffrey J Dobb, Sheldon Magder

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of intensive care, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Metabolic Acidosis in Critically Ill Cirrhotic Patients with Acute Kidney Injury.Journal of clinical and translational hepatology · 2019
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Kwok M HoDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Royal Perth Hospital, Wellington Street, Perth, WA 6000 Australia ; School of Population Health, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia ; School of Veterinary and Life Sciences, Murdoch University, Perth, Australia.
Norris S H LanSchool of Medicine and Pharmacology, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.
Teresa A WilliamsSchool of Nursing, Midwifery and Paramedicine, Curtin University, Perth, Australia.
Yusra HarahshehDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Royal Perth Hospital, Wellington Street, Perth, WA 6000 Australia.
Andrew R ChapmanDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Royal Perth Hospital, Wellington Street, Perth, WA 6000 Australia.
Geoffrey J DobbDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Royal Perth Hospital, Wellington Street, Perth, WA 6000 Australia ; School of Medicine and Pharmacology, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.
Sheldon MagderCritical Care Division, Department of Medicine and Physiology, Royal Victoria Hospital, McGill University Health Centre and McGill University, Montréal, Canada.
Royal Perth Hospital · AUUniversity of Western Australia · AUCurtin University · AUMcGill University Health Centre · CA

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis cohort study compared the prognostic significance of strong ion gap (SIG) with other acid-base markers in the critically ill.

methodsThe relationships between SIG, lactate, anion gap (AG), anion gap albumin-corrected (AG-corrected), base excess or strong ion difference-effective (SIDe), all obtained within the first hour of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and the hospital mortality of 6878 patients were analysed. The prognostic significance of each acid-base marker, both alone and in combination with the Admission Mortality Prediction Model (MPM0 III) predicted mortality, were assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC).

resultsOf the 6878 patients included in the study, 924 patients (13.4 %) died after ICU admission. Except for plasma chloride concentrations, all acid-base markers were significantly different between the survivors and non-survivors. SIG (with lactate: AUROC 0.631, confidence interval [CI] 0.611-0.652; without lactate: AUROC 0.521, 95 % CI 0.500-0.542) only had a modest ability to predict hospital mortality, and this was no better than using lactate concentration alone (AUROC 0.701, 95 % 0.682-0.721). Adding AG-corrected or SIG to a combination of lactate and MPM0 III predicted risks also did not substantially improve the latter's ability to differentiate between survivors and non-survivors. Arterial lactate concentrations explained about 11 % of the variability in the observed mortality, and it was more important than SIG (0.6 %) and SIDe (0.9 %) in predicting hospital mortality after adjusting for MPM0 III predicted risks. Lactate remained as the strongest predictor for mortality in a sensitivity multivariate analysis, allowing for non-linearity of all acid-base markers.

conclusionsThe prognostic significance of SIG was modest and inferior to arterial lactate concentration for the critically ill. Lactate concentration should always be considered regardless whether physiological, base excess or physical-chemical approach is used to interpret acid-base disturbances in critically ill patients.

Indexed as

AcidosisAlkalosisAnion gapOutcomesStrong ion difference

Identifiers

PMID27366324
PMCPMC4928272
OpenAlexW2475111555

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.