Why the study?
The study was conducted to summarize the results of the International CytoSorb Registry on hemoadsorption in critically ill intensive care unit patients.
Does hemoadsorption reduce in-hospital mortality compared to predicted mortality in critically ill patients?
Does hemoadsorption reduce in-hospital mortality compared to predicted mortality in critically ill patients?
In a large international registry of critically ill patients, hemoadsorption did not significantly reduce in-hospital mortality compared to APACHE II predicted mortality, although it was associated with reductions in inflammatory biomarkers and improvements in cardiovascular and pulmonary SOFA scores.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Observed mortality did not differ from APACHE-II predictions; leaves open hemoadsorption efficacy in critical illness pending randomized trials.
The aim of the current paper is to summarize the results of the International CytoSorb Registry. Data were collected on patients of the intensive care unit. The primary endpoint was actual in-hospital mortality compared to the mortality predicted by APACHE II score. The main secondary endpoints were SOFA scores, inflammatory biomarkers and overall evaluation of the general condition. 1434 patients were enrolled. Indications for hemoadsorption were sepsis/septic shock (N = 936); cardiac surgery perioperatively (N = 172); cardiac surgery postoperatively (N = 67) and "other" reasons (N = 259). APACHE-II-predicted mortality was 62.0±24.8%, whereas observed hospital mortality was 50.1%. Overall SOFA scores did not change but cardiovascular and pulmonary SOFA scores decreased by 0.4 [-0.5;-0.3] and -0.2 [-0.3;-0.2] points, respectively. Serum procalcitonin and C-reactive protein levels showed significant reduction: -15.4 [-19.6;-11.17] ng/mL; -17,52 [-70;44] mg/L, respectively. In the septic cohort PCT and IL-6 also showed significant reduction: -18.2 [-23.6;-12.8] ng/mL; -2.6 [-3.0;-2.2] pg/mL, respectively. Evaluation of the overall effect: minimal improvement (22%), much improvement (22%) and very much improvement (10%), no change observed (30%) and deterioration (4%). There was no significant difference in the primary outcome of mortality, but there were improvements in cardiovascular and pulmonary SOFA scores and a reduction in PCT, CRP and IL-6 levels. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02312024 (retrospectively registered).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hawchar et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: