SAVE、APACHEⅡ评分联合循环生物标志物预测经静脉-动脉体外膜肺氧合治疗AMICS患者90天生存预后中的临床应用价值
收稿日期: 2025-09-29
网络出版日期: 2026-02-25
基金资助
河南省医学科技攻关计划联合共建项目(LHGJ20210915)
The clinical application value of SAVE, APACHEⅡ score combined with circulating biomarkers in predicting the 90 day survival prognosis of patients with AMICS treated with VA-ECMO
Received date: 2025-09-29
Online published: 2026-02-25
目的 探讨静脉-动脉体外膜肺氧合生存预测评分(SAVE)、急性生理与慢性健康状况评分Ⅱ(APACHEⅡ)评分联合循环生物标志物预测经静脉-动脉体外膜肺氧合(VA-ECMO)治疗急性心肌梗死合并心源性休克(AMICS)患者90 d生存预后中的临床应用价值。 方法 选取2020年9月至2024年9月新乡市中心医院收治的136例AMICS患者为对象,均行VA-ECMO治疗,并随访90 d(随访起始时间为VA-ECMO置管当天),观察患者生存情况,根据生存情况分为生存组和死亡组。比较生存组、死亡组一般资料、SAVE评分、APACHE Ⅱ评分、低密度脂蛋白、乳酸、C反应蛋白(CRP)、心肌钙蛋白1(cTn1)、脑钠肽(BNP)水平。采用多因素Cox回归分析VA-ECMO治疗AMICS患者死亡的影响因素,受试者工作曲线(ROC)评估相关指标在VA-ECMO治疗AMICS患者90 d生存预后中的临床应用价值,Kaplan-Meier法绘制生存曲线,Log-rank检验比较不同组患者的生存差异。 结果 136例患者90 d内共死亡63例,病死率46.32%;死亡组年龄大于生存组,APACHE Ⅱ评分、低密度脂蛋白、乳酸、CRP、cTn1、BNP水平高于生存组,SAVE评分、高密度脂蛋白低于生存组(P < 0.05);Cox回归分析显示,SAVE评分、APACHE Ⅱ评分、乳酸、CRP、cTn1均为VA-ECMO治疗后AMICS患者90 d死亡的影响因素(P < 0.05);ROC曲线分析显示,SAVE评分、APACHE Ⅱ评分、乳酸、CRP、cTn1联合检测评估VA-ECMO治疗AMICS患者90 d死亡风险的AUC值高于单项检测(Z = 5.731、3.573、5.544、5.983、4.807,P < 0.05);Kaplan-Meier曲线显示(死亡= 1,生存= 0),SAVE评分≤ -4.301分、APACHE Ⅱ评分> 25.076分、乳酸> 3.900 mmol/L、CRP > 23.752 mg/L、cTn1 > 7.755 ng/mL患者生存时间更短(Log-rank χ2 = 16.573、4.028、61.746、22.375、28.635,P < 0.001)。 结论 SAVE评分、APACHE Ⅱ评分、乳酸、CRP、cTn1联合检测评估VA-ECMO治疗AMICS患者90 d死亡风险的效能较高。
关键词: SAVE评分; 急性生理与慢性健康状况评分Ⅱ; 循环生物标志物; 静脉-动脉体外膜肺氧合; 急性心肌梗死; 心源性休克
周姝 , 杨树涵 , 王增夏 , 王雪宁 , 冯蕊涵 , 彭丽丽 , 杨美玲 . SAVE、APACHEⅡ评分联合循环生物标志物预测经静脉-动脉体外膜肺氧合治疗AMICS患者90天生存预后中的临床应用价值[J]. 实用医学杂志, 2026 , 42(4) : 698 -705 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-5725.2026.04.022
Objective Exploring the clinical application value of combining the Survival After Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (SAVE) score, the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation Ⅱ (APACHE Ⅱ) score, and circulatory biomarkers in predicting 90-day survival outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (AMICS) treated with veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). Methods A total of 136 patients with amics admitted to the hospital from September 2020 to September 2024 were selected as the objects. All patients were treated with VA-ECMO, and were followed up for 90 days (the start time of follow-up was the day of VA-ECMO catheterization). The survival status of the patients was observed, and they were divided into survival group and death group according to the survival status.General clinical data, SAVE scores, APACHE Ⅱ scores, and levels of low-density lipoprotein (LDL), lactate, C-reactive protein (CRP), cardiac troponin 1(cTn1), and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) were compared between the two groups. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was employed to identify factors influencing mortality in AMICS patients treated with VA-ECMO. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was conducted to evaluate the clinical value of relevant indicators in predicting 90-day survival outcomes. Survival curves were generated using the Kaplan?Meier method, and the Log-rank test was used to compare survival differences between groups. Result Among 136 patients, a total of 63 died within 90 days, with a mortality rate of 46.32%; The death group was older than the survival group, with higher levels of APACHE Ⅱ score, low-density lipoprotein, lactate, CRP, cTn1, and BNP compared to the survival group, and lower levels of high-density lipoprotein and SAVE score compared to the survival group (P < 0.05); Cox regression analysis showed that SAVE score, APACHE Ⅱ score, lactate, CRP, and cTn1 were all influencing factors for 90 day mortality in AMICS patients after VA-ECMO treatment (P < 0.05); ROC curve analysis showed that the AUC value of the combined detection of SAVE score, APACHE Ⅱ score, lactate, CRP, and cTn1 in evaluating the 90 day mortality risk of VA-ECMO treatment for AMICS patients was higher than that of single detection (Z = 5.731, 3.573, 5.544, 5.983, 4.807, P<0.05); Kaplan Meier curves showed that patients with SAVE score ≤ -4.301, APACHE Ⅱ score > 25.076, lactate > 3.900 mmol/L, CRP > 23.752 mg/L, and cTn1 > 7.755 ng/mL had shorter survival times (Log rank chi square =16.573, 4.028, 61.746, 22.375, 28.635, P < 0.001). Conclusion The combined detection of SAVE score, APACHE Ⅱ score, lactate, CRP, and cTn1 has a high efficacy in evaluating the 90 day mortality risk of VA-ECMO treatment for AMICS patients.
| [1] | 徐莉,汪健飞,郑枫,等. 超声心动图评价急性心肌梗死Ⅱ期心脏康复前后心功能及同步性[J]. 江苏大学学报(医学版),2023,33(1):54-56.doi:10.13312/j.issn.1671-7783.y220181 . |
| [2] | ZEYMER U, BUENO H, GRANGER CB, et al. Acute Cardiovascular Care Association position statement for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: A document of the Acute Cardiovascular Care Association of the European Society of Cardiology[J].Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care,2020,9(2):183-197.doi: 10.1177/2048872619894254 . |
| [3] | 何罗宜,刘品晶,黄静铭,等. 静脉-动脉体外膜肺氧合治疗患者合并毛细血管渗漏综合征分布状态、危险因素及预后[J].实用医学杂志,2025,41(4):542-546.doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-5725.2025.04.012 . |
| [4] | AYYAD A, FADEL R, ALQARQAZ M. 100.76 Assessing Mortality Risk in Cardiogenic Shock Patients on VA-ECMO: The Role of SAVE Score, SOFA Score, and 8-Hour Lactate Clearance[J]. JACC Cardiovasc Interv, 2024, 17(): S23-S24.doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2024.01.158 . |
| [5] | ZOU X, LI S, FANG M, et al. Acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II score as a predictor of hospital mortality in patients of coronavirus disease 2019[J]. Crit Care Med,2020, 48(8): e657-e665.doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000004411 . |
| [6] | SARHADI V K, ARMENGOL G. Molecular biomarkers in cancer[J]. Biomolecules, 2022, 12(8): 1021.doi: 10.3390/biom 12081021 . |
| [7] | 中国医师协会中西医结合医师分会,中国中西医结合学会心血管病专业委员会,中国中西医结合学会重症医学专业委员会,等. 急性心肌梗死中西医结合诊疗指南[J]. 中国中西医结合杂志,2018,38(3):272-284.doi:10.7661/j.cjim.20180119.038 . |
| [8] | 中华医学会心血管病学分会心血管急重症学组,中华心血管病杂志编辑委员会. 心源性休克诊断和治疗中国专家共识(2018)[J]. 中华心血管病杂志,2019,47(4):265-277.doi:10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-3758.2019.04.003 . |
| [9] | SCHMIDT M, BURRELL A, ROBERTS L,et al. Predicting survival after ECMO for refractory cardiogenic shock: The survival after veno-arterial-ECMO (SAVE)-score[J]. European heart journal, 2015, 36(33): 2246-2256.doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv194 . |
| [10] | GILANI M T, RAZAVI M, AZAD A M. A comparison of Simplified Acute Physiology Score Ⅱ, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation Ⅱ and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation Ⅲ scoring system in predicting mortality and length of stay at surgical intensive care unit[J]. Niger Med J, 2014,55(2): 144-147.doi: 10.4103/0300-1652.129651 . |
| [11] | TOMARCHIO E, MOMIGLIANO F, GIOSA L, et al. The intricate physiology of veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: An overview for clinicians[J]. Perfusion, 2024, 39(): 49S-65S.doi: 10.1177/02676591241238156 . |
| [12] | GALVáN-ROMáN F, FERNáNDEZ-HERRERO I, ARIZA-SOLé A, et al. Prognosis of cardiogenic shock secondary to culprit left main coronary artery lesion‐related myocardial infarction[J]. ESC Heart Failure, 2023, 10(1): 111-120.doi: 10.1002/ehf2.14128 . |
| [13] | BECHER PM, GOSSING A, SCHRAGE B, et al. Procedural volume and outcomes in patients undergoing VA-ECMO support[J]. Critical Care, 2020, 24(1): 291.doi: 10.1186/s13054-020-03016-z . |
| [14] | 黄新新,丁琦,冯晔子,等. 静脉-动脉体外膜肺氧合联合主动脉内球囊反搏在急性心肌梗死合并心源性休克患者经皮冠脉介入术中的应用效果[J]. 中国临床医生杂志, 2025, 53(3):379-384.doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-8552.2025.03.028 . |
| [15] | WANG S, TAO S, ZHU Y, et al. AI-powered model for predicting mortality risk in VA-ECMO patients: A multicenter cohort study[J]. Sci Rep, 2025, 15(1): 10362.doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-94734-3 . |
| [16] | 李水仙,唐俊鹏,杨正飞,等. 改良危重症营养风险评分与急诊重症监护室脓毒症患者住院病死率的相关性分析[J]. 中山大学学报(医学科学版),2025,46(2):328-334. doi: 10.13471/j.cnki.j.sun.yat-sen.univ(med.sci).2025.0217 . |
| [17] | GONZáLEZ A, RICHARDS AM, DE BOER RA, et al. Cardiac remodelling?Part 1: From cells and tissues to circulating biomarkers. A review from the Study Group on Biomarkers of the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology[J]. Eur J Heart Fail,2022,24(6): 927-943.doi: 10.1002/ejhf.2493 . |
| [18] | YAN C, XU Z, HUANG W. Cellular senescence affects cardiac regeneration and repair in ischemic heart disease[J]. Aging Dis, 2021, 12(2): 552.doi: 10.14336/AD.2020.0811 . |
| [19] | SCHILLER P, HELLGREN L, VIKHOLM P. Survival after refractory cardiogenic shock is comparable in patients with Impella and veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation when adjusted for SAVE score[J]. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care, 2019, 8(4): 329-337.doi: 10.1177/2048872618799745 . |
| [20] | NG WT, LING L, JOYNT GM, et al. An audit of mortality by using ECMO specific scores and APACHE Ⅱ scoring system in patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in a tertiary intensive care unit in Hong Kong[J].J Thorac Dis, 2019, 11(2): 445.doi: 10.21037/jtd.2018.12.121 . |
| [21] | MINEO C. Lipoprotein receptor signalling in atherosclerosis[J]. Cardiovascular research, 2020, 116(7): 1254-1274.doi: 10.1093/cvr/cvz338 . |
| [22] | JIA C, ANDERSON J L C, GRUPPEN E G, et al. High-density lipoprotein anti-inflammatory capacity and incident cardiovascular events[J]. Circulation, 2021, 143(20): 1935-1945.doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.120.050808 . |
| [23] | 肖浩,崔晓磊,刘亮,等. ECMO支持下治疗急性心肌梗死合并心源性休克患者的预后分析[J]. 中国中西医结合急救杂志, 2023, 30(5):557-562.doi:10.3969/j.issn.1008-9691. 2023. 05.009 . |
| [24] | KOLOGRIVOVA I, KERCHEVA M, PANTELEEV O, et al. The role of inflammation in the pathogenesis of cardiogenic shock secondary to acute myocardial infarction: A narrative review[J]. Biomedicines, 2024, 12(9): 2073.doi: 10.3390/biomedicines12092073 . |
| [25] | 李金滨,全美玲,李晓雪. 急性心肌梗死合并心源性休克发生院内死亡预测模型的建立[J]. 中国循证心血管医学杂志, 2024, 16(3):283-287.doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-4055. 2024. 03.07 . |
| [26] | 张晔,孙婷婷,张海峰,等. 急性心肌梗死合并心源性休克院内死亡的预测模型建立与验证[J]. 中西医结合心脑血管病杂志, 2023, 21(24):4570-4575.doi:10.12102/j.issn.1672-1349. 2023.24.017 . |
| [27] | 刘亮,肖浩,崔晓磊,等. 乳酸对ECMO支持下急性心肌梗死合并心源性休克患者预后的影响[J]. 河北医药, 2024, 46(11):1632-1635.doi:10.3969/j.issn.1002-7386.2024.11.006 . |
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |