COMPARISON OF THE PREDICTIVE PERFORMANCE OF CARDIOGENIC SHOCK SCORES IN A REAL-WORLD LATIN AMERICA COUNTRY

Author:

Ortega-Hernández Jorge1,González-Pacheco Héctor1,Gopar-Nieto Rodrigo1,Araiza-Garaygordobil Diego1,Sierra Lara-Martínez Daniel1,Briseño De La Cruz José Luis1,Mendoza-García Salvador1,Altamirano-Castillo Alfredo1,Montañez-Orozco Álvaro1,Baeza-Herrera Luis Augusto1,Hernández-Montfort Jaime2,Aguilar-Montaño Klayder Melissa1,Soliz Uriona Luis Alejandro1,Meza López Jesús Ángel Freddy1,Lizano Loría Carlos Alonso1,Arias-Mendoza Alexandra1

Affiliation:

1. Coronary Care Unit, Instituto Nacional de Cardiología Ignacio Chávez, México City, México

2. Advanced Heart Failure and Recovery Program for Central Texas Baylor Scott and White Health, Round Rock, Texas

Abstract

ABSTRACT Background: Mortality in cardiogenic shock (CS) is up to 40%, and although risk scores have been proposed to stratify and assess mortality in CS, they have been shown to have inconsistent performance. The purpose was to compare CS prognostic scores and describe their performance in a real-world Latin American country. Methods: We included 872 patients with CS. The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI), CARDSHOCK, IABP-Shock II, Cardiogenic Shock Score, age-lactate-creatinine score, Get-With-The-Guidelines Heart Failure score, and Acute Decompensated Heart Failure National Registry scores were calculated. Decision curve analyses were performed to evaluate the net benefit of the different scoring systems. Logistic and Cox regression analyses were applied to construct area under the curve (AUC) statistics, this last one against time using the Inverse Probability of Censoring Weighting method, for in-hospital mortality prediction. Results: When logistic regression was applied, the scores had a moderate-good performance in the overall cohort that was higher AUC in the CARDSHOCK (c = 0.666). In acute myocardial infarction-related CS (AMI-CS), CARDSHOCK still is the highest AUC (0.68). In non–AMI-CS only SCAI (0.668), CARDSHOCK (0.533), and IABP-SHOCK II (0.636) had statistically significant values. When analyzed over time, significant differences arose in the AUC, suggesting that a time-sensitive component influenced the prediction of mortality. The highest AUC was for the CARDSHOCK score (0.658), followed by SCAI (0.622). In AMI-CS-related, the highest AUC was for the CARDSHOCK score (0.671). In non–AMI-CS, SCAI was the best (0.642). Conclusions: Clinical scores show a time-sensitive AUC, suggesting that performance could be influenced by time and the type of CS. Understanding the temporal influence on the scores could provide a better prediction and be a valuable tool in CS.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine,Emergency Medicine

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3