Journals / Journal of Health Sciences and Medicine / 2026 / Volume: 8 Issue: 2

The role of Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index in sepsis-related mortality in intensive care

Yoğun bakımda sepsisle ilişkili mortalitede Geriatrik Beslenme Risk Endeksinin rolü

Dursun Elmas(konya şehir hastanesi)0000-0002-3452-529X
Mahmut Sami İnce(konya şehir hastanesi)0000-0003-4832-1404
Pages
—
Publication Date
2025-03-21
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

These findings underscore the importance of assessing and improving nutritional status in the management of sepsis.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aims: This study explores the link between nutritional status and sepsis outcomes, focusing on Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) scores and clinical endpoints such as mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) stay duration, and functional recovery.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: The study was a retrospective, observational investigation of 250 older patients with sepsis in the intensive care unit.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:These findings underscore the importance of assessing and improving nutritional status in the management of sepsis.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index · sepsis · malnutrition

Abstract

Aims: This study explores the link between nutritional status and sepsis outcomes, focusing on Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) scores and clinical endpoints such as mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) stay duration, and functional recovery. Methods: The study was a retrospective, observational investigation of 250 older patients with sepsis in the intensive care unit. GNRI was calculated based on admission albumin level and ratio of actual body weight to ideal body weight. Groups were defined as major risk (GNRI 98). The primary outcome measured was 28-day hospital mortality. Additionally, the relationship between the GNRI score and the SOFA and APACHE II scores was assessed. Results: In the univariate analysis comparing median values between survivor and non-survivor groups, significant differences were found in body-mass index, albumin levels, C-reactive protein levels, SOFA score, APACHE II score, and GNRI score. The 28-day hospital mortality rates for each GNRI group were: 5.7% in the very low risk group (GNRI >98), 9.8% in the low risk group (GNRI 92-98), 8.5% in the moderate risk group (GNRI 82-92), and 35.8% in the very high risk group (GNRI <82). The optimal cutoff for predicting outcomes was identified as GNRI <85. In a comparison of area under the curve (AUC) values, GNRI demonstrated superior predictive ability compared to APACHE II and SOFA scores, with AUC values of 0.629 (95% CI 0.543-0.715) for GNRI, 0.579 (95% CI 0.493-0.664) for SOFA, and 0.550 (95% CI 0.455-0.646) for APACHE II. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that GNRI is a significant predictor of mortality and prolonged length of stay in patients with sepsis in the ICU. These findings underscore the importance of assessing and improving nutritional status in the management of sepsis.

Özet

Amaçlar: Bu çalışma, Geriatrik Beslenme Riski İndeksi (GNRI) puanları ve mortalite, yoğun bakım ünitesinde (YBÜ) kalış süresi ve fonksiyonel iyileşme gibi klinik son noktalara odaklanarak beslenme durumu ile sepsis sonuçları arasındaki bağlantıyı araştırmaktadır. Yöntemler: Çalışma, yoğun bakım ünitesinde sepsisi olan 250 yaşlı hastanın retrospektif, gözlemsel bir araştırmasıydı. GNRI, kabul albümin düzeyine ve gerçek vücut ağırlığının ideal vücut ağırlığına oranına göre hesaplandı. Gruplar, majör risk (GNRI 98) olarak tanımlandı. Ölçülen birincil sonuç 28 günlük hastane mortalitesiydi. Ek olarak, GNRI puanı ile SOFA ve APACHE II puanları arasındaki ilişki değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Sağ kalan ve sağ kalmayan gruplar arasında medyan değerleri karşılaştıran tek değişkenli analizde, vücut kitle indeksi, albümin düzeyleri, C-reaktif protein düzeyleri, SOFA skoru, APACHE II skoru ve GNRI skorunda anlamlı farklılıklar bulundu. Her GNRI grubu için 28 günlük hastane ölüm oranları: çok düşük risk grubunda (GNRI >98) %5,7, düşük risk grubunda (GNRI 92-98) %9,8, orta risk grubunda (GNRI 82-92) %8,5 ve çok yüksek risk grubunda (GNRI <82) %35,8 idi. Sonuçları tahmin etmek için optimum kesme değeri GNRI <85 olarak belirlendi. Eğri altında kalan alan (AUC) değerlerinin karşılaştırılmasında, GNRI, APACHE II ve SOFA puanlarına kıyasla üstün öngörü yeteneği gösterdi; GNRI için AUC değerleri 0,629 (95% CI 0,543-0,715), SOFA için 0,579 (95% CI 0,493-0,664) ve APACHE II için 0,550 (95% CI 0,455-0,646) idi. Sonuç: Bu çalışma, GNRI'nin sepsisli hastalarda yoğun bakımda mortalite ve uzun süreli kalış süresinin önemli bir öngörücüsü olduğunu göstermektedir. Bu bulgular, sepsis yönetiminde beslenme durumunun değerlendirilmesi ve iyileştirilmesinin önemini vurgulamaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Elmas, D., İnce, M. S. (2025). The role of Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index in sepsis-related mortality in intensive care. Journal of Health Sciences and Medicine, Volume: 8 Issue: 2. https://doi.org/10.32322/jhsm.1592706

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Angus DC, van der Poll T. Severe sepsis and septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(9):840-851. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1208623
  2. Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, et al. The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (sepsis-3). JAMA. 2016; 315(8):801-810. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.0287
  3. Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et.al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition-a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. Clin Nutr. 2019;38(1):1-9. doi:10.1016/j.clnu.2018. 08.002
  4. Bouillanne O, Morineau G, Dupant C, et al. Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index: a new index for evaluating at-risk elderly medical patients. Am J Clin Nutr. 2005;82(4):777-783. doi:10.1093/ajcn/82.4.777
  5. Bauer JM, Kaiser MJ, Anthony P, Guigoz Y, Sieber CC. The mini nutritional assessment-its history, today’s practice, and future perspectives. Nutr Clin Pract. 2008;23(4):388-396. doi:10.1177/0884533608321132
  6. Stratton RJ, Hackston A, Longmore D, et al. Malnutrition in hospital outpatients and inpatients: prevalence, concurrent validity and ease of use of the ‘malnutrition universal screening tool’ (‘MUST’) for adults. Br J Nutr. 2004;92(5):799-808. doi:10.1079/bjn20041258
  7. Lee JS, Choi HS, Ko YG, Yun DH. Performance of the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index in predicting 28-day hospital mortality in older adult patients with sepsis. Clin Nutr. 2013;32:843-848. doi:10.1016/j.clnu.2013.01.007
  8. Durán Alert P, Milà Villarroel R, Formiga F, Virgili Casas N, Vilarasau Farré C. Assessing risk screening methods of malnutrition in geriatric patients: mini nutritional assessment (MNA) versus Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI). Nutr Hosp. 2012;27(2):590-598. doi:10. 1590/S0212-16112012000200036
  9. Haas M, Lein A, Fuereder T, et al. The Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) as a prognostic biomarker for immune checkpoint inhibitor response in recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck cancer. Nutrients. 2023;15(4):880. doi:10.3390/nu15040880
  10. Xie H, Tang S, Wei L, Gan J. Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index as a predictor of complications and long-term outcomes in patients with gastrointestinal malignancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Cell Int. 2020;20(1):530. doi:10.1186/s12935-020-01628-7
  11. Li H, Cen K, Sun W, Feng B. Prognostic value of geriatric nutritional risk index in elderly patients with heart failure: a meta-analysis. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2021;33(6):1477-1486. doi:10.1007/s40520-020-01656-3
  12. Yamada S, Yamamoto S, Fukuma S, Nakano T, Tsuruya K, Inaba M. Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) and Creatinine Index equally predict the risk of mortality in hemodialysis patients: J-DOPPS. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):5756. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-62720-6
  13. Zhao D, Zhou D, Li T, Wang C, Fei S. The relationship between Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) and in-hospital mortality in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI). BMC Anesthesiol. 2024;24(1): 313. doi:10.1186/s12871-024-02689-1
  14. Plauth M, Sulz I, Viertel M, et al. Phase angle is a stronger predictor of hospital outcome than subjective global assessment-results from the prospective dessau hospital malnutrition study. Nutrients. 2022;14(9): 1780. doi:10.3390/nu14091780
  15. Cereda E, Pedrolli C, Zagami A, et al. Nutritional screening and mortality in newly institutionalised elderly: a comparison between the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index and the mini nutritional assessment. Clin Nutr. 2011;30(6):793-798. doi:10.1016/j.clnu.2011.04.006