Pneumonia scoring systems for severe COVID-19: which one is better
Pengfei Cheng, Hao Wu, Junzhe Yang, Xiaoyang Song, Mengda Xu, Bixi Li, Junjun Zhang, Mingzhe Qin, Cheng Zhou, Xiang Zhou
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate the predictive significance of different pneumonia scoring systems in clinical severity and mortality risk of patients with severe novel coronavirus pneumonia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 53 cases of severe novel coronavirus pneumonia were confirmed. The APACHE II, MuLBSTA and CURB-65 scores of different treatment methods were calculated, and the predictive power of each score on clinical respiratory support treatment and mortality risk was compared. RESULTS: The APACHE II score showed the largest area under ROC curve in both noninvasive and invasive respiratory support treatment assessments, which is significantly different from that of CURB-65. Further, the MuLBSTA score had the largest area under ROC curve in terms of death risk assessment, which is also significantly different from that of CURB-65; however, no difference was noted with the APACHE II score. CONCLUSION: For patients with COVID, the APACHE II score is an effective predictor of the disease severity and mortality risk. Further, the MuLBSTA score is a good predictor only in terms of mortality risk.