Literature DB >> 25990694

Simple new risk score model for adult cardiac extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: simple cardiac ECMO score.

Graham Peigh1, Nicholas Cavarocchi1, Scott W Keith2, Hitoshi Hirose3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although the use of cardiac extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is increasing in adult patients, the field lacks understanding of associated risk factors. While standard intensive care unit risk scores such as SAPS II (simplified acute physiology score II), SOFA (sequential organ failure assessment), and APACHE II (acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II), or disease-specific scores such as MELD (model for end-stage liver disease) and RIFLE (kidney risk, injury, failure, loss of function, ESRD) exist, they may not apply to adult cardiac ECMO patients as their risk factors differ from variables used in these scores.
METHODS: Between 2010 and 2014, 73 ECMOs were performed for cardiac support at our institution. Patient demographics and survival were retrospectively analyzed. A new easily calculated score for predicting ECMO mortality was created using identified risk factors from univariate and multivariate analyses, and model discrimination was compared with other scoring systems.
RESULTS: Cardiac ECMO was performed on 73 patients (47 males and 26 females) with a mean age of 48 ± 14 y. Sixty-four percent of patients (47/73) survived ECMO support. Pre-ECMO SAPS II, SOFA, APACHE II, MELD, RIFLE, PRESERVE, and ECMOnet scores, were not correlated with survival. Univariate analysis of pre-ECMO risk factors demonstrated that increased lactate, renal dysfunction, and postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock were risk factors for death. Applying these data into a new simplified cardiac ECMO score (minimal risk = 0, maximal = 5) predicted patient survival. Survivors had a lower risk score (1.8 ± 1.2) versus the nonsurvivors (3.0 ± 0.99), P < 0.0001.
CONCLUSIONS: Common intensive care unit or disease-specific risk scores calculated for cardiac ECMO patients did not correlate with ECMO survival, whereas a new simplified cardiac ECMO score provides survival predictability.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cardiogenic shock; ECMO; Risk factors; Survival

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25990694     DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2015.04.044

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Surg Res        ISSN: 0022-4804            Impact factor:   2.192


  9 in total

Review 1.  Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock Interventional Approach to Management in the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratories.

Authors:  Behnam N Tehrani; Abdulla A Damluji; Wayne B Batchelor
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rev       Date:  2022

2.  A Simple Scoring System to Predict Survival after Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

Authors:  Berhane Worku; Sandi Khin; Mario Gaudino; Dimitrios Avgerinos; Ivan Gambardella; Marcus D'Ayala; Kumudha Ramasubbu; Iosif Gulkarov; Arash Salemi
Journal:  J Extra Corpor Technol       Date:  2019-09

3.  Clinical implications of the initial SAPS II in veno-arterial extracorporeal oxygenation.

Authors:  Hee Sung Lee; Hyoung Soo Kim; Sun Hee Lee; Song Am Lee; Jae Joon Hwang; Jae Bum Park; Yo Han Kim; Hyoung Ju Moon; Woo Surng Lee
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 2.895

4.  The modified SAVE score: predicting survival using urgent veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation within 24 hours of arrival at the emergency department.

Authors:  Wei-Cheng Chen; Kuo-Yang Huang; Chih-Wei Yao; Cing-Feng Wu; Shinn-Jye Liang; Chia-Hsiang Li; Chih-Yeh Tu; Hung-Jen Chen
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2016-10-22       Impact factor: 9.097

5.  Early Prediction of 3-month Survival of Patients in Refractory Cardiogenic Shock and Cardiac Arrest on Extracorporeal Life Support.

Authors:  Clément Delmas; Jean-Marie Conil; Simon Sztajnic; Bernard Georges; Caroline Biendel; Camille Dambrin; Michel Galinier; Vincent Minville; Olivier Fourcade; Stein Silva; Bertrand Marcheix
Journal:  Indian J Crit Care Med       Date:  2017-03

6.  Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) Strategies under Hemodynamic Support for Cardiogenic Shock: A Single-Center Experience with Two Patients.

Authors:  Talha Ahmed; Diljon Chahal; Ronson J Madathil; David Kaczorowski; Anuj Gupta
Journal:  Case Rep Cardiol       Date:  2020-05-28

7.  Retrospective study on the effects of the prognosis of patients treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation combined with continuous renal replacement therapy.

Authors:  Ping He; Shixin Zhang; Bingyang Hu; Wei Wu
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2018-12

8.  Clinical efficacy of direct or indirect left ventricular unloading during venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for primary cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  Steven Char; Justin Fried; Andrew Melehy; Sanket Mehta; Yuming Ning; Paul Kurlansky; Koji Takeda
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2021-06-18       Impact factor: 5.209

9.  Can we have a rationalized selection of intra-aortic balloon pump, Impella, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in the catheterization laboratory?

Authors:  Giulio Russo; Francesco Burzotta; Cristina Aurigemma; Daniela Pedicino; Enrico Romagnoli; Carlo Trani
Journal:  Cardiol J       Date:  2020-12-21       Impact factor: 2.737

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.