Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
PLoS One ; 11(10): e0164537, 2016.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27764143

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Cancer patients are at risk for severe complications related to the underlying malignancy or its treatment and, therefore, usually require admission to intensive care units (ICU). Here, we evaluated the clinical characteristics and outcomes in this subgroup of patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Secondary analysis of two prospective cohorts of cancer patients admitted to ICUs. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify variables associated with hospital mortality. RESULTS: Out of 2,028 patients, 456 (23%) had cancer-related complications. Compared to those without cancer-related complications, they more frequently had worse performance status (PS) (57% vs 36% with PS≥2), active malignancy (95% vs 58%), need for vasopressors (45% vs 34%), mechanical ventilation (70% vs 51%) and dialysis (12% vs 8%) (P<0.001 for all analyses). ICU (47% vs. 27%) and hospital (63% vs. 38%) mortality rates were also higher in patients with cancer-related complications (P<0.001). Chemo/radiation therapy-induced toxicity (6%), venous thromboembolism (5%), respiratory failure (4%), gastrointestinal involvement (3%) and vena cava syndrome (VCS) (2%) were the most frequent cancer-related complications. In multivariable analysis, the presence of cancer-related complications per se was not associated with mortality [odds ratio (OR) = 1.25 (95% confidence interval, 0.94-1.66), P = 0.131]. However, among the individual cancer-related complications, VCS [OR = 3.79 (1.11-12.92), P = 0.033], gastrointestinal involvement [OR = 3.05 (1.57-5.91), P = <0.001] and respiratory failure [OR = 1.96(1.04-3.71), P = 0.038] were independently associated with in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The prognostic impact of cancer-related complications was variable. Although some complications were associated with worse outcomes, the presence of an acute cancer-related complication per se should not guide decisions to admit a patient to ICU.


Subject(s)
Critical Illness , Neoplasms/pathology , Aged , Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Female , Gastrointestinal Diseases/complications , Hematologic Diseases/etiology , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Staging , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Neoplasms/mortality , Odds Ratio , Prognosis , Prospective Studies , Renal Dialysis , Respiration, Artificial , Respiratory Insufficiency/complications , Venous Thromboembolism/complications
2.
Intensive Care Med ; 36(7): 1188-95, 2010 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20221751

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to validate the Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II) and 3 (SAPS 3), the Mortality Probability Models III (MPM(0)-III), and the Cancer Mortality Model (CMM) in patients with cancer admitted to several intensive care units (ICU). DESIGN: Prospective multicenter cohort study. SETTING: Twenty-eight ICUs in Brazil. PATIENTS: Seven hundred and seventeen consecutive patients (solid tumors 93%; hematological malignancies 7%) included over a 2-month period. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Discrimination was assessed by area under receiver operating characteristic (AROC) curves and calibration by Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test. The main reasons for ICU admission were postoperative care (57%), sepsis (15%) and respiratory failure (10%). The ICU and hospital mortality rates were 21 and 30%, respectively. When all 717 patients were evaluated, discrimination was superior for both SAPS II (AROC = 0.84) and SAPS 3 (AROC = 0.84) scores compared to CMM (AROC = 0.79) and MPM(0)-III (AROC = 0.71) scores (P < 0.05 in all comparisons). Calibration was better using CMM and the customized equation of SAPS 3 score for South American countries (CSA). MPM(0)-III, SAPS II and standard SAPS 3 scores underestimated mortality (standardized mortality ratio, SMR > 1), while CMM tended to overestimation (SMR = 0.48). However, using the SAPS 3 for CSA resulted in more precise estimations of the probability of death [SMR = 1.02 (95% confidence interval = 0.87-1.19)]. Similar results were observed when scheduled surgical patients were excluded. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter study, the customized equation of SAPS 3 score for CSA was found to be accurate in predicting outcomes in cancer patients requiring ICU admission.


Subject(s)
APACHE , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Brazil/epidemiology , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/mortality , Observation , Probability , Prognosis , Prospective Studies , ROC Curve , Reproducibility of Results
3.
Crit Care Med ; 38(1): 9-15, 2010 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19829101

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of patients with cancer admitted to several intensive care units. Knowledge on patients with cancer requiring intensive care is mostly restricted to single-center studies. DESIGN: : Prospective, multicenter, cohort study. SETTING: Intensive care units from 28 hospitals in Brazil. PATIENTS: A total of 717 consecutive patients included over a 2-mo period. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: There were 667 (93%) patients with solid tumors and 50 (7%) patients had hematologic malignancies. The main reasons for intensive care unit admission were postoperative care (57%), sepsis (15%), and respiratory failure (10%). Overall hospital mortality rate was 30% and was higher in patients admitted because of medical complications (58%) than in emergency (37%) and scheduled (11%) surgical patients (p < .001). Adjusting for covariates other than the type of admission, the number of hospital days before intensive care unit admission (odds ratio [OR], 1.18; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.37), higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.17-1.34), poor performance status (OR, 3.40; 95% CI, 2.19 -5.26), the need for mechanical ventilation (OR, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.51-3.87), and active underlying malignancy in recurrence or progression (OR, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.51-3.87) were associated with increased hospital mortality in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: This large multicenter study reports encouraging survival rates for patients with cancer requiring intensive care. In these patients, mortality was mostly dependent on the severity of organ failures, performance status, and need for mechanical ventilation rather than cancer-related characteristics, such as the type of malignancy or the presence of neutropenia.


Subject(s)
Critical Care/statistics & numerical data , Hospital Mortality/trends , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Neoplasms/mortality , Neoplasms/therapy , Patient Admission/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Analysis of Variance , Brazil , Cohort Studies , Confidence Intervals , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Hematologic Neoplasms/mortality , Hematologic Neoplasms/pathology , Hematologic Neoplasms/therapy , Humans , Length of Stay , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , Neoplasms/pathology , Odds Ratio , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Probability , Prospective Studies , Survival Analysis , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...