The applicability of the Phoenix criteria and Phoenix Sepsis Score in higher-resource pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) outside the United States requires further validation. A retrospective cohort study analyzed electronic health records of 1,304 PICU admissions under 18 years old with suspected infection between February 2017 and December 2023. The score was calculated using two methods: 24-hour assessment, based on worst sub-scores within 24 hours of admission, and prompt assessment, using values closest to admission within 6 hours before or after. Based on the 24-hour assessment, in-hospital mortality was 8.3% for sepsis and 10.3% for septic shock. The score demonstrated an area under the precision-recall curve of 0.42 (95% confidence interval, 0.31–0.55) for in-hospital mortality. Results were consistent across both assessment methods. The Phoenix criteria and the Phoenix Sepsis Score are reliable predictors of mortality outcomes. Further investigation in diverse clinical settings is warranted.

The applicability of the Phoenix criteria and Phoenix Sepsis Score in higher-resource pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) outside the United States requires further validation. A retrospective cohort study analyzed electronic health records of 1,304 PICU admissions under 18 years old with suspected infection between February 2017 and December 2023. The score was calculated using two methods: 24-hour assessment, based on worst sub-scores within 24 hours of admission, and prompt assessment, using values closest to admission within 6 hours before or after. Based on the 24-hour assessment, in-hospital mortality was 8.3% for sepsis and 10.3% for septic shock. The score demonstrated an area under the precision-recall curve of 0.42 (95% confidence interval, 0.31–0.55) for in-hospital mortality. Results were consistent across both assessment methods. The Phoenix criteria and the Phoenix Sepsis Score are reliable predictors of mortality outcomes. Further investigation in diverse clinical settings is warranted.

The applicability of the Phoenix criteria and Phoenix Sepsis Score in higher-resource pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) outside the United States requires further validation. A retrospective cohort study analyzed electronic health records of 1,304 PICU admissions under 18 years old with suspected infection between February 2017 and December 2023. The score was calculated using two methods: 24-hour assessment, based on worst sub-scores within 24 hours of admission, and prompt assessment, using values closest to admission within 6 hours before or after. Based on the 24-hour assessment, in-hospital mortality was 8.3% for sepsis and 10.3% for septic shock. The score demonstrated an area under the precision-recall curve of 0.42 (95% confidence interval, 0.31–0.55) for in-hospital mortality. Results were consistent across both assessment methods. The Phoenix criteria and the Phoenix Sepsis Score are reliable predictors of mortality outcomes. Further investigation in diverse clinical settings is warranted.

The applicability of the Phoenix criteria and Phoenix Sepsis Score in higher-resource pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) outside the United States requires further validation. A retrospective cohort study analyzed electronic health records of 1,304 PICU admissions under 18 years old with suspected infection between February 2017 and December 2023. The score was calculated using two methods: 24-hour assessment, based on worst sub-scores within 24 hours of admission, and prompt assessment, using values closest to admission within 6 hours before or after. Based on the 24-hour assessment, in-hospital mortality was 8.3% for sepsis and 10.3% for septic shock. The score demonstrated an area under the precision-recall curve of 0.42 (95% confidence interval, 0.31–0.55) for in-hospital mortality. Results were consistent across both assessment methods. The Phoenix criteria and the Phoenix Sepsis Score are reliable predictors of mortality outcomes. Further investigation in diverse clinical settings is warranted.

The administration of high-dose vitamins has been focused on in critically ill patients as adjunctive therapy for life-threatening conditions. We evaluated the association between serum vitamin C concentrations and patient prognosis. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed and collected clinical and biochemical data, including thiamine and vitamin C levels, of patients admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). Results: In total, 177 patients were admitted to the PICU during the study period, and 63 children were enrolled in this study. The most common reason for PICU admission was sepsis (33.3%). The median thiamine and vitamin C levels were 3.6 µg/dl (interquartile range [IQR], 2.9–4.5 µg/dl) and 2.84 µg/ml (IQR, 1.61–4.55 µg/ml), respectively. Thiamine deficiency was observed in 10 patients (15.9%), and 17 (27.0%) had vitamin C deficiency. There were no differences in the vitamin levels according to the reason for PICU admission. Vitamin C levels were affected by nutritional status. The length of stay in the PICU and duration of mechanical ventilation were longer in patients with vitamin C deficiency than in those without (P=0.035 and P=0.010, respectively). The serum delta neutrophil index and C-reactive protein and lactate levels increased in the vitamin C-deficient group (P=0.028 and P=0.039, respectively). There was a significant difference in Pediatric Index of Mortality 3 scores according to vitamin C levels but not in mortality directly. Conclusions: Vitamin C deficiency was associated with elevated inflammatory marker levels, increased mechanical ventilation durations, and PICU admission. Our results support the potential benefits of vitamin C administration in critically ill children.

Background: Body weight can fluctuate during critical illness due to factors such as fluid shifts, nutritional status, the type of acute illness, and underlying comorbidities. We investigated the association between acute body weight variability (WV) and clinical outcomes in critically ill pediatric patients. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from patients aged 1 month to 18 years who were admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) of a university-affiliated tertiary hospital between August 2017 and July 2021. WV was defined as the percentage difference between the measured body weight at PICU admission and the usual body weight, obtained either from recent hospital records or caregiver reports. Associations between WV and clinical outcomes, including PICU mortality and ventilator-free days (VFDs), were assessed. Results: Of the 926 patients, 74 (8.0%) died. Median WV was significantly higher in non-survivors than in survivors (8.7% vs. 0.0%; P<0.001). Increased WV was independently associated with higher mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.102; 95% CI, 1.073–1.131) and fewer VFDs (odds ratio [OR], 0.599; 95% CI, 0.524–0.684). Combining WV with Pediatric Index of Mortality 3 score significantly improved mortality prediction over either parameter alone (area under the curve, 0.888; P=0.047). Conclusions Higher WV at PICU admission is independently associated with adverse clinical outcomes, including increased mortality and fewer VFDs. WV could complement existing mortality prediction models in pediatric critical care.

Purpose: This study introduced adenomas per polypectomy (APP) as a novel metric for evaluating the progression of lesion discrimination skills among colonoscopy trainees. Methods: This retrospective study was conducted at the National Cancer Center, Korea between March 2020 and February 2023. Nine colorectal surgeons who completed a structured 1-year colonoscopy training program were included, and their performance was compared with that of 5 expert endoscopists. APP was defined as the number of histologically confirmed adenomas among the total number of polypectomies performed. The APPs were calculated serially to assess changes from the beginning to the end of the training. Results: A total of 8,072 colonoscopies were performed by 9 trainees and 11,687 by 5 experts. The average APP of the 9 trainees was 67.0%, which was significantly different from the 73.9% APP of the experts (P < 0.001). The APP progression of trainees exhibited 3 phases: phase 1 (<200 cases) showed increasing polyp detection and APP; phase 2 (200–500 cases) displayed a sharp rise in the number of polypectomies but a decline in APP; and phase 3 (>500 cases) demonstrated a decrease in the number of polypectomies with a moderate rise in APP. However, even in phase 3, the trainees’ APP remained significantly lower than that of the experts (69.9% vs. 73.9%, P = 0.027). Conclusion APP, a measure of visual adenoma discrimination ability, undergoes 3 stages of progression during colonoscopy training. This progression suggests that the APP may serve as an additional metric for assessing the effectiveness of colonoscopy training.

Purpose: To analyze adenoma detection rate (ADR) and related quality indicators of colonoscopy among trainees and make recommendations for appropriate colonoscopy training. Methods: ADR and related indicators of colonoscopies performed by 3 trainees and 5 colonoscopy experts between March and November 2022 were analyzed. These indicators were analyzed in both the entire patients and the screening/surveillance group. In addition, the training period of the 3 trainees was divided into 3 sections, and the changes in these indicators were examined. Results: The mean ADR of the 3 trainees was 50.6%. In the screening/surveillance group, the mean ADR of the 3 trainees was 51.8%, showing no significant difference from the experts' ADR (53.4%). When the training period was divided into 3 sections and analyzed in the screening/surveillance group, the mean ADR of the trainees gradually increased to 49.4%, 52.6%, and 53.6%, respectively; however, the difference was insignificant. Analyzing each trainee’s ADR, there was a significant difference among the 3 trainees (58.5% vs. 44.7% vs. 50.2%, P=0.008). However, in the third section of the training period, the 3 trainees’ ADRs were 53.0%, 49.2%, and 57.3%, respectively, showing no significant difference (P=0.606). Conclusion In the early stages of training, the ADR was higher than recommended; however, there were variances in ADR between individuals. As the training period passed, the ADR became similar at the expert level, whereas the difference in ADR between trainees decreased. Therefore, efforts to increase ADR should be made actively from the beginning of training and continued during the training period.

Purpose: To analyze adenoma detection rate (ADR) and related quality indicators of colonoscopy among trainees and make recommendations for appropriate colonoscopy training. Methods: ADR and related indicators of colonoscopies performed by 3 trainees and 5 colonoscopy experts between March and November 2022 were analyzed. These indicators were analyzed in both the entire patients and the screening/surveillance group. In addition, the training period of the 3 trainees was divided into 3 sections, and the changes in these indicators were examined. Results: The mean ADR of the 3 trainees was 50.6%. In the screening/surveillance group, the mean ADR of the 3 trainees was 51.8%, showing no significant difference from the experts' ADR (53.4%). When the training period was divided into 3 sections and analyzed in the screening/surveillance group, the mean ADR of the trainees gradually increased to 49.4%, 52.6%, and 53.6%, respectively; however, the difference was insignificant. Analyzing each trainee’s ADR, there was a significant difference among the 3 trainees (58.5% vs. 44.7% vs. 50.2%, P=0.008). However, in the third section of the training period, the 3 trainees’ ADRs were 53.0%, 49.2%, and 57.3%, respectively, showing no significant difference (P=0.606). Conclusion In the early stages of training, the ADR was higher than recommended; however, there were variances in ADR between individuals. As the training period passed, the ADR became similar at the expert level, whereas the difference in ADR between trainees decreased. Therefore, efforts to increase ADR should be made actively from the beginning of training and continued during the training period.

Purpose: To analyze adenoma detection rate (ADR) and related quality indicators of colonoscopy among trainees and make recommendations for appropriate colonoscopy training. Methods: ADR and related indicators of colonoscopies performed by 3 trainees and 5 colonoscopy experts between March and November 2022 were analyzed. These indicators were analyzed in both the entire patients and the screening/surveillance group. In addition, the training period of the 3 trainees was divided into 3 sections, and the changes in these indicators were examined. Results: The mean ADR of the 3 trainees was 50.6%. In the screening/surveillance group, the mean ADR of the 3 trainees was 51.8%, showing no significant difference from the experts' ADR (53.4%). When the training period was divided into 3 sections and analyzed in the screening/surveillance group, the mean ADR of the trainees gradually increased to 49.4%, 52.6%, and 53.6%, respectively; however, the difference was insignificant. Analyzing each trainee’s ADR, there was a significant difference among the 3 trainees (58.5% vs. 44.7% vs. 50.2%, P=0.008). However, in the third section of the training period, the 3 trainees’ ADRs were 53.0%, 49.2%, and 57.3%, respectively, showing no significant difference (P=0.606). Conclusion In the early stages of training, the ADR was higher than recommended; however, there were variances in ADR between individuals. As the training period passed, the ADR became similar at the expert level, whereas the difference in ADR between trainees decreased. Therefore, efforts to increase ADR should be made actively from the beginning of training and continued during the training period.