Search

Background: For a significant majority of cancers age is a major risk factor. The aim of our study was to investigate survival of older patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) with underlying haematological malignancy and compare them to younger patients. Matherials and methods: A prospective observational study was carried out in Vilnius University Hospital Santaros Klinikos from2017 to 2019. Patients were categorized into two groups: younger (< 65 years) and older (≥ 65 years), depending on age on admission to ICU. Results: 114 patients were included in the study. There were 61 (53.51%) patients in the younger patient group and 53 (46.49%) patients in the older patient group. The older patient group had more chronic heart failure (34.0% vs. 11.5%), vascular disease (67.9% vs. 21.3%), poor physical performance status (39.6% vs. 13.1%) and higher APACHE II scores (23.34 vs. 20.31). Younger patients more often received intensive chemotherapy (57.4% vs. 39.6%). The proportion of patients for whom SOFA score increased over the first 48 hours in ICU also qSOFA and SOFA scores did not differ between the groups. Both groups received the same amount of organ support therapies such as vasopressors, invasive mechanical ventilation, and renal replacement therapy. We found that age did not influence survival of the patients as there was no difference in ICU, 30 days and overall mortality between the groups. Conclusion: Age group does not influence survival of critically ill oncohaematological patients, and it shouldn’t be the criteria for eligibility to the ICU. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: As the COVID-19 pandemic continues, the number of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) is still increasing. The aim of our article is to estimate which of the conventional ICU mortality risk scores is the most accurate at predicting mortality in COVID-19 patients and to determine how these scores can be used in combination with the 4C Mortality Score.Methods: This was a retrospective study of critically ill COVID-19 patients treated in tertiary reference COVID-19 hospitals during the year 2020. The 4C Mortality Score was calculated upon admission to the hospital. The Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II, and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores were calculated upon admission to the ICU. Patients were divided into two groups: ICU survivors and ICU non-survivors.Results: A total of 249 patients were included in the study, of which 63.1% were male. The average age of all patients was 61.32 ± 13.3 years. The all-cause ICU mortality ratio was 41.4% (n = 103). To determine the accuracy of the ICU mortality risk scores a ROC-AUC analysis was performed. The most accurate scale was the APACHE II, with an AUC value of 0.772 (95% CI 0.714-0.830; p < 0.001). All of the ICU risk scores and 4C Mortality Score were significant mortality predictors in the univariate regression analysis. The multivariate regression analysis was completed to elucidate which of the scores can be used in combination with the independent predictive value. In the final model, the APACHE II and 4C Mortality Score prevailed. For each point increase in the APACHE II, mortality risk increased by 1.155 (OR 1.155, 95% CI 1.085-1.229; p < 0.001), and for each point increase in the 4C Mortality Score, mortality risk increased by 1.191 (OR 1.191, 95% CI 1.086-1.306; p < 0.001), demonstrating the best overall calibration of the model.Conclusions: The study demonstrated that the APACHE II had the best discrimination of mortality in ICU patients. Both the APACHE II and 4C Mortality Score independently predict mortality risk and can be used concomitantly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]