Prognostic Value of APACHE IV Score in Patients Bridged to Heart Transplantation on ECMO.

BACKGROUND: Methods for risk stratification of candidates for heart transplantation (HTx) supported by extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) are limited. We evaluated the reliability of the APACHE IV score to identify the risk of mortality in this patient subset in a multicenter study. METHODS: Between January 2010 and December 2022, 167 consecutive ECMO patients were bridged to HTx; they were divided into two groups, according to a cutoff value of APACHE IV score, obtained by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis for 90-day mortality. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were plotted, and compared through the log-Rank test. Cox regression model was used to estimate which factors were associated with survival. RESULTS: The 90-day mortality prediction of the APACHE IV score showed an area under the curve of 0.87 (95% CI: 0.80-0.94), with a cutoff value of 49 (specificity 91.7%-sensibility 69.6%). 125 patients (74.8%) showed an APACHE IV score value < 49 (Group A), and 42 (25.2%) ≥ 49 (Group B). 90-day mortality was 11.2% in Group A and 76.2% in Group B (p < 0.01). Survival at 1 and 5 years was 85.5%, 77% versus 23.4%, 23.4% (p < 0.01) in Groups A and B. Mortality correlated at univariable analysis with recipient age, body mass index, mechanical ventilation, APACHE IV score, and platelets number. At multivariable analysis only APACHE IV score (HR: 1.07 [1.05-1.09, 95% CI]) independently affected survival. CONCLUSIONS: The APACHE IV score represents a powerful predictor of survival in patients bridged to HTx on ECMO support, and could guide candidacy of patients on ECMO.

Long-term effects of primary graft dysfunction after heart transplantation.

BACKGROUND: We studied the incidence of primary graft dysfunction (PGD), its impact on in-hospital and follow-up outcomes and searched for independent risk factors. METHODS: During an 18-year period, 508 individuals underwent heart transplantation at our institution. Patients were diagnosed with none, mild, moderate or severe PGD according to ISHLT criteria. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients (7.5%) met the ISHLT criteria for mild PGD, 92 (18.1%) for moderate PGD and 23 (4.5%) for severe PGD. Patients were classified into none/mild PGD (77.4%) and moderate/severe PGD (22.6%) groups. In-hospital mortality was 12.4% (7.8% for none/mild PGD and 28.7% for moderate/severe PGD; p < .001). Survival at 1, 5, and 15 years was 85.5 ± 1.9% versus 67.2 ± 4.5%, 80 ± 2.2% versus 63.5 ± 4.7%, and 60.4 ± 3.6% versus 45.9 ± 8.4%, respectively (p < .001). Excluding the events occurring during the first month of follow-up, survival was comparable between the two groups (93.1 ± 1.4% vs. 94.7 ± 2.6 at 1 year and 65.6 ± 3.8% vs. 70.4 ± 10.4% at 15 years, respectively; p = .88). Upon multivariate logistic regression analysis preoperative mechanical circulatory support (odds ratio [OR] = 5.86) and preoperative intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) (OR = 9.58) were independently associated with moderate/severe PGD. CONCLUSIONS: Our results confirm that PGD is associated with poor in-hospital outcome. The poor outcome does not extend beyond the first month of follow-up, with comparable survival between patients with none/mild PGD and moderate/severe PGD in the short and long-term. Mechanical circulatory support and preoperative IABP were found to be independent risk factors for moderate/severe PGD.

Predictive scores for major bleeding after coronary artery bypass surgery in low operative risk patients.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac surgery is associated with perioperative bleeding and carries high risk of allogeneic blood transfusion. Recently new scores for prediction of severe bleeding have been developed. This study aims to compare the WILL-BLEED, CRUSADE, PAPWORTH, TRUST, TRACK and ACTION scores in predicting major bleeding after CABG in patients with low estimated operative risk. METHODS: A multicenter observational study included 1391 patients who underwent isolated CABG from July 2015 to January 2018. We tested the hypothesis that the WILL-BLEED score, specifically designed for CABG, would perform at least as well as the CRUSADE, PAPWORTH, TRUST, TRACK and ACTION scores in predicting postoperative major bleeding in low operative risk patients. The primary endpoint was the performance of known bleeding risk scores after CABG. The secondary endpoint was the evaluation of in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Mean age was 68.2±9.4 years and median Euroscore II value was 1.69% (IQR 1.15-2.81%). Mean blood losses in the first 12 postoperative hours was 339.75 mL. Seventy-three (5.2%) subjects underwent administration of blood products. The rate of severe-massive bleeding according to UDPB grades 3-4 was 1.5%. WILL-BLEED, TRUST, TRACK and ACTION scores were significantly associated with severe postoperative bleeding. WILL-BLEED presented the best c-index (AUC: 0.658; 95% CI: 0.600,0.716). Reclassification analysis showed a worsening in sensitivity and significant negative reclassification of CRUSADE, PAPWORTH, TRACK and ACTION scores when compared with WILL-BEED. The combination of WILL-BLEED and TRUST scores improved the prediction ability (AUC: 0.673; 95% CI: 0.615-0.732). Overall in-hospital mortality was 1.65%. Early mortality in patients with severe versus no-severe bleeding was found to be 11.8% vs. 1.0% Severe bleeding (OR: 13.26; P value<0.001) was found to be significantly associated with early mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Severe bleeding after CABG is a harmful event associated with adverse outcomes. WILL-BLEED Score has the better performance in predicting severe-massive bleeding after CABG. The TRUST Score, although suboptimal, represents a valuable alternative in this setting.