ArticleCureus2024
Study on Assessing Serum Lactate as an Early Prognostic Determinant in Sepsis Outcome.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lactate-enhanced-qSOFA (LqSOFA) score as a predictor of in-hospital mortality in patients with sepsis: systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2025Pooled it
- Trial
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundApart from being one of the main causes of death, sepsis has recently been considered a chronic critical illness. This has resulted in the implementation of standard treatment recommendations for management, with a focus on the initial phases of treatment. Early detection of sepsis and prognostic grading are now crucial for management. Despite the fact that sequential organ failure assessment score (SOFA), acute physiology, and chronic health evaluation II score (APACHE II) have been widely used in sepsis, there have been shortcomings such as feasibility and many lab parameters involved. As a result, this study was conducted to evaluate the role of serum lactate as an early marker and to compare it to current scoring systems for determining the outcome of sepsis. METHODS AND MATERIAL: This was an observational hospital-based study with 60 individuals recruited over a one-year period from July 2021 to June 2022. Serum lactate, as well as the other laboratory tests required for the computation of SOFA and APACHE II, were performed. The baseline data and the trend of lactate vs standard scores were examined in the first 48 hours, as well as their impact on outcomes in sepsis patients (as measured by mortality rates- patients were followed up for 28 days). The diagnostic accuracy of these scores was calculated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUROC).
resultsThe study enrolled 60 people out of a total of 162 people who were screened. The mean age was 48.4 years, with the highest mortality occurring between the ages of 41 and 60 years. Of the total 60 participants, 34 (56.6%) were male, with the respiratory tract being the most common source of infection for sepsis (36.67%). In our study, 46 patients survived while 14 patients died. The mean lactate on admission was 3.1 mmol/L in survivors and 4 mmol/L in non-survivors, whereas APACHE II was 9 and 12.36, and SOFA was 3.63 and 7.79, respectively, in survivors and non-survivors. Serum lactate and prognosis scores were compared in the survivor and non-survivor groups, and the difference in diagnostic accuracy was found to be statistically significant.
conclusionsSerum lactate can be used as an early recognition marker in patients with a probability of sepsis and serial lactate monitoring has a similar diagnostic accuracy in predicting outcomes as the traditional prognostic scoring systems SOFA and APACHE II.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.