Suppr超能文献

左心室辅助装置患者的选择:风险评分有帮助吗?

Left ventricular assist device patient selection: do risk scores help?

作者信息

Ravichandran Ashwin K, Cowger Jennifer

机构信息

St. Vincent Heart Center of Indiana, Indianapolis, IN 46260, USA.

出版信息

J Thorac Dis. 2015 Dec;7(12):2080-7. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2072-1439.2015.11.02.

Abstract

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.

摘要

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。

相似文献

1
Left ventricular assist device patient selection: do risk scores help?
J Thorac Dis. 2015 Dec;7(12):2080-7. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2072-1439.2015.11.02.
3
Left ventricular assist devices: an evidence-based analysis.
Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2004;4(3):1-69. Epub 2004 Mar 1.
4
[Palliative care in patients with left ventricular assist devices: systematic review].
Anaesthesist. 2021 Dec;70(12):1044-1050. doi: 10.1007/s00101-021-00967-y. Epub 2021 Apr 30.
5
Impact of concurrent surgical valve procedures in patients receiving continuous-flow devices.
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014 Feb;147(2):581-9; discussion 589. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2013.10.024.
7
Bridging to a Long-Term Ventricular Assist Device With Short-Term Mechanical Circulatory Support.
Artif Organs. 2018 Jun;42(6):589-596. doi: 10.1111/aor.13112. Epub 2018 Feb 23.
8
Use of left ventricular assist device (HeartMate II): a Singapore experience.
Artif Organs. 2014 Jul;38(7):543-8. doi: 10.1111/aor.12247. Epub 2014 Jan 7.

引用本文的文献

1
Is pectoralis muscle index a risk factor for mortality in left ventricular assist device patients?
Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992). 2022 Nov 25;68(12):1692-1697. doi: 10.1590/1806-9282.20220744. eCollection 2022.
3
Limitations of receiver operating characteristic curve on imbalanced data: Assist device mortality risk scores.
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2023 Apr;165(4):1433-1442.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2021.07.041. Epub 2021 Jul 30.
4
Creation and Validation of a Novel Sex-Specific Mortality Risk Score in LVAD Recipients.
J Am Heart Assoc. 2021 Apr 6;10(7):e020019. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.120.020019. Epub 2021 Mar 25.
5
2019 EACTS Expert Consensus on long-term mechanical circulatory support.
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2019 Aug 1;56(2):230-270. doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezz098.
6
A Bayesian Model to Predict Survival After Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation.
JACC Heart Fail. 2018 Sep;6(9):771-779. doi: 10.1016/j.jchf.2018.03.016. Epub 2018 Aug 8.
7
Impact of Center Left Ventricular Assist Device Volume on Outcomes After Implantation: An INTERMACS Analysis.
JACC Heart Fail. 2017 Oct;5(10):691-699. doi: 10.1016/j.jchf.2017.05.011. Epub 2017 Sep 6.

本文引用的文献

2
Validation of clinical scores for right ventricular failure prediction after implantation of continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices.
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2015 Dec;34(12):1595-603. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2015.05.005. Epub 2015 Jun 1.
4
Sixth INTERMACS annual report: a 10,000-patient database.
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2014 Jun;33(6):555-64. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2014.04.010. Epub 2014 Apr 21.
5
Pre-operative mortality risk assessment in patients with continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices: application of the HeartMate II risk score.
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2014 Jul;33(7):675-81. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2014.02.011. Epub 2014 Feb 14.
6
Frailty and outcomes after implantation of left ventricular assist device as destination therapy.
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2014 Apr;33(4):359-65. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2013.12.014. Epub 2013 Dec 27.
7
The MELD scoring system and the prediction of outcomes in heart failure patients: what we have learned from the hepatologists.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013 Jun 4;61(22):2262-3. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2013.02.064. Epub 2013 Apr 2.
8
Predicting survival in patients receiving continuous flow left ventricular assist devices: the HeartMate II risk score.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013 Jan 22;61(3):313-21. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2012.09.055. Epub 2012 Dec 19.
9
Use of an intrapericardial, continuous-flow, centrifugal pump in patients awaiting heart transplantation.
Circulation. 2012 Jun 26;125(25):3191-200. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.111.058412. Epub 2012 May 22.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验