Medical Intensive Care Unit, University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Petersgraben 4, 4031 Basel, Switzerland; Medical Communication and psychosomatic medicine, University Hospital Basel, Klingelbergstrasse 23, 4031 Basel, Switzerland.
Medical Communication and psychosomatic medicine, University Hospital Basel, Klingelbergstrasse 23, 4031 Basel, Switzerland.
Resuscitation. 2019 Mar;136:21-29. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2018.10.022. Epub 2018 Nov 1.
Several scores are available to predict mortality and neurological outcome in cardiac arrest patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). The aim of the study was to externally validate the prognostic value of four previously published risk scores.
For this observational, single-center study, we prospectively included 349 consecutive adult cardiac arrest patients upon ICU admission. We calculated two cardiac arrest specific risk scores (OHCA and CAHP) and two general severity of illness scores (APACHE II and SAPS II). The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality. Secondary endpoints were neurological outcome at hospital discharge and 30-day mortality.
170 patients (49%) died until hospital discharge. All scores were independently associated with outcomes in logistic regression analysis and showed acceptable discrimination for in-hospital mortality with highest AUCs of the cardiac arrest specific risk scores (OHCA: 0.80 (95%CI 0.75-0.85) and CAHP: 0.84 (95%CI 0.79-0.88) compared to the severity of illness scores (APACHE II: 0.78 (95%CI 0.73-0.83) and SAPS II: 0.77 (95%CI 0.72-0.82). Results were robust in subgroup analysis except for worse performance in elderly patients (>75 years) and patients with respiratory cause of cardiac arrest. Results were similar for 30-days mortality and slightly higher for neurological outcome.
This study confirms the good prognostic performance of cardiac arrest specific scores to predict mortality and neurological outcomes in cardiac arrest patients. Routine use of OHCA or CAHP score helps to objectively risk stratify these vulnerable patients and thereby may improve therapeutic decisions.
有几种评分可用于预测入住重症监护病房(ICU)的心脏骤停患者的死亡率和神经结局。本研究的目的是外部验证四个先前发表的风险评分的预后价值。
这项观察性、单中心研究前瞻性纳入了 349 例连续成年心脏骤停患者。我们计算了两个心脏骤停特异性风险评分(OHCA 和 CAHP)和两个一般严重程度的疾病评分(APACHE II 和 SAPS II)。主要终点是院内死亡率。次要终点是出院时的神经功能结局和 30 天死亡率。
170 例患者(49%)在出院前死亡。所有评分在逻辑回归分析中均与结局独立相关,在院内死亡率方面具有可接受的区分能力,心脏骤停特异性风险评分的 AUC 最高(OHCA:0.80(95%CI 0.75-0.85)和 CAHP:0.84(95%CI 0.79-0.88),与严重程度评分(APACHE II:0.78(95%CI 0.73-0.83)和 SAPS II:0.77(95%CI 0.72-0.82)相比。除了年龄较大的患者(>75 岁)和心脏骤停的呼吸原因患者的表现更差外,亚组分析结果稳健。对于 30 天死亡率的结果相似,对于神经结局的结果略高。
这项研究证实了心脏骤停特异性评分在预测心脏骤停患者死亡率和神经结局方面的良好预后性能。常规使用 OHCA 或 CAHP 评分有助于客观地对这些脆弱患者进行风险分层,从而可能改善治疗决策。