Literature DB >> 30863575

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

Hee Sung Lee1, Hyoung Soo Kim2, Sun Hee Lee2, Song Am Lee3, Jae Joon Hwang3, Jae Bum Park3, Yo Han Kim4, Hyoung Ju Moon4, Woo Surng Lee4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Prediction of survival and weaning probability in VA ECMO (veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation) patients could be of great benefit for real-time decision making on VA ECMO initiation in critical ill patients. We investigated whether the SAPS II score would be a real-time determinant for VA ECMO initiation and could be a predictor of survival and weaning probability in patients on VA ECMO.
METHODS: Between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2014, VA ECMO was carried out on 135 adult patients suffering from primary cardiogenic shock. To avoid selection bias, we excluded respiratory failure patients treated with VV or other types of ECMO. Successful VA ECMO weaning was defined as weaning, followed by stable survival for more than 48 hours. Survival after VA ECMO was defined as successful weaning and treatment of the underlying medical condition, followed by discharge without any further events.
RESULTS: A total of 135 patients consisted of 41 women and 94 men, with a mean age of 59.4±16.5 years. Fifty-three patients had successful weaning, and 35 survived and were discharged uneventfully. Compared to the non-survivors, the survivors showed a lower SAPS II (67.77±20.79 vs. 90.29±13.31, P<0.001), a lower SOFA score (12.63±3.49 vs. 15.33±2.28, P<0.001), a lower predicted death rate (71.12±30.51 vs. 94.00±9.36, P<0.001), a higher initial ipH (7.14±0.22 vs. 6.98±0.15, P<0.001), and a lower initial lactate level (7.09±4.93 vs. 12.11±4.84, P<0.001). The average duration of hospital stay in the successful vs. failed weaning groups was 33.43±27.41 vs. 6.35±8.71 days, and the average duration of ICU stay in the successful vs. failed weaning groups was 20.60±16.88 vs. 5.39±5.95 days. By multivariate logistic regression analysis of initial parameters for VA ECMO assistance, the simplified acute physiology score II (SAPS II) (OR =1.1019, P=0.0389), ipH (OR =0.0010, P=0.0452), and hospital stay (OR =0.8140, P=0.001) had an association with in-hospital mortality on VA ECMO. The initial SAPS II score [area under the curve (AUC) =0.821] demonstrated significantly superior prediction of VA ECMO mortality than age (AUC =0.697), SOFA score (AUC =0.701), ipH (AUC =0.551), and the other parameters. By multivariable CoX regression analysis of survival, only the SAPS II score proved to have statistical significance (hazard ratio, 1.0423; 95% CI, 1.0083-1.0775; P=0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: Although the precise predictive scoring systems for VA ECMO still remains one of the most difficult challenges to ECMO physicians, the SAPS II score could provide valuable information on prognosis to patient himself, family members and caretakers, and might help physicians increase the survival rate and might avoid a waste of healthcare resources.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Extracorporeal circulation; cardiogenic shock; cardiopulmonary bypass; cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR); critical care; extracorporeal life support (ECLS); extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO); intensive care; outcome; simplified acute physiology score II (SAPS II); veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO)

Year:  2019        PMID: 30863575      PMCID: PMC6384379          DOI: 10.21037/jtd.2018.12.20

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Thorac Dis        ISSN: 2072-1439            Impact factor:   2.895


  22 in total

Review 1.  Contemporary extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for adult respiratory failure: life support in the new era.

Authors:  Graeme MacLaren; Alain Combes; Robert H Bartlett
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2011-12-07       Impact factor: 17.440

2.  Application of a mechanical heart and lung apparatus to cardiac surgery.

Authors:  J H GIBBON
Journal:  Minn Med       Date:  1954-03

3.  Early and late outcomes of 517 consecutive adult patients treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for refractory postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  Ardawan Julian Rastan; Andreas Dege; Matthias Mohr; Nicolas Doll; Volkmar Falk; Thomas Walther; Friedrich Wilhelm Mohr
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 5.209

4.  Ethical dilemmas of adult ECMO: emerging conceptual challenges.

Authors:  Kollengode Ramanathan; Matthew E Cove; Michael G Caleb; Kristine L K Teoh; Graeme Maclaren
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth       Date:  2014-10-23       Impact factor: 2.628

5.  Application of the sequential organ failure assessment score to cardiac surgical patients.

Authors:  Roberto Ceriani; Maurizio Mazzoni; Franco Bortone; Sara Gandini; Costantino Solinas; Giuseppe Susini; Oberdan Parodi
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 9.410

6.  A review of a newly established ECMO program in a university affiliated cardiac center.

Authors:  J Belohlávek; V Rohn; J Tosovsky; J Kunstyr; M Semrád; J Horák; M Lips; F Mlejnsky; I Vykydal; M Balík; M Strítesky; V Mrázek; A Klein; A Linhart; J Lindner
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino)       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 1.888

7.  Outcomes, long-term quality of life, and psychologic assessment of fulminant myocarditis patients rescued by mechanical circulatory support.

Authors:  Mariana Mirabel; Charles-Edouard Luyt; Pascal Leprince; Jean-Louis Trouillet; Philippe Léger; Alain Pavie; Jean Chastre; Alain Combes
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 7.598

8.  Efficacy and economic assessment of conventional ventilatory support versus extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for severe adult respiratory failure (CESAR): a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Giles J Peek; Miranda Mugford; Ravindranath Tiruvoipati; Andrew Wilson; Elizabeth Allen; Mariamma M Thalanany; Clare L Hibbert; Ann Truesdale; Felicity Clemens; Nicola Cooper; Richard K Firmin; Diana Elbourne
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2009-09-15       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  Impact of preexisting organ dysfunction on extracorporeal life support for non-postcardiotomy cardiopulmonary failure.

Authors:  Meng-Yu Wu; Pyng-Jing Lin; Feng-Chang Tsai; Yoa-Kuang Haung; Kuo-Sheng Liu; Feng-Chun Tsai
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2008-07-09       Impact factor: 5.262

10.  Mortality prediction using SAPS II: an update for French intensive care units.

Authors:  Jean Roger Le Gall; Anke Neumann; François Hemery; Jean Pierre Bleriot; Jean Pierre Fulgencio; Bernard Garrigues; Christian Gouzes; Eric Lepage; Pierre Moine; Daniel Villers
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2005-10-06       Impact factor: 9.097

View more
  4 in total

1.  Vasoactive Inotropic Score as a Prognostic Factor during (Cardio-) Respiratory ECMO.

Authors:  Stany Sandrio; Joerg Krebs; Eva Leonardy; Manfred Thiel; Jochen J Schoettler
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-04-24       Impact factor: 4.964

2.  Predictors of survival following veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in patients with acute myocardial infarction-related refractory cardiogenic shock: clinical and coronary angiographic factors.

Authors:  Hyoung Soo Kim; Kyoung-Ha Park; Sang Ook Ha; Sun Hee Lee; Hong-Mi Choi; Sung-Ai Kim; Sunghoon Park; Sang Ho Jo; Hyun-Sook Kim; Sang Jin Han; Woo Jung Park
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 2.895

3.  Predictors associated with mortality of extracorporeal life support therapy for acute heart failure: single-center experience with 679 patients.

Authors:  Sebastian D Sahli; Alexander Kaserer; Donat R Spahn; Markus J Wilhelm; Julia Braun; Maximilian Halbe; Yuliya Dahlem; Muriel A Spahn; Julian Rössler; Bernard Krüger; Francesco Maisano
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2022-06       Impact factor: 3.005

4.  Can levosimendan reduce ECMO weaning failure in cardiogenic shock?: a cohort study with propensity score analysis.

Authors:  Enrique Guilherme; Matthias Jacquet-Lagrèze; Matteo Pozzi; Felix Achana; Xavier Armoiry; Jean-Luc Fellahi
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2020-07-16       Impact factor: 9.097

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.