Validation of RESP and PRESERVE score for ARDS patients with pumpless extracorporeal lung assist (pECLA)
RESP score and PRESERVE score have been validated for veno-venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in severe ARDS to assume individual mortality risk. ARDS patients with low-flow Extracorporeal Carbon Dioxide Removal, especially pumpless Extracorporeal Lung Assist, have also a high mortality rate...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | BMC anesthesiology 2020-05, Vol.20 (1), p.102-102, Article 102 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | RESP score and PRESERVE score have been validated for veno-venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in severe ARDS to assume individual mortality risk. ARDS patients with low-flow Extracorporeal Carbon Dioxide Removal, especially pumpless Extracorporeal Lung Assist, have also a high mortality rate, but there are no validated specific or general outcome scores. This retrospective study tested whether these established specific risk scores can be validated for pumpless Extracorporeal Lung Assist in ARDS patients in comparison to a general organ dysfunction score, the SOFA score.
In a retrospective single center cohort study we calculated and evaluated RESP, PRESERVE, and SOFA score for 73 ARDS patients with pumpless Extracorporeal Lung Assist treated between 2002 and 2016 using the XENIOS iLA Membrane Ventilator. Six patients had a mild, 40 a moderate and 27 a severe ARDS according to the Berlin criteria. Demographic data and hospital mortality as well as ventilator settings, hemodynamic parameters, and blood gas measurement before and during extracorporeal therapy were recorded.
Pumpless Extracorporeal Lung Assist of mechanical ventilated ARDS patients resulted in an optimized lung protective ventilation, significant reduction of P
, and compensation of acidosis. Scoring showed a mean score of alive versus deceased patients of 3 ± 1 versus - 1 ± 1 for RESP (p |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1471-2253 1471-2253 |
DOI: | 10.1186/s12871-020-01010-0 |