ArticleInternational journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature2022
Predictive value of the APACHE II score in cardiogenic shock patients treated with a percutaneous left ventricular assist device.
Article in International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognostic validation and risk stratification of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions cardiogenic shock classification in a large, real-world intensive care unit cohort in South Korea.Acute and critical care · 2026Article
- Mean Systemic Filling Pressure Was Associated with 28-Day Mortality in Patients with Constrictive Pericarditis After Pericardial Stripping: A Retrospective Cohort Study.International journal of general medicine · 2025Article
- Epigenomic biomarkers insights in PBMCs for prognostic assessment of ECMO-treated cardiogenic shock patients.Clinical epigenetics · 2024Article
- Data for validation and adjustment of APACHE II score in cardiogenic shock patients treated with a percutaneous left ventricular assist device.Data in brief · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The APACHE II score assesses patient prognosis in intensive care units. Different disease entities are predictable by using a specific factor called Diagnostic Category Weight (DCW). We aimed to validate the prognostic value of the APACHE II score in patients treated with a percutaneous left ventricular assist device because of refractory cardiogenic shock (CS). Methods: From the Dresden Impella Registry, we analyzed 180 patients receiving an Impella CP®. The main outcome was the observed intrahospital mortality ( Results: The APACHE II score, which was 33.5 ± 0.6, significantly overestimated intrahospital mortality ( Conclusion: The APACHE II score has an acceptable accuracy for the prediction of intrahospital mortality but overestimates its total amount in CS patients. Adjustment of the DCW can lead to a much more precise prediction of prognosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.