Suppr超能文献

复合性肺栓塞休克指数与肺栓塞患者不良预后的风险

Composite Pulmonary Embolism Shock Score and Risk of Adverse Outcomes in Patients With Pulmonary Embolism.

机构信息

Division of Cardiovascular Medicine (R.S.Z., E.Y., J.M.H., S.B.), New York University.

Department of Medicine (P.Z.), New York University.

出版信息

Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2024 Aug;17(8):e014088. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.124.014088. Epub 2024 Jul 12.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

In hemodynamically stable patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE), the Composite Pulmonary Embolism Shock (CPES) score predicts normotensive shock. However, it is unknown if CPES predicts adverse clinical outcomes. The objective of this study was to determine whether the CPES score predicts in-hospital mortality, resuscitated cardiac arrest, or hemodynamic deterioration.

METHODS

Patients with acute intermediate-risk PE admitted from October 2016 to July 2019 were included. CPES was calculated for each patient. The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital mortality, resuscitated cardiac arrest, or hemodynamic decompensation. Secondary outcomes included individual components of the primary outcome. The association of CPES with primary and secondary outcomes was evaluated.

RESULTS

Among the 207 patients with intermediate-risk PE (64.7% with intermediate-high risk PE), 29 (14%) patients had a primary outcome event. In a multivariable model, a higher CPES score was associated with a worse primary composite outcome (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.81 [95% CI, 1.29-2.54]; =0.001). Moreover, a higher CPES score predicted death (aHR, 1.76 [95% CI, 1.04-2.96]; =0.033), resuscitated cardiac arrest (aHR, 1.99 [95% CI, 1.17-3.38]; =0.011), and hemodynamic decompensation (aHR, 1.96 [95% CI, 1.34-2.89]; =0.001). A high CPES score (≥3) was associated with the worse primary outcome when compared with patients with a low CPES score (22% versus 2.4%; =0.003; aHR, 6.48 [95% CI, 1.49-28.04]; =0.012). CPES score provided incremental prognostic value for the prediction of primary outcome over baseline demographics and European Society of Cardiology intermediate-risk subcategories (global Χ value increased from 0.63 to 1.39 to 13.69; =0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with acute intermediate-risk PE, the CPES score effectively risk stratifies and prognosticates patients for the prediction of clinical events and provides incremental value over baseline demographics and European Society of Cardiology intermediate-risk subcategories.

摘要

背景

在血流动力学稳定的急性肺栓塞(PE)患者中,复合肺栓塞休克(CPES)评分可预测血压正常性休克。然而,CPES 是否可预测不良临床结局尚不清楚。本研究旨在确定 CPES 评分是否可预测院内死亡率、复苏性心脏骤停或血流动力学恶化。

方法

纳入 2016 年 10 月至 2019 年 7 月期间因急性中危 PE 入院的患者。为每位患者计算 CPES。主要结局是院内死亡率、复苏性心脏骤停或血流动力学恶化的复合结局。次要结局包括主要结局的各个组成部分。评估 CPES 与主要和次要结局的关系。

结果

在 207 例中危 PE 患者(64.7%为中高危 PE)中,29 例(14%)患者发生主要结局事件。在多变量模型中,CPES 评分越高,主要复合结局越差(校正后的危险比[HR],1.81[95%CI,1.29-2.54];=0.001)。此外,CPES 评分越高,死亡(HR,1.76[95%CI,1.04-2.96];=0.033)、复苏性心脏骤停(HR,1.99[95%CI,1.17-3.38];=0.011)和血流动力学恶化(HR,1.96[95%CI,1.34-2.89];=0.001)的风险越高。与 CPES 评分低的患者相比,CPES 评分高(≥3)与较差的主要结局相关(22%比 2.4%;=0.003;HR,6.48[95%CI,1.49-28.04];=0.012)。CPES 评分在预测主要结局方面比基线人口统计学和欧洲心脏病学会中危亚组提供了额外的预后价值(全局 Χ 值从 0.63 增加到 1.39 再增加到 13.69;=0.005)。

结论

在急性中危 PE 患者中,CPES 评分可有效对患者进行风险分层和预后评估,预测临床事件,并在基线人口统计学和欧洲心脏病学会中危亚组的基础上提供额外价值。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验