Pulmonary Hypertension an Independent Risk Factor for Death in Intensive Care Unit: Correlation of Hemodynamic Factors with Mortality.

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Accounts of Chemical Research Pub Date : 2015-06-23 eCollection Date: 2015-01-01 DOI:10.4137/CCRPM.S22199
Ghulam Saydain, Aamir Awan, Palaniappan Manickam, Paul Kleinow, Safwan Badr
{"title":"Pulmonary Hypertension an Independent Risk Factor for Death in Intensive Care Unit: Correlation of Hemodynamic Factors with Mortality.","authors":"Ghulam Saydain,&nbsp;Aamir Awan,&nbsp;Palaniappan Manickam,&nbsp;Paul Kleinow,&nbsp;Safwan Badr","doi":"10.4137/CCRPM.S22199","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Critically ill patients with pulmonary hypertension (PH) pose additional challenges due to the existence of right ventricular (RV) dysfunction. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of hemodynamic factors on the outcome.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We reviewed the records of patients with a diagnosis of PH admitted to the intensive care unit. In addition to evaluating traditional hemodynamic parameters, we defined severe PH as right atrial pressure >20 mmHg, mean pulmonary artery pressure >55 mmHg, or cardiac index (CI) <2 L/min/m(2). We also defined the RV functional index (RFI) as pulmonary artery systolic pressure (PASP) adjusted for CI as PASP/CI; increasing values reflect RV dysfunction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-three patients (mean age 60 years, 72% women, 79% Blacks), were included in the study. Severe PH was present in 68% of patients who had higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (6.8 ± 3.3 vs 3.8 ± 1.6; P = 0.001) and overall in-hospital mortality (36% vs 6%; P = 0.02) compared to nonsevere patients, although Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II scores (19.9 ± 7.5 vs 18.5 ± 6.04; P = 0.52) were similar and sepsis was more frequent among nonsevere PH patients (31 vs 64%; P = 0.02). Severe PH (P = 0.04), lower mean arterial pressure (P = 0.04), and CI (P = 0.01); need for invasive ventilation (P = 0.02) and vasopressors (P = 0.03); and higher SOFA (P = 0.001), APACHE II (P = 0.03), pulmonary vascular resistance index (PVRI) (P = 0.01), and RFI (P = 0.004) were associated with increased mortality. In a multivariate model, SOFA [OR = 1.45, 95% confidence interval (C.I.) = 1.09-1.93; P = 0.01], PVRI (OR = 1.12, 95% C.I. = 1.02-1.24; P = 0.02), and increasing RFI (OR = 1.06, 95% C.I. = 1.01-1.11; P = 0.01) were independently associated with mortality.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PH is an independent risk factor for mortality in critically ill patients. Composite factors rather than individual hemodynamic parameters are better predictors of outcome. Monitoring of RV function using composite hemodynamic factors resulting in specific interventions is likely to improve survival and needs to be studied further.</p>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2015-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4137/CCRPM.S22199","citationCount":"21","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4137/CCRPM.S22199","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2015/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21

Abstract

Objective: Critically ill patients with pulmonary hypertension (PH) pose additional challenges due to the existence of right ventricular (RV) dysfunction. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of hemodynamic factors on the outcome.

Methods: We reviewed the records of patients with a diagnosis of PH admitted to the intensive care unit. In addition to evaluating traditional hemodynamic parameters, we defined severe PH as right atrial pressure >20 mmHg, mean pulmonary artery pressure >55 mmHg, or cardiac index (CI) <2 L/min/m(2). We also defined the RV functional index (RFI) as pulmonary artery systolic pressure (PASP) adjusted for CI as PASP/CI; increasing values reflect RV dysfunction.

Results: Fifty-three patients (mean age 60 years, 72% women, 79% Blacks), were included in the study. Severe PH was present in 68% of patients who had higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (6.8 ± 3.3 vs 3.8 ± 1.6; P = 0.001) and overall in-hospital mortality (36% vs 6%; P = 0.02) compared to nonsevere patients, although Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II scores (19.9 ± 7.5 vs 18.5 ± 6.04; P = 0.52) were similar and sepsis was more frequent among nonsevere PH patients (31 vs 64%; P = 0.02). Severe PH (P = 0.04), lower mean arterial pressure (P = 0.04), and CI (P = 0.01); need for invasive ventilation (P = 0.02) and vasopressors (P = 0.03); and higher SOFA (P = 0.001), APACHE II (P = 0.03), pulmonary vascular resistance index (PVRI) (P = 0.01), and RFI (P = 0.004) were associated with increased mortality. In a multivariate model, SOFA [OR = 1.45, 95% confidence interval (C.I.) = 1.09-1.93; P = 0.01], PVRI (OR = 1.12, 95% C.I. = 1.02-1.24; P = 0.02), and increasing RFI (OR = 1.06, 95% C.I. = 1.01-1.11; P = 0.01) were independently associated with mortality.

Conclusion: PH is an independent risk factor for mortality in critically ill patients. Composite factors rather than individual hemodynamic parameters are better predictors of outcome. Monitoring of RV function using composite hemodynamic factors resulting in specific interventions is likely to improve survival and needs to be studied further.

Abstract Image

肺动脉高压是重症监护病房死亡的独立危险因素:血流动力学因素与死亡率的相关性。
目的:危重患者肺动脉高压(PH)右心室功能障碍的存在给其治疗带来了额外的挑战。本研究的目的是评估血流动力学因素对结果的影响。方法:我们回顾了重症监护病房诊断为PH的患者的记录。除了评估传统的血流动力学参数外,我们将重度PH定义为右心房压> 20mmhg,平均肺动脉压> 55mmhg或心脏指数(CI)。结果:53例患者(平均年龄60岁,72%女性,79%黑人)纳入研究。在顺序器官衰竭评估(SOFA)评分较高的患者中,68%存在严重PH(6.8±3.3 vs 3.8±1.6;P = 0.001)和总体住院死亡率(36% vs 6%;P = 0.02),尽管急性生理和慢性健康评估(APACHE) II评分(19.9±7.5 vs 18.5±6.04;P = 0.52)相似,脓毒症在非严重PH患者中更常见(31 vs 64%;P = 0.02)。严重的PH (P = 0.04)、较低的平均动脉压(P = 0.04)和CI (P = 0.01);需要有创通气(P = 0.02)和血管加压药物(P = 0.03);较高的SOFA (P = 0.001)、APACHE II (P = 0.03)、肺血管阻力指数(ppvri) (P = 0.01)和RFI (P = 0.004)与死亡率升高相关。在多变量模型中,SOFA [OR = 1.45, 95%置信区间(ci) = 1.09-1.93;P = 0.01), PVRI(或= 1.12,95% C.I. = 1.02 - -1.24;P = 0.02), RFI增加(OR = 1.06, 95% ci = 1.01-1.11;P = 0.01)与死亡率独立相关。结论:PH是危重患者死亡的独立危险因素。复合因素比单个血流动力学参数更能预测预后。使用复合血流动力学因素监测右心室功能,从而进行特异性干预可能会提高生存率,但需要进一步研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信