A comparison of disseminated intravascular coagulation scoring systems and their performance to predict mortality in sepsis patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Background: Disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) is a common complication in sepsis patients which exacerbates patient outcomes. The prevalence and outcomes of DIC in sepsis is wide-ranging and highly depends on the severity of the disease and diagnostic approaches utilized. Varied diagnostic criteria of DIC have been developed and their performance in diagnosis and prognosis is not consistent. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the score positivity rate and performance of different DIC scoring systems in predicting mortality in sepsis patients.

Methods: Four databases, including Medline (through PubMed), Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for studies that determined DIC in sepsis patients using the three scoring systems namely: the International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis DIC (ISTH-DIC) criteria, the Japanese association for acute medicine DIC (JAAM-DIC) criteria, and the sepsis-induced coagulopathy (SIC) criteria. A random-effect meta-analysis was performed with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Subgroup analysis was conducted in view of geographic region and sepsis stages. the protocol was submitted to the Prospective Register for Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) with an identifier (CRD42023409614).

Results: Twenty-one studies, published between 2009 and 2024, comprising 9319 sepsis patients were included. The pooled proportion of cases diagnosed as positive using ISTH-DIC criteria, JAAM-DIC criteria, and SIC were 28% (95% CI: 24-34%), 55% (95% CI:42-70%), and 57% (95% CI: 52-78%), respectively. The pooled mortality rates were 44% (95% CI:33-53%), 37% (95% CI: 29-46%), and 35% (95% CI: 29-41%), respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of ISTH-DIC to predict mortality were 0.43 (95% CI: 0.34-0.52), and 0.81 (95% CI: 0.74-0.87), respectively, while for JAAM-DIC it was 0.73 (95% CI: 0.57-0.85) and 0.46 (95% CI: 0.28-0.65), respectively. Pooled sensitivity and specificity for SIC were 0.71 (95% CI: 0.57-0.82) and 0.49 (95% CI: 0.31-0.66), respectively.

Conclusion: The SIC and JAAM-DIC scores exhibited higher sensitivity to identify patients with coagulopathy and predict patient outcomes, and thus are valuable to identify patients for possible treatment at an early stage. The ISTH-DIC score perhaps identified patients at later stages and demonstrated better specificity to predict disease outcomes. Thus, early identification of patients using the SIC and JAAM-DIC scores and later confirmation using the ISTH-DIC score would be beneficial approach for improved management of patients with sepsis.

Fig 1. PRISMA flowchart for the systematic review and meta-analysis detailing the database searches, the number of abstracts screened, and the full texts retrieved.

Fig 2

Proportion of ISTH DIC positive (A), JAAM DIC positive (B), and SIC positive (C) cases in sepsis.

Fig 3

Mortality rate among ISTH DIC positive (A), JAAM DIC positive (B), and SIC positive (C) individuals.

Fig 4

Proportion of positive score and mortality rates of ISTH-DIC (A), JAAM-DIC (B), and SIC (C), across the same studies.

Fig 5

The proportion of patients diagnosed as SIC and ISTH positive (A), and patients diagnosed as JAAM and ISTH positive (B).

Fig 6

Sensitivity and specificity to predict 28 day mortality A: ISTH DIC, B: JAAM DIC, C: SIC.