Blood purification · 2023
Extracorporeal Blood Purification with CytoSorb in 359 Critically Ill Patients.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
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.
Pieri Marina, Bonizzoni Matteo A, Belletti Alessandro, Calabrò Maria G, Fominskiy Evgeny, Nardelli Pasquale, Ortalda Alessandro, Scandroglio Anna M
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Critically ill patients with inflammatory dysregulation and organ disfunction may benefit from blood purification, although the use of this technique has not been described in large case series. We evaluated clinical outcomes and survival in high-risk intensive care unit (ICU) patients who underwent extracorporeal blood purification.
METHODS: 359 consecutive ICU patients treated with CytoSorb were included.
RESULTS: Main admission diagnoses were 120 (34%) refractory cardiac arrest under mechanical chest compression; 101 (28%) profound cardiogenic shock; 81 (23%) post-cardiotomy cardiogenic shock; and 37 (10%) respiratory failure. Fifteen patients (4%) were positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection. We observed 49% 30-day mortality, 57% ICU mortality, and 62% hospital mortality, all lower than the 71% mortality predicted by SAPS II and 68% predicted by SOFA score. Parameters of shock and organ failure, above all vasoactive inotropic score, reduced during CytoSorb treatment. Multivariable analysis identified SAPS II, lactate dehydrogenase, ICU stay duration, vasoactive inotropic score, lactates, intra-aortic counterpulsation on top of VA-ECMO, and total bilirubin as predictors of mortality. No CytoSorb-related complications occurred.
CONCLUSION: CytoSorb treatment was effective in reducing laboratory parameters of shock and vasoactive inotropic score with possible survival implications in a large population of critically ill patients.
METHODS: 359 consecutive ICU patients treated with CytoSorb were included.
RESULTS: Main admission diagnoses were 120 (34%) refractory cardiac arrest under mechanical chest compression; 101 (28%) profound cardiogenic shock; 81 (23%) post-cardiotomy cardiogenic shock; and 37 (10%) respiratory failure. Fifteen patients (4%) were positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection. We observed 49% 30-day mortality, 57% ICU mortality, and 62% hospital mortality, all lower than the 71% mortality predicted by SAPS II and 68% predicted by SOFA score. Parameters of shock and organ failure, above all vasoactive inotropic score, reduced during CytoSorb treatment. Multivariable analysis identified SAPS II, lactate dehydrogenase, ICU stay duration, vasoactive inotropic score, lactates, intra-aortic counterpulsation on top of VA-ECMO, and total bilirubin as predictors of mortality. No CytoSorb-related complications occurred.
CONCLUSION: CytoSorb treatment was effective in reducing laboratory parameters of shock and vasoactive inotropic score with possible survival implications in a large population of critically ill patients.