Dataset Information

Predicting survival in patients with acute decompensated heart failure complicated by cardiogenic shock.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS) has unique pathophysiological background requiring specific patient stratification, management and therapeutic targets. Accordingly, the aim of this study was to derive a simple stratification tool to predict survival in patients with ADHF complicated by CS.

Methods and results

Using logistic regression, univariable testing was performed to identify the variables potentially associated with 28-day mortality. We propose a new logistic model (ALC-Shock score) based on three easy parameters (age, serum creatinine and serum lactate at the ICU admission) as a powerful predictor of survival or successful bridge to heart replacement therapy at 28-day follow-up in this specific population. A multivariable analysis (logistic model) was performed to evaluate the association between selected variables and outcome (overall death at 28-day follow up). The score was then validated in a different cohort of 93 ADHF-CS patients and compared to a previous developed score (the Cardshock score).Overall, 28-day mortality was 34%. The ALC-shock score showed better discrimination (Area Under the Curve-AUC- 0.82; 95% CI 0.73-0.91) as compared to the Cardshock score (AUC 0.67; 95% CI 0.55-0.79) (p = 0.009) to predict 28-days overall mortality. In the validation cohort the AUC for the ALC-shock score was 0.66.

Conclusions

A simple score including age, lactates and creatinine on admission could be considered to predict short-term mortality in CS-ADHF patients in order to drive towards a treatment intensification.

SUBMITTER: Morici N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8188054 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLoop diuretics are an essential component of therapy for patients with acute decompensated heart failure, but there are few prospective data to guide their use.MethodsIn a prospective, double-blind, randomized trial, we assigned 308 patients with acute decompensated heart failure to receive furosemide administered intravenously by means of either a bolus every 12 hours or continuous infusion and at either a low dose (equivalent to the patient's previous oral dose) or a high dose (2.5 times the previous oral dose). The protocol allowed specified dose adjustments after 48 hours. The coprimary end points were patients' global assessment of symptoms, quantified as the area under the curve (AUC) of the score on a visual-analogue scale over the course of 72 hours, and the change in the serum creatinine level from baseline to 72 hours.ResultsIn the comparison of bolus with continuous infusion, there was no significant difference in patients' global assessment of symptoms (mean AUC, 4236±1440 and 4373±1404, respectively; P=0.47) or in the mean change in the creatinine level (0.05±0.3 mg per deciliter [4.4±26.5 μmol per liter] and 0.07±0.3 mg per deciliter [6.2±26.5 μmol per liter], respectively; P=0.45). In the comparison of the high-dose strategy with the low-dose strategy, there was a nonsignificant trend toward greater improvement in patients' global assessment of symptoms in the high-dose group (mean AUC, 4430±1401 vs. 4171±1436; P=0.06). There was no significant difference between these groups in the mean change in the creatinine level (0.08±0.3 mg per deciliter [7.1±26.5 μmol per liter] with the high-dose strategy and 0.04±0.3 mg per deciliter [3.5±26.5 μmol per liter] with the low-dose strategy, P=0.21). The high-dose strategy was associated with greater diuresis and more favorable outcomes in some secondary measures but also with transient worsening of renal function.ConclusionsAmong patients with acute decompensated heart failure, there were no significant differences in patients' global assessment of symptoms or in the change in renal function when diuretic therapy was administered by bolus as compared with continuous infusion or at a high dose as compared with a low dose. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00577135.).