[Construction and Validation of an In-hospital Mortality Risk Prediction Model for Patients Receiving VA-ECMO: a Retrospective Multi-center Case-control Study]

Overview

Journal Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao

Specialty General Medicine

Date 2024 Apr 10

PMID 38597440

Authors

Y Ge

J Li

H Liang

L Hou

L Zuo

J Lu

X Zhao

J Liang

L Peng

J Bao

J Duan

L Liu

K Mao

Z Zeng

H Hu

Z Chen

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the risk factors of in-hospital mortality and establish a risk prediction model for patients receiving venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO).

Methods: We retrospectively collected the data of 302 patients receiving VA-ECMO in ICU of 3 hospitals in Guangdong Province between January, 2015 and January, 2022 using a convenience sampling method. The patients were divided into a derivation cohort (201 cases) and a validation cohort (101 cases). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to analyze the risk factors for in-hospital death of these patients, based on which a risk prediction model was established in the form of a nomogram. The receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve, calibration curve and clinical decision curve were used to evaluate the discrimination ability, calibration and clinical validity of this model.

Results: The in-hospital mortality risk prediction model was established based the risk factors including hypertension (OR=3.694, 95% : 1.582-8.621), continuous renal replacement therapy (OR=9.661, 95%: 4.103-22.745), elevated Na2 + level (OR=1.048, 95% : 1.003-1.095) and increased hemoglobin level (OR=0.987, 95% : 0.977-0.998). In the derivation cohort, the area under the ROC curve (AUC) of this model was 0.829 (95% : 0.770-0.889), greater than those of the 4 single factors (all AUC < 0.800), APACHE II Score (AUC=0.777, 95% : 0.714-0.840) and the SOFA Score (AUC=0.721, 95% : 0.647-0.796). The results of internal validation showed that the AUC of the model was 0.774 (95% : 0.679-0.869), and the goodness of fit test showed a good fitting of this model (χ=4.629, >0.05).

Conclusion: The risk prediction model for in-hospital mortality of patients on VA-ECMO has good differentiation, calibration and clinical effectiveness and outperforms the commonly used disease severity scoring system, and thus can be used for assessing disease severity and prognostic risk level in critically ill patients.

References

Schmidt M, Burrell A, Roberts L, Bailey M, Sheldrake J, Rycus P . Predicting survival after ECMO for refractory cardiogenic shock: the survival after veno-arterial-ECMO (SAVE)-score. Eur Heart J. 2015; 36(33):2246-56. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv194. View

Gartman E, Casserly B, Martin D, Ward N . Using serial severity scores to predict death in ICU patients: a validation study and review of the literature. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2009; 15(6):578-82. DOI: 10.1097/MCC.0b013e328332f50c. View

Akin S, Caliskan K, Soliman O, Muslem R, Guven G, van Thiel R . A novel mortality risk score predicting intensive care mortality in cardiogenic shock patients treated with veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. J Crit Care. 2019; 55:35-41. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2019.09.017. View

Cao X, Zhao Z, Kang Y, Tian Y, Song Y, Wang L . The burden of cardiovascular disease attributable to high systolic blood pressure across China, 2005-18: a population-based study. Lancet Public Health. 2022; 7(12):e1027-e1040. DOI: 10.1016/S2468-2667(22)00232-8. View

Wengenmayer T, Duerschmied D, Graf E, Chiabudini M, Benk C, Muhlschlegel S . Development and validation of a prognostic model for survival in patients treated with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: the PREDICT VA-ECMO score. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. 2018; 8(4):350-359. DOI: 10.1177/2048872618789052. View

Lin J, Hu F, Curhan G . Associations of diet with albuminuria and kidney function decline. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2010; 5(5):836-43. PMC: 2863979. DOI: 10.2215/CJN.08001109. View

Koomans H, Roos J, Dorhout Mees E, Delawi I . Sodium balance in renal failure. A comparison of patients with normal subjects under extremes of sodium intake. Hypertension. 1985; 7(5):714-21. DOI: 10.1161/01.hyp.7.5.714. View

Messerli F, Williams B, Ritz E . Essential hypertension. Lancet. 2007; 370(9587):591-603. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61299-9. View

Becher P, Twerenbold R, Schrage B, Schmack B, Sinning C, Fluschnik N . Risk prediction of in-hospital mortality in patients with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for cardiopulmonary support: The ECMO-ACCEPTS score. J Crit Care. 2020; 56:100-105. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2019.12.013. View

10.

Tsangaris A, Alexy T, Kalra R, Kosmopoulos M, Elliott A, Bartos J . Overview of Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (VA-ECMO) Support for the Management of Cardiogenic Shock. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2021; 8:686558. PMC: 8292640. DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2021.686558. View

11.

Choi K, Yang J, Park T, Lee J, Song Y, Hahn J . Risk Prediction Model of In-hospital Mortality in Patients With Myocardial Infarction Treated With Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation. Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed). 2018; 72(9):724-731. DOI: 10.1016/j.rec.2018.06.010. View

12.

Moons K, Altman D, Vergouwe Y, Royston P . Prognosis and prognostic research: application and impact of prognostic models in clinical practice. BMJ. 2009; 338:b606. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.b606. View

13.

Wannamethee S, Shaper A, Lennon L, Papacosta O, Whincup P . Mild hyponatremia, hypernatremia and incident cardiovascular disease and mortality in older men: A population-based cohort study. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2015; 26(1):12-9. PMC: 4714622. DOI: 10.1016/j.numecd.2015.07.008. View

14.

Vincent J, Opal S, Marshall J . Ten reasons why we should NOT use severity scores as entry criteria for clinical trials or in our treatment decisions. Crit Care Med. 2009; 38(1):283-7. DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181b785a2. View

15.

Paden M, Conrad S, Rycus P, Thiagarajan R . Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Registry Report 2012. ASAIO J. 2013; 59(3):202-10. DOI: 10.1097/MAT.0b013e3182904a52. View

16.

Pavasini R, Cirillo C, Campo G, Nobre Menezes M, Biscaglia S, Tonet E . Extracorporeal Circulatory Support in Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Crit Care Med. 2017; 45(11):e1173-e1183. DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002692. View

17.

Beck D, Taylor B, Millar B, Smith G . Prediction of outcome from intensive care: a prospective cohort study comparing Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II and III prognostic systems in a United Kingdom intensive care unit. Crit Care Med. 1997; 25(1):9-15. DOI: 10.1097/00003246-199701000-00006. View

18.

Moons K, Kengne A, Grobbee D, Royston P, Vergouwe Y, Altman D . Risk prediction models: II. External validation, model updating, and impact assessment. Heart. 2012; 98(9):691-8. DOI: 10.1136/heartjnl-2011-301247. View

19.

Nunez J, Gosling A, OGara B, Kennedy K, Rycus P, Abrams D . Bleeding and thrombotic events in adults supported with venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: an ELSO registry analysis. Intensive Care Med. 2021; 48(2):213-224. PMC: 9178906. DOI: 10.1007/s00134-021-06593-x. View

20.

Bjelic M, Kumar N, Gu Y, Chase K, Paic F, Gosev I . Cause of In-Hospital Death After Weaning from Venoarterial-Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation. J Intensive Care Med. 2022; 37(12):1545-1552. DOI: 10.1177/08850666221086839. View