Cargando…

Validation of Prognostic Scores in Extracorporeal Life Support: A Multi-Centric Retrospective Study

Multiple prognostic scores have been developed for both veno-arterial (VA) and veno-venous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), mostly in single-center cohorts. The aim of this study was to compare and validate different prediction scores in a large multicenter ECMO-population. Methods:...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fisser, Christoph, Rincon-Gutierrez, Luis Alberto, Enger, Tone Bull, Taccone, Fabio Silvio, Broman, Lars Mikael, Belliato, Mirko, Nobile, Leda, Pappalardo, Federico, Malfertheiner, Maximilian V.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7912316/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33498825
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/membranes11020084
_version_ 1783656549138300928
author Fisser, Christoph
Rincon-Gutierrez, Luis Alberto
Enger, Tone Bull
Taccone, Fabio Silvio
Broman, Lars Mikael
Belliato, Mirko
Nobile, Leda
Pappalardo, Federico
Malfertheiner, Maximilian V.
author_facet Fisser, Christoph
Rincon-Gutierrez, Luis Alberto
Enger, Tone Bull
Taccone, Fabio Silvio
Broman, Lars Mikael
Belliato, Mirko
Nobile, Leda
Pappalardo, Federico
Malfertheiner, Maximilian V.
author_sort Fisser, Christoph
collection PubMed
description Multiple prognostic scores have been developed for both veno-arterial (VA) and veno-venous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), mostly in single-center cohorts. The aim of this study was to compare and validate different prediction scores in a large multicenter ECMO-population. Methods: Data from five ECMO centers included 300 patients on VA and 329 on VV ECMO support (March 2008 to November 2016). Different prognostic scores were compared between survivors and non-survivors: APACHE II, SOFA, SAPS II in all patients; SAVE, modified SAVE and MELD-XI in VA ECMO; RESP, PRESET, ROCH and PRESERVE in VV ECMO. Model performance was compared using receiver-operating-curve analysis and assessment of model calibration. Survival was assessed at intensive care unit discharge. Results: The main indication for VA ECMO was cardiogenic shock; overall survival was 51%. ICU survivors had higher Glasgow Coma Scale scores and pH, required cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) less frequently, had lower lactate levels and shorter ventilation time pre-ECMO at baseline. The best discrimination between survivors and non-survivors was observed with the SAPS II score (area under the curve [AUC] of 0.73 (95% CI 0.67–0.78)). The main indication for VV ECMO was pneumonia; overall survival was 60%. Lower PaCO(2), higher pH, lower lactate and lesser need for CPR were observed among survivors. The best discrimination between survivors and non-survivors was observed with the PRESET score (AUC 0.66 (95% CI 0.60–0.72)). Conclusion: The prognostic performance of most scores was moderate in ECMO patients. The use of such scores to decide about ECMO implementation in potential candidates should be discouraged.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7912316
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79123162021-02-28 Validation of Prognostic Scores in Extracorporeal Life Support: A Multi-Centric Retrospective Study Fisser, Christoph Rincon-Gutierrez, Luis Alberto Enger, Tone Bull Taccone, Fabio Silvio Broman, Lars Mikael Belliato, Mirko Nobile, Leda Pappalardo, Federico Malfertheiner, Maximilian V. Membranes (Basel) Article Multiple prognostic scores have been developed for both veno-arterial (VA) and veno-venous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), mostly in single-center cohorts. The aim of this study was to compare and validate different prediction scores in a large multicenter ECMO-population. Methods: Data from five ECMO centers included 300 patients on VA and 329 on VV ECMO support (March 2008 to November 2016). Different prognostic scores were compared between survivors and non-survivors: APACHE II, SOFA, SAPS II in all patients; SAVE, modified SAVE and MELD-XI in VA ECMO; RESP, PRESET, ROCH and PRESERVE in VV ECMO. Model performance was compared using receiver-operating-curve analysis and assessment of model calibration. Survival was assessed at intensive care unit discharge. Results: The main indication for VA ECMO was cardiogenic shock; overall survival was 51%. ICU survivors had higher Glasgow Coma Scale scores and pH, required cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) less frequently, had lower lactate levels and shorter ventilation time pre-ECMO at baseline. The best discrimination between survivors and non-survivors was observed with the SAPS II score (area under the curve [AUC] of 0.73 (95% CI 0.67–0.78)). The main indication for VV ECMO was pneumonia; overall survival was 60%. Lower PaCO(2), higher pH, lower lactate and lesser need for CPR were observed among survivors. The best discrimination between survivors and non-survivors was observed with the PRESET score (AUC 0.66 (95% CI 0.60–0.72)). Conclusion: The prognostic performance of most scores was moderate in ECMO patients. The use of such scores to decide about ECMO implementation in potential candidates should be discouraged. MDPI 2021-01-24 /pmc/articles/PMC7912316/ /pubmed/33498825 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/membranes11020084 Text en © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Fisser, Christoph
Rincon-Gutierrez, Luis Alberto
Enger, Tone Bull
Taccone, Fabio Silvio
Broman, Lars Mikael
Belliato, Mirko
Nobile, Leda
Pappalardo, Federico
Malfertheiner, Maximilian V.
Validation of Prognostic Scores in Extracorporeal Life Support: A Multi-Centric Retrospective Study
title Validation of Prognostic Scores in Extracorporeal Life Support: A Multi-Centric Retrospective Study
title_full Validation of Prognostic Scores in Extracorporeal Life Support: A Multi-Centric Retrospective Study
title_fullStr Validation of Prognostic Scores in Extracorporeal Life Support: A Multi-Centric Retrospective Study
title_full_unstemmed Validation of Prognostic Scores in Extracorporeal Life Support: A Multi-Centric Retrospective Study
title_short Validation of Prognostic Scores in Extracorporeal Life Support: A Multi-Centric Retrospective Study
title_sort validation of prognostic scores in extracorporeal life support: a multi-centric retrospective study
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7912316/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33498825
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/membranes11020084
work_keys_str_mv AT fisserchristoph validationofprognosticscoresinextracorporeallifesupportamulticentricretrospectivestudy
AT rincongutierrezluisalberto validationofprognosticscoresinextracorporeallifesupportamulticentricretrospectivestudy
AT engertonebull validationofprognosticscoresinextracorporeallifesupportamulticentricretrospectivestudy
AT tacconefabiosilvio validationofprognosticscoresinextracorporeallifesupportamulticentricretrospectivestudy
AT bromanlarsmikael validationofprognosticscoresinextracorporeallifesupportamulticentricretrospectivestudy
AT belliatomirko validationofprognosticscoresinextracorporeallifesupportamulticentricretrospectivestudy
AT nobileleda validationofprognosticscoresinextracorporeallifesupportamulticentricretrospectivestudy
AT pappalardofederico validationofprognosticscoresinextracorporeallifesupportamulticentricretrospectivestudy
AT malfertheinermaximilianv validationofprognosticscoresinextracorporeallifesupportamulticentricretrospectivestudy