MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1016/j.healun.2015.05.005

Медицинская библиотека · The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation · 2015

Validation of clinical scores for right ventricular failure prediction after implantation of continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices.

Kalogeropoulos Andreas P, Kelkar Anita, Weinberger Jeremy F, Morris Alanna A, Georgiopoulou Vasiliki V, Markham David W, Butler Javed, Vega J David, Smith Andrew L

СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАВалидационное исследованиеПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

Several clinical prediction schemes for right ventricular failure (RVF) risk after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation have been developed in both the pulsatile- and continuous-flow LVAD eras. The performance of these models has not been evaluated systematically in a continuous-flow LVAD cohort.

METHODS

We evaluated 6 clinical RVF prediction models (Michigan, Penn, Utah, Kormos et al, CRITT, Pittsburgh Decision Tree) in 116 patients (age 51 ± 13 years; 41.4% white and 56.0% black; 66.4% men; 56.0% bridge to transplant, 37.1% destination therapy, 17.4% bridge to decision) who received a continuous-flow LVAD (HeartMate II: 79 patients, HeartWare: 37 patients) between 2008 and 2013.

RESULTS

Overall, 37 patients (31.9%) developed RVF, defined: as pulmonary vasodilator use for ≥48 hours or inotrope use for ≥14 days post-operatively; re-institution of inotropes; multi-organ failure due to RVF; or need for mechanical RV support. Median (Quartile 1 to Quartile 3) time to initial discontinuation of inotropes was 6 (range 4 to 8) days. Among scores, the Michigan score reached significance for RVF prediction but discrimination was modest (C = 0.62 [95% CI 0.52 to 0.72], p = 0.021; positive predictive value [PPV] 60.0%; negative predictive value [NPV] 75.8%), followed by CRITT (C = 0.60 [95% CI 0.50 to 0.71], p = 0.059; PPV 40.5%; NPV 72.2%). Other models did not significantly discriminate RVF. The newer, INTERMACS 3.0 definition for RVF, which includes inotropic support beyond 7 days, was reached by 57 patients (49.1%). The Kormos model performed best with this definition (C = 0.62 [95% CI 0.54 to 0.71], p = 0.005; PPV 64.3%; NPV 59.5%), followed by Penn (C = 0.61), Michigan (C = 0.60) and CRITT (C = 0.60), but overall score performance was modest.

CONCLUSION

Current schemes for post-LVAD RVF risk prediction perform only modestly when applied to external populations.

Для цитирования: Kalogeropoulos Andreas P, Kelkar Anita, Weinberger Jeremy F, Morris Alanna A, Georgiopoulou Vasiliki V, Markham David W, Butler Javed, Vega J David, Smith Andrew L. Validation of clinical scores for right ventricular failure prediction after implantation of continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices.. The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation. 2015. DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2015.05.005.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.