Key result
Prognostic scales such as HFSS, SHFM, and INTERMACS are essential tools for accurate risk stratification and estimating potential benefits of therapy in patients with advanced heart failure.
Prognostic scales are essential for accurate risk stratification and optimal selection of candidates for advanced heart failure therapies like heart transplantation and VAD implantation.
Supports incorporation of HFSS/SHFM/INTERMACS into advanced HF evaluation; leaves open prospective validation in contemporary cohorts.
Heart transplantation (HT) is the treatment of choice for patients with advanced heart failure (HF) who remain symptomatic despite optimal medical therapy. Due to the shortage of organs for transplantation and constantly increasing number of patients placed on waiting lists, accurate risk stratification is a crucial element of management in this population. Prognostic scales allow one to evaluate the patient prognosis, estimate the potential benefits of therapy and identify those patients most likely to benefit from advanced methods of treatment. In this review, we describe prognostic scales in advanced HF, concentrating on commonly used tools - the Heart Failure Survival Score (HFSS) and Seattle Heart Failure Model (SHFM) - as well as on the new promising scales for evaluating waiting list mortality and post-transplant outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Szczurek et al. (2018) conducted a review in Advanced heart failure. Prognostic scales (HFSS, SHFM, MELD, INTERMACS, IMPACT, RADIAL) was evaluated. Prognostic scales such as HFSS, SHFM, and INTERMACS are essential tools for accurate risk stratification and estimating potential benefits of therapy in patients with advanced heart failure.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: