• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation survival: External validation of current predictive scoring systems focusing on influenza A etiology

J. Maca, V. Matousek, F. Bursa, O. Klementova, R. Hanak, M. Burda, P. Sevcik, J. Rulisek

. 2021 ; 45 (8) : 881-892. [pub] 20210419

Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, multicentrická studie, validační studie

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc22003971

Despite increasing clinical experience with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), its optimal indications remain unclear. Here, we externally evaluated all currently available ECMO survival-predicting scoring systems and the APACHE II score in subjects undergoing veno-venous ECMO (VV ECMO) support due to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) with influenza (IVA) and non-influenza (n-IVA) etiologies. Our aim was to find the best scoring system for influenza A ARDS ECMO success prediction. Retrospective data were analyzed to assess the abilities of the PRESERVE, RESP, PRESET, ECMOnet, Roch, and APACHE II scores to predict patient outcome. Patients treated with veno-venous ECMO support for ARDS were divided into two groups: IVA and n-IVA etiologies. Parameters collected within 24 hours before ECMO initiation were used to calculate PRESERVE, RESP, PRESET, ECMOnet, Roch, and APACHE II scores. Compared to the IVA group, the n-IVA group exhibited significantly higher ICU, 28-day, and 6-month mortality (P = .043, .034, and .047, respectively). Regarding ECMO support success predictions, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.62 for PRESERVE, 0.44 for RESP, 0.57 for PRESET, and 0.67 for ECMOnet, and 0.62 for Roch calculated for all subjects according to the original papers. In the IVA group, APACHE II had the best predictive value for ICU, hospital, 28-day, and 6-month mortality (AUC values of 0.73, 0.73, 0.70, and 0.73, respectively). In the n-IVA group, APACHE II was the best predictor of survival in the ICU and hospital (AUC 0.54 and 0.57, respectively). From all possible ECMO survival scoring systems, the APACHE II score had the best predictive value for VV ECMO subjects with ARDS caused by influenza A-related pneumonia with a cut-off value of about 32 points.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc22003971
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20220127145659.0
007      
ta
008      
220113s2021 xxu f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1111/aor.13932 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)33534922
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxu
100    1_
$a Maca, Jan $u Department of Anesthesiology, Resuscitation and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Ostrava, Ostrava, Czech Republic
245    10
$a Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation survival: External validation of current predictive scoring systems focusing on influenza A etiology / $c J. Maca, V. Matousek, F. Bursa, O. Klementova, R. Hanak, M. Burda, P. Sevcik, J. Rulisek
520    9_
$a Despite increasing clinical experience with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), its optimal indications remain unclear. Here, we externally evaluated all currently available ECMO survival-predicting scoring systems and the APACHE II score in subjects undergoing veno-venous ECMO (VV ECMO) support due to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) with influenza (IVA) and non-influenza (n-IVA) etiologies. Our aim was to find the best scoring system for influenza A ARDS ECMO success prediction. Retrospective data were analyzed to assess the abilities of the PRESERVE, RESP, PRESET, ECMOnet, Roch, and APACHE II scores to predict patient outcome. Patients treated with veno-venous ECMO support for ARDS were divided into two groups: IVA and n-IVA etiologies. Parameters collected within 24 hours before ECMO initiation were used to calculate PRESERVE, RESP, PRESET, ECMOnet, Roch, and APACHE II scores. Compared to the IVA group, the n-IVA group exhibited significantly higher ICU, 28-day, and 6-month mortality (P = .043, .034, and .047, respectively). Regarding ECMO support success predictions, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.62 for PRESERVE, 0.44 for RESP, 0.57 for PRESET, and 0.67 for ECMOnet, and 0.62 for Roch calculated for all subjects according to the original papers. In the IVA group, APACHE II had the best predictive value for ICU, hospital, 28-day, and 6-month mortality (AUC values of 0.73, 0.73, 0.70, and 0.73, respectively). In the n-IVA group, APACHE II was the best predictor of survival in the ICU and hospital (AUC 0.54 and 0.57, respectively). From all possible ECMO survival scoring systems, the APACHE II score had the best predictive value for VV ECMO subjects with ARDS caused by influenza A-related pneumonia with a cut-off value of about 32 points.
650    _2
$a APACHE $7 D018806
650    _2
$a dospělí $7 D000328
650    12
$a mimotělní membránová oxygenace $7 D015199
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    _2
$a mortalita v nemocnicích $7 D017052
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a chřipka lidská $x mortalita $x terapie $x virologie $7 D007251
650    _2
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    _2
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
650    12
$a posouzení stavu pacienta $7 D062072
650    _2
$a prediktivní hodnota testů $7 D011237
650    _2
$a syndrom dechové tísně $x mortalita $x terapie $x virologie $7 D012128
650    _2
$a retrospektivní studie $7 D012189
650    _2
$a analýza přežití $7 D016019
651    _2
$a Česká republika $7 D018153
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a multicentrická studie $7 D016448
655    _2
$a validační studie $7 D023361
700    1_
$a Matousek, Vojtech $u Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative, and Intensive Care Medicine, Krajská zdravotní, a.s., Ústi nad Labem, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Bursa, Filip $u Department of Anesthesiology, Resuscitation and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Ostrava, Ostrava, Czech Republic $u Department of Intensive Care and Forensic Studies, Medical Faculty, University of Ostrava, Ostrava, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Klementova, Olga $u Department of Anesthesiology, Resuscitation and Intensive Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry of the Palacky University, Olomouc, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Hanak, Roman $u Department of Anesthesiology and Resuscitation, Trinec Podlesi Hospital, Praha, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Burda, Michal $u Institute for Research and Applications of Fuzzy Modeling, Centre of Excellence IT4Innovations, University of Ostrava, Ostrava, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Sevcik, Pavel $u Department of Anesthesiology, Resuscitation and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Ostrava, Ostrava, Czech Republic $u Department of Intensive Care and Forensic Studies, Medical Faculty, University of Ostrava, Ostrava, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Rulisek, Jan $u Department of Anesthesiology, Resuscitation and Intensive Care Medicine, General University Hospital in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic
773    0_
$w MED00000595 $t Artificial organs $x 1525-1594 $g Roč. 45, č. 8 (2021), s. 881-892
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33534922 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
990    __
$a 20220113 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20220127145655 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1751433 $s 1155120
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2021 $b 45 $c 8 $d 881-892 $e 20210419 $i 1525-1594 $m Artificial organs $n Artif Organs $x MED00000595
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20220113

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Možnosti archivace