Literature DB >> 19932256

Evaluation of risk indices in continuous-flow left ventricular assist device patients.

Justin M Schaffer1, Jeremiah G Allen, Eric S Weiss, Nishant D Patel, Stuart D Russell, Ashish S Shah, John V Conte.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Leitz-Miller (LM), Columbia (COL), Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II), Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS), and Seattle Heart Failure Model (SHFM) risk scores have been used to risk stratify patients with pulsatile-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVAD). We assessed the predictive ability of these scores in a cohort of continuous-flow LVAD patients.
METHODS: Preoperative scores were calculated from prospective data of patients who received continuous-flow LVADs between June 2000 and May 2009. Cox proportional hazard analysis assessed the effect of preoperative variables and scores on 30-day, 90-day, and 1-year mortality. Patients were stratified by score into low- and high-risk groups. Survival was modeled using the Kaplan-Meier method.
RESULTS: During the study period, 86 continuous-flow LVADs were implanted. The mean (+/- standard deviation) preoperative scores were: COL, 1.05 +/- 1.59; LM, 11.9 +/- 5.4; APACHE II, 15.6 +/- 4.3; INTERMACS, 2.64 +/- 1.01; and SHFM, 2.97 +/- 1 .42. On univariate analysis, the SHFM score best differentiated low- and high-risk patients at all mortality end points; the INTERMACS and APACHE II scores were predictive for 90-day and 1-year mortality. On multivariable analysis, SHFM (hazard ratio [HR], 1.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02 to 2.21; p = 0.04) and APACHE II (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.21; p = 0.04) predicted 1-year mortality.
CONCLUSIONS: Among the LM, COL, APACHE II, INTERMACS, and SHFM scores, the best predictor of mortality in a single institutional cohort of continuous-flow LVAD patients was the SHFM score.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19932256     DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2009.08.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg        ISSN: 0003-4975            Impact factor:   4.330


  11 in total

1.  A Classification Approach for Risk Prognosis of Patients on Mechanical Ventricular Assistance.

Authors:  Yajuan Wang; Carolyn Penstein Rosé; Antonio Ferreira; Dennis M McNamara; Robert L Kormos; James F Antaki
Journal:  Proc Int Conf Mach Learn Appl       Date:  2010-12-12

Review 2.  Renal dysfunction and chronic mechanical circulatory support: from patient selection to long-term management and prognosis.

Authors:  Meredith A Brisco; Jeffrey M Testani; Jennifer L Cook
Journal:  Curr Opin Cardiol       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 2.161

Review 3.  Left ventricular assist device-related infections: past, present and future.

Authors:  Sanjay Maniar; Sreekanth Kondareddy; Veli K Topkara
Journal:  Expert Rev Med Devices       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 3.166

Review 4.  Mechanical circulatory support as a bridge to transplant or for destination therapy.

Authors:  Satya S Shreenivas; J Eduardo Rame; Mariell Jessup
Journal:  Curr Heart Fail Rep       Date:  2010-12

Review 5.  Left ventricular assist device patient selection: do risk scores help?

Authors:  Ashwin K Ravichandran; Jennifer Cowger
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 2.895

6.  Ventricular assist device implant in the elderly is associated with increased, but respectable risk: a multi-institutional study.

Authors:  Pavan Atluri; Andrew B Goldstone; Dale M Kobrin; Jeffrey E Cohen; John W MacArthur; Jessica L Howard; Mariell L Jessup; J Eduardo Rame; Michael A Acker; Y Joseph Woo
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2013-05-31       Impact factor: 4.330

7.  Right ventricular dysfunction following continuous flow left ventricular assist device placement in 51 patients: predicators and outcomes.

Authors:  Siyamek Neragi-Miandoab; Daniel Goldstein; Ricardo Bello; Robert Michler; David D'Alessandro
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2012-06-27       Impact factor: 1.637

8.  Current status of mechanical circulatory support: a systematic review.

Authors:  Kyriakos Spiliopoulos; Gregory Giamouzis; George Karayannis; Dimos Karangelis; Stelios Koutsias; Andreas Kalogeropoulos; Vasiliki Georgiopoulou; John Skoularigis; Javed Butler; Filippos Triposkiadis
Journal:  Cardiol Res Pract       Date:  2012-08-26       Impact factor: 1.866

Review 9.  Left ventricular assist devices: a kidney's perspective.

Authors:  T R Tromp; N de Jonge; J A Joles
Journal:  Heart Fail Rev       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 4.214

10.  Extracorporeal life support prior to left ventricular assist device implantation leads to improvement of the patients INTERMACS levels and outcome.

Authors:  David Schibilsky; Christoph Haller; Bruno Lange; Barbara Schibilsky; Helene Haeberle; Peter Seizer; Meinrad Gawaz; Peter Rosenberger; Tobias Walker; Christian Schlensak
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-03-30       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.