Optimal ECLS Support in Mixed Cardiogenic and Septic Shock
Rattachement africain : us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
BACKGROUND: Mixed cardiogenic and septic shock has been shown to have a higher mortality than cardiogenic shock alone and presents a unique hemodynamic phenotype. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate whether higher circulatory support with veno-arterial extracorporeal life support (VA-ECLS) was associated with increased survival to discharge in patients with mixed shock. METHODS: flow) circulatory support on VA-ECLS at 24 hours post-ECLS initiation. RESULTS: A total of 452 patients supported with VA-ECLS with mixed shock were identified. Overall mortality was 63% (n = 285). Older age (adjusted OR [aOR]: 1.02; 95% CI: 1.01-1.04; P < 0.001), pre-extracorporeal membrane oxygenation cardiac arrest (aOR: 1.71; 95% CI: 1.11-2.65; P = 0.016), and baseline Charlson Comorbidity Index (aOR: 1.13; 95% CI: 1.01-1.28; P = 0.043) were associated with increased mortality. Patients receiving higher VA-ECLS support at 24 hours were numerically more likely to survive to discharge (42.6% vs 33.8%, P = 0.063). When evaluated as a continuous variable, higher VA-ECLS flow at 24 hours was associated with an aOR of 1.31 (95% CI: 0.87-1.97; P = 0.19) for survival to discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with mixed shock requiring VA-ECLS have a high mortality. Patients with mixed shock receiving higher support at 24 hours had a trend toward increased survival to discharge compared to those with lower support. These results are hypothesis-generating, and further studies are needed.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Optimal ECLS Support in Mixed Cardiogenic and Septic Shock
- Date Crossref
- 01/10/2025
- Éditeur
- Elsevier BV
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.