G Rizzi1, X Startseva1, M Wolfrum1, T F Lüscher1, F Ruschitzka1, G M Fröhlich1, F Enseleit2. 1. University Heart Center, Cardiology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. 2. University Heart Center, Cardiology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. Electronic address: frank.enseleit@usz.ch.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The quality of the donor heart and the individual risk of the recipient awaiting heart transplantation are difficult to assess. We investigated whether routinely used intensive care scoring systems can provide additional prognostic information on outcomes after heart transplantation. METHODS: A total of 114 consecutive patients who underwent heart transplantation were included. The Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II), the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II), and the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores were calculated for donors and recipients. Risk factors such as the donor's cause of death, donor's catecholamine use, dialysis status of the recipient, and smoking pattern of the donor and the recipient were assessed. The association of these parameters with mortality, length of stay on the intensive care unit, and need for invasive ventilation was investigated. RESULTS: The median APACHE II score of the donors was 20 (confidence interval [CI], 19-20), the median SAPS II score was 46 (CI, 45-48), and the median SOFA score was 10 (CI, 9-10). In contrast, the median scores of the recipients were as follows: APACHE II, 7 (CI, 6-8); SAPS II, 13 (CI, 12-14); and SOFA, 1 (CI, 1-2). None of the scores as calculated significantly predicted clinical outcome after transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: This study detected no prognostic impact of donor-related risk factors on outcome after heart transplantation. Our findings support the growing practice of also considering organs from donors with high-risk scores for heart transplantation.
BACKGROUND: The quality of the donor heart and the individual risk of the recipient awaiting heart transplantation are difficult to assess. We investigated whether routinely used intensive care scoring systems can provide additional prognostic information on outcomes after heart transplantation. METHODS: A total of 114 consecutive patients who underwent heart transplantation were included. The Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II), the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II), and the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores were calculated for donors and recipients. Risk factors such as the donor's cause of death, donor's catecholamine use, dialysis status of the recipient, and smoking pattern of the donor and the recipient were assessed. The association of these parameters with mortality, length of stay on the intensive care unit, and need for invasive ventilation was investigated. RESULTS: The median APACHE II score of the donors was 20 (confidence interval [CI], 19-20), the median SAPS II score was 46 (CI, 45-48), and the median SOFA score was 10 (CI, 9-10). In contrast, the median scores of the recipients were as follows: APACHE II, 7 (CI, 6-8); SAPS II, 13 (CI, 12-14); and SOFA, 1 (CI, 1-2). None of the scores as calculated significantly predicted clinical outcome after transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: This study detected no prognostic impact of donor-related risk factors on outcome after heart transplantation. Our findings support the growing practice of also considering organs from donors with high-risk scores for heart transplantation.