Development and external validation of a parsimonious lactate-to-diastolic blood pressure ratio model for 28-day mortality risk stratification in septic shock: a retrospective two-cohort study - Summary - MDSpire

Development and external validation of a parsimonious lactate-to-diastolic blood pressure ratio model for 28-day mortality risk stratification in septic shock: a retrospective two-cohort study

  • By

  • Ziang Li

  • Wanglin Zhang

  • Kanlirong Wang

  • Tong Jin

  • Liqun Sun

  • June 15, 2026

  • 0 min

Share

Objective:

To develop and externally validate a model based on the lactate-to-invasive diastolic blood pressure ratio (LDR) for predicting 28-day mortality in septic shock patients with invasive arterial monitoring, emphasizing its potential impact on clinical decision-making.

Key Findings:
  • 28-day mortality was 29.7% in the development cohort and 26.0% in the validation cohort.
  • LDR × 100 showed AUCs of 0.726 (95% CI 0.657–0.786) and 0.714 (95% CI 0.674–0.753) for the development and validation cohorts, respectively.
  • LDR × 100 improved AUC compared to lactate alone, though the improvement was small in external validation (ΔAUC +0.029, 95% CI +0.006 to +0.051).
  • External validation showed calibration drift, indicating local recalibration is necessary for absolute risk estimates.
Interpretation:

LDR × 100 serves as a simple bedside marker for risk stratification in septic shock patients with invasive monitoring, particularly in the lactate gray zone, with implications for addressing calibration drift.

Limitations:
  • Calibration drift observed in external validation.
  • Selection bias due to exclusion of patients without invasive DBP measurements, which may affect generalizability.
  • Observational design necessitates prospective validation before clinical adoption.
Conclusion:

LDR × 100 is a complementary tool for risk assessment in septic shock patients with invasive monitoring, requiring further validation for clinical use, particularly due to calibration drift and selection bias.

Original Source(s)

Related Content