Ravichandran Ashwin K, Cowger Jennifer
St. Vincent Heart Center of Indiana, Indianapolis, IN 46260, USA.
J Thorac Dis. 2015 Dec;7(12):2080-7. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2072-1439.2015.11.02.
Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) and left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation is becoming increasingly utilized in the advanced heart failure (HF) population. Until further developments are made in this continually evolving field, the need for appropriate patient selection is fueled by our knowledge that the less sick do better. Due to the evolution of MCS technology, and the importance of patient selection to outcomes, risk scores and classification schemes have been developed to provide a structure for medical decision making. As clinical experience grows, technology improves, and further favorable clinical characteristics are identified, it is incumbent upon the HF community to continually hone these instruments. The magnitude of such tools cannot be understated when it comes to aiding in the informed consent and shared-decision making process for patients, families, and the healthcare team. Many risk models that have attempted to address which groups of patients will be successful focus on short term mortality and not long term survival or quality of life. The benefits and pitfalls of these models and their potential implications for patient selection and MCS therapy will be reviewed here.
机械循环支持(MCS)和左心室辅助装置(LVAD)植入在晚期心力衰竭(HF)患者中越来越常用。在这个不断发展的领域取得进一步进展之前,鉴于我们了解病情较轻者预后较好,因此需要进行适当的患者选择。由于MCS技术的发展以及患者选择对治疗结果的重要性,已经开发了风险评分和分类方案,为医疗决策提供框架。随着临床经验的积累、技术的进步以及更多有利临床特征的发现,HF领域有责任不断完善这些工具。在帮助患者、家属和医疗团队进行知情同意和共同决策过程中,这些工具的重要性不可低估。许多试图确定哪些患者群体治疗会成功的风险模型都侧重于短期死亡率,而非长期生存率或生活质量。本文将对这些模型的利弊及其对患者选择和MCS治疗的潜在影响进行综述。