Search

The goal of this study is to determine the cost-effectiveness of MIRISK VP, a next generation coronary heart disease risk assessment score, in correctly reclassifying and appropriately treating asymptomatic, intermediate risk patients.A Markov model was employed with simulated subjects based on the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). This study evaluated three treatment strategies: (i) practice at MESA enrollment, (ii) current guidelines, and (iii) MIRISK VP in MESA.The model assessed patient healthcare costs and outcomes, expressed in terms of life years and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), over the lifetime of the cohort from the provider and payer perspective. A total of 50,000 hypothetical individuals were used in the model. A sensitivity analysis was conducted (based on the various input parameters) for the entire cohort and also for individuals aged 65 and older.Guiding treatment with MIRISK VP leads to the highest net monetary benefits when compared to the 'Practice at MESA Enrollment' or to the 'Current Guidelines' strategies. MIRISK VP resulted in a lower mortality rate from any CHD event and a modest increase in QALY of 0.12-0.17 years compared to the other two approaches.This study has limitations of not comparing performance against strategies other than the FRS, the results are simulated as with all models, the model does not incorporate indirect healthcare costs, and the impact of patient or physician behaviors on outcomes were not taken into account.MIRISK VP has the potential to improve patient outcomes compared to the alternative strategies. It is marginally more costly than both the 'Practice at MESA Enrollment' and the 'Current Guidelines' strategies, but it provides increased effectiveness, which leads to positive net monetary benefits over either strategy.

BACKGROUND Infections and their sequelae are a major cause of death among patients admitted to the surgical intensive care unit (ICU). Studies of passive immunotherapy with standard intravenous immune globulin and hyperimmune globulin directed against gram-negative core lipopolysaccharide to prevent gram-negative infections and their serious systemic complications have had equivocal results in such patients. METHODS We performed a double-blind study to assess the efficacy of standard immune globulin and core-lipopolysaccharide hyperimmune globulin in preventing infections in surgical patients at high risk. The patients received standard immune globulin (400 mg per kilogram of body weight), hyperimmune globulin (400 mg per kilogram), or placebo (25 percent albumin, 8 ml per kilogram) weekly, for a maximum of four doses while in the ICU. RESULTS A total of 352 patients were enrolled, and 329 could be evaluated. The number of patients in whom infections developed was significantly lower in the group receiving standard immune globulin than in the placebo group (36 of 109 vs. 53 of 112 patients, P = 0.03), as was the incidence of pneumonia (15 vs. 30 cases, P = 0.04), especially pneumonia due to gram-negative bacteria (5 vs. 16 cases, P = 0.02). The number of days spent in the ICU and the total days spent in the hospital were lower in the standard immune globulin group (medians of 2 and 7.5 days fewer; P = 0.02 and 0.06, respectively). In contrast, the hyperimmune globulin had no detectable prophylactic effect on infections (50 of 108 patients, with 25 cases of pneumonia). The rate of systemic infections and shock was similar in the three study groups, and hospital mortality did not differ significantly among them. CONCLUSIONS Intravenous immune globulin given prophylactically to selected high-risk patients in the surgical ICU can reduce the incidence of infection. Core-lipopolysaccharide hyperimmune globulin is not effective in preventing gram-negative infections and their systemic complications.

Resistin induces insulin resistance in mice. In humans, recent data suggest that resistin functions as a proinflammatory cytokine. Here, we studied resistin up to 2 wks after admission in patients with septic shock and/or severe sepsis.Two prospective studies of patients with sepsis and in vitro studies of resistin interaction with monocytes.Intensive care unit at Karolinska University Hospital and Center for Infectious Medicine, Karolinska Institute, Huddinge, Sweden.Twenty-nine patients with severe sepsis and 66 with septic shock.None.Ninety-five patients were studied, 25 of whom died within 28 days. Resistin and cytokine levels and routine biochemistry were measured at three to six defined time points during the first 2 wks after admission and were correlated to other cytokines, glucose levels, body mass index, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, and Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment scores. Serum resistin was significantly elevated compared with healthy controls (p.000001) and correlated with severity of disease as measured by Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II and Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment scores, with an increasingly strong degree of correlation over time. Median levels were four- to eight-fold higher than controls and remained high up to 2 wks after admission to the intensive care unit. Levels correlated with interleukin-6, interleukin-8, interleukin-10, tumor necrosis factor-alpha, creatinine, D-dimer, and lactate, but not with p-glucose or body mass index. In vitro, resistin was released from monocytes after stimulation with either lipopolysaccharide or high mobility group box 1 protein. Recombinant resistin itself up-regulated intercellular adhesion molecule-1 on monocytes.This is the first study assessing systemic levels of resistin in patients with septic shock/severe sepsis. We show that resistin is a marker of severity of disease and possibly a mediator of the prolonged inflammatory state seen in infected critically ill patients. Further exploration of resistin as a therapeutic target and marker of disease is merited.

Objective: To study the systemic release and kinetics of high mobility group box-1 protein (HMGB1) in relation to clinical features in a population of patients with severe sepsis or septic shock and to compare these with the kinetics of the cytokines interleukin-6, interleukin-8, interleukin-10, and tumor necrosis factor-. Design: Prospective study of two cohorts of patients. Setting: Intensive care unit and infectious disease clinic at Karolinska University Hospital Huddinge. Patients: Twenty-six patients with severe sepsis, 33 patients with septic shock, and a reference group of five patients with sepsis. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Sixty-four patients were included, ten of whom died within 28 days. Cytokine levels were measured at five time points during the first week after admission and were correlated to Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II and Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment scores. Two HMGB1 assays were used. Both demonstrated delayed kinetics for HMGB1 with high levels on inclusion that remained high throughout the study period. Serum concentration at 144 hrs, the last sampling point, was 300 times higher, 34,000 76,000 pg/mL (mean SD), than any of the other cytokines. This study, however, found no predictable correlation between serum levels of HMGB1 and severity of infection. We did quite unexpectedly find significantly lower levels of HMGB1 in nonsurvivors compared with survivors as measured by our main assay, but the other showed no difference between the two groups. Levels of interleukin-6, interleukin-8, interleukin-10, and tumor necrosis factor- correlated significantly with severity of disease, and all were significantly higher in patients with septic shock compared with those with severe sepsis. Neither of these comparisons showed significant correlations for HMGB1. Conclusions: This is the first prospective study assessing the release over time of HMGB1 in a population of patients with sepsis, severe sepsis, or septic shock. Levels remained high in the majority of patients up to 1 wk after admittance, indicating that the cytokine indeed is a downstream and late mediator of inflammation. Further studies are required to fully define the relationship of HMGB1 to severity of disease. (Crit Care Med 2005; 33:564‐573)