BACKGROUND: Mortality of patients with haematological malignancies requiring intensive therapy is high. We wanted to establish reasons for intensive care unit (ICU) admission and treatment as well as outcome in subjects who required invasive mechanical ventilation. We were also interested in differences between ICU survivors and non-survivors at the moment of admission. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty patients (21 women and 19 men) were included in the study. Median of age was 42 (range 16-73) years. All patients required mechanical ventilation. We analysed age, gender, disease character (acute/chronic), diagnosed pneumonia, multiple organ failure (MOF), history of bone marrow transplantation, peripheral blood parameters (leukocyte, neutrocyte, erythrocyte and thrombocyte counts, haemoglobin level and haematocrit), mean arterial pressure (obtained through direct measurement), necessity of catecholamine administration and symptoms of the acute renal insufficiency at the moment of ICU admission. MAIN RESULTS: Sixty-five percent of patients died in ICU. Intergroup comparisons between survivors and non-survivors revealed statistically significant differences in the presence of neutropenia, thrombocyte count, mean arterial pressure and the necessity of catecholamines administration, as well as scores obtained through patient evaluation according to the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II), the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) and the New Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) scales. Multivariate logistic regression revealed only one independent risk factor for ICU mortality in the analysed group--SAPS II score (p=0.009). Calculated value of the unitary odds ratio was 1.065 (95% confidence interval 1.017-1.116). CONCLUSIONS: Mortality of patients with haematological malignancies requiring intensive mechanical ventilation remains high. Scoring with the SAPS II system was a useful tool for determination of ICU mortality risk in those patients.
BACKGROUND: Mortality of patients with haematological malignancies requiring intensive therapy is high. We wanted to establish reasons for intensive care unit (ICU) admission and treatment as well as outcome in subjects who required invasive mechanical ventilation. We were also interested in differences between ICU survivors and non-survivors at the moment of admission. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty patients (21 women and 19 men) were included in the study. Median of age was 42 (range 16-73) years. All patients required mechanical ventilation. We analysed age, gender, disease character (acute/chronic), diagnosed pneumonia, multiple organ failure (MOF), history of bone marrow transplantation, peripheral blood parameters (leukocyte, neutrocyte, erythrocyte and thrombocyte counts, haemoglobin level and haematocrit), mean arterial pressure (obtained through direct measurement), necessity of catecholamine administration and symptoms of the acute renal insufficiency at the moment of ICU admission. MAIN RESULTS: Sixty-five percent of patients died in ICU. Intergroup comparisons between survivors and non-survivors revealed statistically significant differences in the presence of neutropenia, thrombocyte count, mean arterial pressure and the necessity of catecholamines administration, as well as scores obtained through patient evaluation according to the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II), the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) and the New Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) scales. Multivariate logistic regression revealed only one independent risk factor for ICU mortality in the analysed group--SAPS II score (p=0.009). Calculated value of the unitary odds ratio was 1.065 (95% confidence interval 1.017-1.116). CONCLUSIONS: Mortality of patients with haematological malignancies requiring intensive mechanical ventilation remains high. Scoring with the SAPS II system was a useful tool for determination of ICU mortality risk in those patients.
Authors: A J Huaringa; F J Leyva; S A Giralt; J Blanco; J Signes-Costa; H Velarde; R E Champlin Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2000-04 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: F Brunet; J J Lanore; J F Dhainaut; F Dreyfus; J F Vaxelaire; S Nouira; T Giraud; A Armaganidis; J F Monsallier Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 1990 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: J Evison; P Rickenbacher; R Ritz; A Gratwohl; C Haberthür; S Elsasser; J R Passweg Journal: Swiss Med Wkly Date: 2001-12-22 Impact factor: 2.193
Authors: Dominique D Benoit; Koenraad H Vandewoude; Johan M Decruyenaere; Eric A Hoste; Francis A Colardyn Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Rohan Gupta; Neda Heshami; Chouhan Jay; Naveen Ramesh; Juhee Song; Xiudong Lei; Erfe Jean Rose; Kristen Carter; Dejka M Araujo; Robert S Benjamin; Shreyaskumar Patel; Joseph L Nates; Vinod Ravi Journal: Clin Sarcoma Res Date: 2016-07-19
Authors: William A Wood; Donna S Neuberg; J Colton Thompson; Martin S Tallman; Mikkael A Sekeres; Laurie H Sehn; Kenneth C Anderson; Aaron D Goldberg; Nathan A Pennell; Charlotte M Niemeyer; Emily Tucker; Kathleen Hewitt; Robert M Plovnick; Lisa K Hicks Journal: Blood Adv Date: 2020-12-08
Authors: Peter A Hampshire; Catherine A Welch; Lawrence A McCrossan; Katharine Francis; David A Harrison Journal: Crit Care Date: 2009-08-25 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: G Maschmeyer; J Carratalà; D Buchheidt; A Hamprecht; C P Heussel; C Kahl; J Lorenz; S Neumann; C Rieger; M Ruhnke; H Salwender; M Schmidt-Hieber; E Azoulay Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2014-05-15 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Michele Pohlen; Nils H Thoennissen; Jan Braess; Johannes Thudium; Christoph Schmid; Matthias Kochanek; Karl-Anton Kreuzer; Pia Lebiedz; Dennis Görlich; Hans U Gerth; Christian Rohde; Torsten Kessler; Carsten Müller-Tidow; Matthias Stelljes; Carsten Hullermann; Thomas Büchner; Günter Schlimok; Michael Hallek; Johannes Waltenberger; Wolfgang Hiddemann; Wolfgang E Berdel; Bernhard Heilmeier; Utz Krug Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-08-30 Impact factor: 3.240