Predicting Survival After VA-ECMO for Refractory Cardiogenic Shock: Validating the SAVE Score

被引:9
|
作者
Amin, Faizan [1 ,2 ]
Lombardi, Julia [1 ]
Alhussein, Mosaad [1 ,2 ]
Posada, Juan Duero [1 ,2 ]
Suszko, Adrian [1 ]
Koo, Margaret [3 ]
Fan, Eddy [4 ,5 ,6 ]
Ross, Heather [1 ,2 ]
Rao, Vivek [1 ]
Alba, Ana Carolina [1 ,2 ]
Billia, Filio [1 ,2 ,7 ]
机构
[1] Peter Munk Cardiac Ctr, Toronto, ON, Canada
[2] Ted Rogers Ctr Heart Res, Toronto, ON, Canada
[3] Univ Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
[4] Univ Toronto, Interdept Div Crit Care Med, Toronto, ON, Canada
[5] Univ Toronto, Inst Hlth Policy Management & Evaluat, Toronto, ON, Canada
[6] Univ Hlth Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
[7] Univ Hlth Network, PMB 11-135,200 Elizabeth St, Toronto, ON M5G 2N2, Canada
关键词
EXTRACORPOREAL MEMBRANE-OXYGENATION; HOSPITAL CARDIAC-ARREST; LIFE-SUPPORT; MORTALITY; OUTCOMES; ADULTS; COST;
D O I
10.1016/j.cjco.2020.09.011
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VAECMO) is used increasingly to support patients who are in cardiogenic shock. Due to the risk of complications, prediction models may aid in identifying patients who would benefit most from VA-ECMO. One such model is the Survival After Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (SAVE) score. Therefore, we wanted to validate the utility of the SAVE score in a contemporary cohort of adult patients. Methods: Retrospective data were extracted from electronic health records of 120 patients with cardiogenic shock supported with VAECMO between 2011 and 2018. The SAVE score was calculated foreach patient to predict survival to hospital discharge. We assessed the SAVE score calibration by comparing predicted vs observed survival at discharge. We assessed discrimination with the area under the receiver operating curve using logistic regression. Results: A total of 45% of patients survived to hospital discharge. Survivors had a significantly higher mean SAVE score (-9.3 +/- 4.1 in survivors vs -13.1 +/- 4.4, respectively; P = 0.001). SAVE score discrimination was adequate (c = 0.77; 95% confidence interval 0.690.86; P < 0.001). SAVE score calibration was limited, as observed survival rates for risk classes II-V were higher in our cohort (II: 67% vs 58%; III: 78% vs 42%; IV: 61% vs 30%; and V: 29% vs 18%). Conclusions: The SAVE score underestimates survival in a contemporary North American cohort of adult patients with cardiogenic shock. Its inaccurate performance could lead to denying ECMO support to patients deemed to be too high risk. Further studies are needed to validate additional predictive models for patients requiring VA-ECMO.
引用
收藏
页码:71 / 81
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Predicting survival after ECMO for refractory cardiogenic shock: the survival after veno-arterial-ECMO (SAVE)-score
    Schmidt, Matthieu
    Burrell, Aidan
    Roberts, Lloyd
    Bailey, Michael
    Sheldrake, Jayne
    Rycus, Peter T.
    Hodgson, Carol
    Scheinkestel, Carlos
    Cooper, D. Jamie
    Thiagarajan, Ravi R.
    Brodie, Daniel
    Pellegrino, Vincent
    Pilcher, David
    [J]. EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL, 2015, 36 (33) : 2246 - 2256
  • [2] Postcardiotomy VA-ECMO for refractory cardiogenic shock
    Michael Charlesworth
    Rajamiyer Venkateswaran
    Julian M. Barker
    Lee Feddy
    [J]. Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery, 12
  • [3] Postcardiotomy VA-ECMO for refractory cardiogenic shock
    Charlesworth, Michael
    Venkateswaran, Rajamiyer
    Barker, Julian M.
    Feddy, Lee
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CARDIOTHORACIC SURGERY, 2017, 12
  • [4] VA-ECMO improves survival in cardiogenic shock
    Robson A.
    [J]. Nature Reviews Cardiology, 2020, 17 (11) : 680 - 680
  • [5] Utility of the SAVE Score as a Predictor of Survival in Cardiogenic Shock Requiring VA-ECMO or Impella for Acute Mechanical Circulatory Support
    Kuchibhotla, Sudeep
    Esposito, Michele
    Zisa, David
    O'Kelly, Ryan
    Annamalai, Shiva
    Ghuloom, Adel
    Lussier, Leslie
    Breton, Catalina
    Rheude, Tobias
    Mullin, Andrew
    Kimmelstiel, Carey
    Kiernan, Michael
    Vest, Amanda
    Kapur, Navin
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2016, 68 (18) : B53 - B53
  • [6] Validation of SAVE score and the value of serum lactate in patients admitted for cardiogenic shock treated with VA-ECMO
    Presume, J.
    Gomes, D. A.
    Albuquerque, F.
    Lopes, P.
    Bello, A. R.
    Brizido, C.
    Strong, C.
    Ferreira, J.
    Mendes, M.
    Neves, J. P.
    Tralhao, A.
    [J]. EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL, 2023, 44
  • [7] Peripheral VA-ECMO with direct biventricular decompression for refractory cardiogenic shock
    Rao, Prashant
    Mosier, Jarrod
    Malo, Joshua
    Dotson, Vicky
    Mogan, Christopher
    Smith, Richard
    Keller, Roy
    Slepian, Marvin
    Khalpey, Zain
    [J]. PERFUSION-UK, 2018, 33 (06): : 493 - 495
  • [8] Lung Ultrasound for Cardiogenic Shock in VA-ECMO
    Rodriguez-Fanjul, Javier
    Moreno Hernando, Julio
    Sanchez-de-Toledo, Joan
    [J]. REVISTA ESPANOLA DE CARDIOLOGIA, 2018, 71 (05): : 393 - 393
  • [9] REPLY: Does VA-ECMO Plus Impella Work in Refractory Cardiogenic Shock?
    Schrage, Benedikt
    Westermann, Dirk
    [J]. JACC-HEART FAILURE, 2019, 7 (04) : 364 - 365
  • [10] VA-ECMO does not increase survival in MI-related cardiogenic shock
    Gregory B. Lim
    [J]. Nature Reviews Cardiology, 2023, 20 : 720 - 720