ABSTRACT
Objective: The modified Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (mCDC) criteria have been proposed for diagnosing and managing stroke-associated pneumonia (SAP). The objective was to investigate the impact of SAP on stroke outcome depending on whether or not it conforms to mCDC criteria. Our secondary objective was to identify the responsible factors for antibiotic initiation in stroke patients. Methods: We conducted a prospective, multicenter, observational study of ischemic stroke patients with moderate to severe stroke (NIHSS≥4) admitted within 24 h. For 7 days, mCDC criteria were assessed daily, and infections and antibiotics were recorded. Pneumonias were divided into those fulfilling mCDC criteria (mCDC-SAP) or not (other pneumonias, OPn). The effect of each type of pneumonia on 3-month outcome was evaluated in separated logistic regression models. Factors associated with antibiotic initiation were explored using a random forest analysis. Results: Of the 342 patients studied, infections were diagnosed in 72 (21.6%), including 39 (11.7%) cases of pneumonia. Of them, 25 (7.5%) fulfilled mCDC criteria. Antibiotics were used in 92% of mCDC-SAP and 64.3% of OPn. In logistic regression analysis, mCDC-SAP, but not OPn, was an independent predictor of poor outcome [OR, 4.939 (1.022-23.868)]. The random forest analysis revealed that fever had the highest importance for antibiotic initiation. Interpretation: The mCDC criteria might be useful for detecting clinically relevant SAP, which is associated with poor outcomes. Isolated signs of infection were more important for antibiotic initiation than compliance with pre-defined criteria. Therefore, adherence to mCDC criteria might result in antibiotic saving without compromising clinical outcome.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: The screening for atrial fibrillation (AF) scale (SAFE score) was recently developed to provide a prediction of the diagnosis of AF after an ischemic stroke. It includes 7 items: age ≥ 65 years, bronchopathy, thyroid disease, cortical location of stroke, intracranial large vessel occlusion, NT-ProBNP ≥250 pg/mL, and left atrial enlargement. In the internal validation, a good performance was obtained, with an AUC = 0.88 (95% CI 0.84-0.91) and sensitivity and specificity of 83% and 80%, respectively, for scores ≥ 5. The aim of this study is the external validation of the SAFE score in a multicenter cohort. Methods: A retrospective multicenter study, including consecutive patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack between 2020 and 2022 with at least 24 hours of cardiac monitoring. Patients with previous AF or AF diagnosed on admission ECG were excluded. Results: Overall, 395 patients were recruited for analysis. The SAFE score obtained an AUC = 0.822 (95% CI 0.778-0.866) with a sensitivity of 87.2%, a specificity of 65.4%, a positive predictive value of 44.1%, and a negative predictive value of 94.3% for a SAFE score ≥ 5, with no significant gender differences. Calibration analysis in the external cohort showed an absence of significant differences between the observed values and those predicted by the model (Hosmer-Lemeshow's test 0.089). Conclusions: The SAFE score showed adequate discriminative ability and calibration, so its external validation is justified. Further validations in other external cohorts or specific subpopulations of stroke patients might be required.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The Prestroke Independence, Sex, Age, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (ISAN), Age, Atrial Fibrillation, Dysphagia, male sex, and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (A2DS2), and acute ischemic stroke-associated pneumonia score (AIS-APS) scores were created to predict stroke-associated pneumonia (SAP), one of the most important medical stroke complications. External validation of all such scores in an acute stroke population was the aim of our study. METHODS: Patients with ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke were prospectively enrolled in the multicenter Stroke-Induced Pneumonia in Andalucía project between October 2014 and May 2016. Receiver operating characteristic curves and linear regression analyses were used to determine discrimination ability of the scores. The Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test and the plot of observed versus predicted SAP risk were used to assess model calibration. RESULTS: Among 201 included patients, SAP rate was 15.5% (31). Higher ISAN, A2DS2, and AIS-APS scores were related to SAP (all P < .001). The C statistic was .83 (95% confidence interval [CI], .76-.91) for the ISAN score, .80 (95% CI, .70-.89) for the A2DS2 score, and .82 (95% CI, .74-.90) for the AIS-APS score, suggesting good discrimination. The ISAN and AIS-APS scores showed good calibration (Cox and Snell R2 = .206 and .174, respectively). The A2DS2 score showed the highest sensitivity (87%), and the AIS-APS score showed the highest specificity (92.8%). CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort, the external validation of ISAN, A2DS2, and AIS-APS scores have demonstrated their accurate prediction of SAP and the ability of these scores as screening tools to better manage SAP. The AIS-APS score would be recommendable for the development of future clinical trials.
