BackgroundOutcome prediction scoring systems are increasingly used in intensive care medicine, but most were not developed for use in cardiac surgery patients. We compared the performance of four intensive care outcome prediction scoring systems (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II [APACHE II], Simplified Acute Physiology Score II [SAPS II], Sequential Organ Failure Assessment [SOFA], and Cardiac Surgery Score [CASUS]) in patients after open heart surgery.MethodsWe prospectively included all consecutive adult patients who underwent open heart surgery and were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) between January 1st 2007 and December 31st 2008. Scores were calculated daily from ICU admission until discharge. The outcome measure was ICU mortality. The performance of the four scores was assessed by calibration and discrimination statistics. Derived variables (Mean- and Max- scores) were also evaluated.ResultsDuring the study period, 2801 patients (29.6% female) were included. Mean age was 66.9 ± 10.7 years and the ICU mortality rate was 5.2%. Calibration tests for SOFA and CASUS were reliable throughout (p-value not < 0.05), but there were significant differences between predicted and observed outcome for SAPS II (days 1, 2, 3 and 5) and APACHE II (days 2 and 3). CASUS, and its mean- and maximum-derivatives, discriminated better between survivors and non-survivors than the other scores throughout the study (area under curve ≥ 0.90). In order of best discrimination, CASUS was followed by SOFA, then SAPS II, and finally APACHE II. SAPS II and APACHE II derivatives had discrimination results that were superior to those of the SOFA derivatives.ConclusionsCASUS and SOFA are reliable ICU mortality risk stratification models for cardiac surgery patients. SAPS II and APACHE II did not perform well in terms of calibration and discrimination statistics.
Most of general ICU scoring systems use extensive data collection and focus on the first day of ICU stay. Despite this fact, general scores do not perform well in the prediction of outcome in cardiac surgical patients. Our new 10-variable risk index performs very well, with calibration and discrimination very high, better than general severity systems, and it is an appropriate tool for daily risk stratification in ICU cardiac surgery patients. Thus, it may serve as an expert system for diagnosing organ failure and predicting mortality in ICU cardiac surgical patients.
We characterized genome alterations in 1255 clinically annotated lung tumors of all histological subgroups to identify genetically defined and clinically relevant subtypes. More than 55% of all cases had at least one oncogenic genome alteration potentially amenable to specific therapeutic intervention, including several personalized treatment approaches that are already in clinical evaluation. Marked differences in the pattern of genomic alterations existed between and within histological subtypes, thus challenging the original histomorphological diagnosis. Immunohistochemical studies confirmed many of these reassigned subtypes. The reassignment eliminated almost all cases of large cell carcinomas, some of which had therapeutically relevant alterations. Prospective testing of our genomics-based diagnostic algorithm in 5145 lung cancer patients enabled a genome-based diagnosis in 3863 (75%) patients, confirmed the feasibility of rational reassignments of large cell lung cancer, and led to improvement in overall survival in patients with EGFR-mutant or ALK-rearranged cancers. Thus, our findings provide support for broad implementation of genome-based diagnosis of lung cancer.
Both CASUS and SOFA are reliable mortality prediction tools after cardiac surgery. However, CASUS was more accurate in predicting the individual patient's risk of mortality. Thus, use of the CASUS in cardiac surgery intensive care units is recommended.
A best evidence topic in thoracic surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was whether manual palpation of the lung is necessary in patients undergoing pulmonary metastasectomy. In total, 56 articles were found using the described search strategy. After screening these articles and their references, 18 publications represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. No randomized controlled trial addressing the three-part question was available. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers were tabulated. The studies reported on 1472 patients with different primary cancers. The patients underwent more than 1630 pulmonary metastasectomies between 1990 and 2014 after the treatment of primary cancer. Almost three quarters of patients underwent open procedures like thoracotomy or sternotomy. Most frequently, helical CT with a slice thickness ranging between 1 and 10 mm was used for preoperative imaging. The sensitivity in detecting pulmonary nodules ranged from 34 to 97%. The corresponding sensitivity rates for PET-CT were 66-67.5 and 75% for high-resolution CT. The positive predictive value for lesions detected by helical CT varied from 47 to 96%. Helical CT reached a specificity between 54 and 93% in detecting pulmonary nodules. The surgeons identified more nodules by meticulous palpation than helical CT. It is noteworthy that up to 48.5% of these palpated nodules were benign lesions (false-positive). Patients with smaller imaged nodules, multiple imaged nodules or primary mesenchymal tumour are more likely to have occult pulmonary nodules. We conclude that not all palpable pulmonary nodules can be imaged preoperatively. Thoracotomy allows the manual palpation of the ipsilateral hemithorax and might be superior to video-assisted thoracic surgery regarding radical resection. However, not all palpable nodules are malignant, and the impact of non-resected pulmonary metastases on patient survival is not clearly evaluated.
The immune response against cancer is orchestrated by various parameters and site-dependent specificities have been poorly investigated. In our analyses of ten different cancer types, we describe elevated infiltration by regulatory T cells as the most common feature, while other lymphocyte subsets and also expression of immune-regulatory molecules on tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes showed site-specific variation. Multiparametric analyses of these data identified similarities of renal and liver or lung with head and neck cancer. Co-expression of immune-inhibitory ligands on tumor cells was most frequent in colorectal, lung and ovarian cancer. Genes related to antigen presentation were frequently dysregulated in liver and lung cancer. Expression of co-inhibitory molecules on tumor-infiltrating T cells accumulated in advanced stages while T-cell abundance was related to enhanced expression of genes related to antigen presentation. Our results promote evaluation of cancer-specific or even personalized immunotherapeutic combinations to overcome primary or secondary resistance as major limitation of immune-checkpoint inhibition.
CASUS derivatives including δ CASUS have a good prognostic value for cardiac surgery patients with regard to the prediction of mortality and survival during ICU stay, with the exception of total CASUS which was not informative.
Sixty-one subjects with fibrosing interstitial lung disease were prospectively analysed to determine the efficacy of transbronchial cryobiopsy (CryoTBB) and the effect of procedural modifications which were introduced after an interim analysis of the first 19 subjects. The modifications significantly reduced complication rates from 84% to 14% (p<0.001). 30-day-mortality was 2%. The algorithm with initial CryoTBB and surgical lung biopsy (SLB) as optional step-up procedure was feasible. CryoTBB led to a confident diagnosis in 46/61 subjects (75%). Only 21% out of all subjects were forwarded for SLB. As the modified CryoTBB reduced but not eliminated the risk of severe complications, tissue sampling should be limited to patients where confident diagnosis enables life prolonging therapy. Trial registration number: NCT01714518.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.