心源性休克严重程度可预测临时机械循环支持患者的出血事件。

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Kenjiro Oyabu, Hidetoshi Hattori, Noriko Kikuchi, Shintaro Haruki, Yuichiro Minami, Yuki Ichihara, Satoshi Saito, Shinichi Nunoda, Hiroshi Niinami, Junichi Yamaguchi
{"title":"心源性休克严重程度可预测临时机械循环支持患者的出血事件。","authors":"Kenjiro Oyabu, Hidetoshi Hattori, Noriko Kikuchi, Shintaro Haruki, Yuichiro Minami, Yuki Ichihara, Satoshi Saito, Shinichi Nunoda, Hiroshi Niinami, Junichi Yamaguchi","doi":"10.1002/ccd.31219","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Data on shock severity and bleeding events in patients with temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) are limited. We investigated the relationship between the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) shock stage classification and bleeding events in patients with tMCS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We evaluated the data of 285 consecutive patients with tMCS who were admitted to our institution between June 2019 and May 2022. At the time of tMCS initiation, 81 patients (28.4%) were in SCAI stage A, 38 (13.3%) in stage B, 69 (24.2%) in stage C, 33 (11.6%) in stage D, and 64 (22.5%) in stage E. Multivariable logistic regression modeling was used to assess the association between the SCAI shock stage and in-hospital bleeding events.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In-hospital bleeding occurred in 100 patients (35.1%). The bleeding event rate increased incrementally across the SCAI shock stages (stage A, 11.1%; stage B, 15.8%; stage C, 37.7%; stage D, 54.6%; stage E, 64.1%). In-hospital bleeding was associated with the SCAI shock stage (p < 0.001). Compared with stage A, the adjusted odds ratios for in-hospital bleeding were 1.48 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47-4.66), 6.47 (95% CI 2.61-10.66), 11.59 (95% CI 3.77-35.64), and 7.85 (95% CI 2.51-24.55) for stages B, C, D, and E, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The SCAI shock stage predicted subsequent bleeding events in patients with tMCS. This simple scheme may be useful for tailored risk-based clinical assessment and management of patients with tMCS.</p>","PeriodicalId":9650,"journal":{"name":"Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cardiogenic shock severity predicts bleeding events in patients with temporary mechanical circulatory support.\",\"authors\":\"Kenjiro Oyabu, Hidetoshi Hattori, Noriko Kikuchi, Shintaro Haruki, Yuichiro Minami, Yuki Ichihara, Satoshi Saito, Shinichi Nunoda, Hiroshi Niinami, Junichi Yamaguchi\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ccd.31219\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Data on shock severity and bleeding events in patients with temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) are limited. We investigated the relationship between the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) shock stage classification and bleeding events in patients with tMCS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We evaluated the data of 285 consecutive patients with tMCS who were admitted to our institution between June 2019 and May 2022. At the time of tMCS initiation, 81 patients (28.4%) were in SCAI stage A, 38 (13.3%) in stage B, 69 (24.2%) in stage C, 33 (11.6%) in stage D, and 64 (22.5%) in stage E. Multivariable logistic regression modeling was used to assess the association between the SCAI shock stage and in-hospital bleeding events.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In-hospital bleeding occurred in 100 patients (35.1%). The bleeding event rate increased incrementally across the SCAI shock stages (stage A, 11.1%; stage B, 15.8%; stage C, 37.7%; stage D, 54.6%; stage E, 64.1%). In-hospital bleeding was associated with the SCAI shock stage (p < 0.001). Compared with stage A, the adjusted odds ratios for in-hospital bleeding were 1.48 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47-4.66), 6.47 (95% CI 2.61-10.66), 11.59 (95% CI 3.77-35.64), and 7.85 (95% CI 2.51-24.55) for stages B, C, D, and E, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The SCAI shock stage predicted subsequent bleeding events in patients with tMCS. This simple scheme may be useful for tailored risk-based clinical assessment and management of patients with tMCS.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9650,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.31219\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.31219","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:有关临时机械循环支持(tMCS)患者休克严重程度和出血事件的数据有限。我们研究了心血管造影和介入学会(SCAI)休克分级与临时机械循环支持患者出血事件之间的关系:我们评估了本院在 2019 年 6 月至 2022 年 5 月期间连续收治的 285 例 tMCS 患者的数据。在开始使用 tMCS 时,81 名患者(28.4%)处于 SCAI A 期,38 名患者(13.3%)处于 B 期,69 名患者(24.2%)处于 C 期,33 名患者(11.6%)处于 D 期,64 名患者(22.5%)处于 E 期:结果:100 名患者(35.1%)发生了院内出血。各SCAI休克分期的出血事件发生率呈递增趋势(A期,11.1%;B期,15.8%;C期,37.7%;D期,54.6%;E期,64.1%)。院内出血与 SCAI 休克分期有关(p 结论:院内出血与 SCAI 休克分期有关:SCAI 休克分期可预测 tMCS 患者的后续出血事件。这一简单的方案可能有助于对 tMCS 患者进行有针对性的基于风险的临床评估和管理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cardiogenic shock severity predicts bleeding events in patients with temporary mechanical circulatory support.

Background: Data on shock severity and bleeding events in patients with temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) are limited. We investigated the relationship between the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) shock stage classification and bleeding events in patients with tMCS.

Methods: We evaluated the data of 285 consecutive patients with tMCS who were admitted to our institution between June 2019 and May 2022. At the time of tMCS initiation, 81 patients (28.4%) were in SCAI stage A, 38 (13.3%) in stage B, 69 (24.2%) in stage C, 33 (11.6%) in stage D, and 64 (22.5%) in stage E. Multivariable logistic regression modeling was used to assess the association between the SCAI shock stage and in-hospital bleeding events.

Results: In-hospital bleeding occurred in 100 patients (35.1%). The bleeding event rate increased incrementally across the SCAI shock stages (stage A, 11.1%; stage B, 15.8%; stage C, 37.7%; stage D, 54.6%; stage E, 64.1%). In-hospital bleeding was associated with the SCAI shock stage (p < 0.001). Compared with stage A, the adjusted odds ratios for in-hospital bleeding were 1.48 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47-4.66), 6.47 (95% CI 2.61-10.66), 11.59 (95% CI 3.77-35.64), and 7.85 (95% CI 2.51-24.55) for stages B, C, D, and E, respectively.

Conclusions: The SCAI shock stage predicted subsequent bleeding events in patients with tMCS. This simple scheme may be useful for tailored risk-based clinical assessment and management of patients with tMCS.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
8.70%
发文量
419
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions is an international journal covering the broad field of cardiovascular diseases. Subject material includes basic and clinical information that is derived from or related to invasive and interventional coronary or peripheral vascular techniques. The journal focuses on material that will be of immediate practical value to physicians providing patient care in the clinical laboratory setting. To accomplish this, the journal publishes Preliminary Reports and Work In Progress articles that complement the traditional Original Studies, Case Reports, and Comprehensive Reviews. Perspective and insight concerning controversial subjects and evolving technologies are provided regularly through Editorial Commentaries furnished by members of the Editorial Board and other experts. Articles are subject to double-blind peer review and complete editorial evaluation prior to any decision regarding acceptability.
×
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