Neuroimaging Augments DCD-N Score in Predicting Time from Withdrawal of Life-Sustaining Measures to Death Among Potential Organ Donors.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Neurocritical Care Pub Date : 2025-01-07 DOI:10.1007/s12028-024-02204-x
Andreas H Kramer, Philippe L Couillard, Christopher J Doig, Julie A Kromm
{"title":"Neuroimaging Augments DCD-N Score in Predicting Time from Withdrawal of Life-Sustaining Measures to Death Among Potential Organ Donors.","authors":"Andreas H Kramer, Philippe L Couillard, Christopher J Doig, Julie A Kromm","doi":"10.1007/s12028-024-02204-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Controlled donation after circulatory determination of death (DCD) is feasible only if circulatory arrest occurs soon after withdrawal of life-sustaining measures (WLSM). When organ recovery cannot proceed because this time interval is too long, there are potential negative implications, including perceptions of \"secondary loss\" for patients' families and significant resource consumption. The DCD-N score is a validated clinical tool for predicting rapid death following WLSM. We hypothesized that neuroimaging evidence of effaced perimesencephalic cisterns improves prediction of time to death compared with the DCD-N score alone.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In a retrospective population-based cohort study, DCD-N scores were prospectively determined in patients for whom consent for DCD had been obtained. Perimesencephalic cisterns on last available neuroimaging were assessed in duplicate and classified as normal, partially effaced, or completely effaced. Multivariable logistic regression assessed the capacity of DCD-N score and effaced cisterns to predict death within 1, 2, or 3 h of WLSM.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 164 consecutive patients, 49 (30%) progressed to death by neurologic criteria and were excluded. Of the remaining 115 patients, 81 (70%) died within 2 h of WLSM. When perimesencephalic cisterns were patent, this occurred in 48% of patients, compared with 88% and 93%, respectively, of patients with partially and completely effaced cisterns (p < 0.0001). In multivariable analysis, the odds ratio for prediction of death within 2 h was 7.2 (2.8-18.3) for each incremental DCD-N score and 15.4 (4.1-58.1) for the presence of either partially or completely effaced cisterns (c = 0.92 vs. 0.75-0.84 for univariate models). Results were comparable for prediction of death within 1 or 3 h. With patent cisterns, median time to death was 132.5 (21-420) minutes, compared with 23.5 (16-32) and 22 (19-30) minutes, respectively, with partially and completely effaced cisterns (p = 0.0002).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Cerebral edema with effaced perimesencephalic cisterns predicts rapid death following WLSM in potential DCD organ donors and improves on performance of the DCD-N score alone. Although originally validated for the prediction of death within 1 h, the DCD-N score remains predictive up to 3 h following WLSM.</p>","PeriodicalId":19118,"journal":{"name":"Neurocritical Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurocritical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12028-024-02204-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Controlled donation after circulatory determination of death (DCD) is feasible only if circulatory arrest occurs soon after withdrawal of life-sustaining measures (WLSM). When organ recovery cannot proceed because this time interval is too long, there are potential negative implications, including perceptions of "secondary loss" for patients' families and significant resource consumption. The DCD-N score is a validated clinical tool for predicting rapid death following WLSM. We hypothesized that neuroimaging evidence of effaced perimesencephalic cisterns improves prediction of time to death compared with the DCD-N score alone.

Methods: In a retrospective population-based cohort study, DCD-N scores were prospectively determined in patients for whom consent for DCD had been obtained. Perimesencephalic cisterns on last available neuroimaging were assessed in duplicate and classified as normal, partially effaced, or completely effaced. Multivariable logistic regression assessed the capacity of DCD-N score and effaced cisterns to predict death within 1, 2, or 3 h of WLSM.

Results: Of 164 consecutive patients, 49 (30%) progressed to death by neurologic criteria and were excluded. Of the remaining 115 patients, 81 (70%) died within 2 h of WLSM. When perimesencephalic cisterns were patent, this occurred in 48% of patients, compared with 88% and 93%, respectively, of patients with partially and completely effaced cisterns (p < 0.0001). In multivariable analysis, the odds ratio for prediction of death within 2 h was 7.2 (2.8-18.3) for each incremental DCD-N score and 15.4 (4.1-58.1) for the presence of either partially or completely effaced cisterns (c = 0.92 vs. 0.75-0.84 for univariate models). Results were comparable for prediction of death within 1 or 3 h. With patent cisterns, median time to death was 132.5 (21-420) minutes, compared with 23.5 (16-32) and 22 (19-30) minutes, respectively, with partially and completely effaced cisterns (p = 0.0002).

Conclusions: Cerebral edema with effaced perimesencephalic cisterns predicts rapid death following WLSM in potential DCD organ donors and improves on performance of the DCD-N score alone. Although originally validated for the prediction of death within 1 h, the DCD-N score remains predictive up to 3 h following WLSM.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
神经影像学增强DCD-N评分预测潜在器官供者从停止维持生命措施到死亡的时间。
背景:只有在停止生命维持措施(WLSM)后不久发生循环停止时,循环死亡确定(DCD)后的控制捐赠才可行。当由于时间间隔过长而无法进行器官恢复时,会产生潜在的负面影响,包括患者家属的“二次损失”和大量资源消耗。DCD-N评分是预测WLSM后快速死亡的有效临床工具。我们假设,与单独的DCD-N评分相比,脑周围池消失的神经影像学证据可以提高死亡时间的预测。方法:在一项基于人群的回顾性队列研究中,对已获得DCD同意的患者的DCD- n评分进行前瞻性测定。最后一次可用的神经成像对脑周围池进行了重复评估,并将其分为正常、部分抹去或完全抹去。多变量logistic回归评估了DCD-N评分和消泡池预测WLSM后1、2或3小时内死亡的能力。结果:在164例连续患者中,49例(30%)根据神经学标准进展至死亡,并被排除在外。其余115例患者中,81例(70%)在WLSM后2小时内死亡。当脑周围池未闭时,48%的患者出现这种情况,而脑周围池部分消失和完全消失的患者分别为88%和93% (p)结论:脑周围池消失的脑水肿预示着潜在的DCD器官供者在WLSM后的快速死亡,并且单独改善DCD- n评分的表现。虽然最初被证实可以预测1小时内的死亡,但DCD-N评分仍然可以预测WLSM后3小时的死亡。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Neurocritical Care
Neurocritical Care 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
8.60%
发文量
221
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Neurocritical Care is a peer reviewed scientific publication whose major goal is to disseminate new knowledge on all aspects of acute neurological care. It is directed towards neurosurgeons, neuro-intensivists, neurologists, anesthesiologists, emergency physicians, and critical care nurses treating patients with urgent neurologic disorders. These are conditions that may potentially evolve rapidly and could need immediate medical or surgical intervention. Neurocritical Care provides a comprehensive overview of current developments in intensive care neurology, neurosurgery and neuroanesthesia and includes information about new therapeutic avenues and technological innovations. Neurocritical Care is the official journal of the Neurocritical Care Society.
期刊最新文献
Palliative Care Spiritual Assessment and Goals-of-Care Discussions in the Neurocritical Care Unit: Collaborating with Chaplains. States Do Not Delineate the "Accepted Medical Standards" for Brain Death/Death by Neurologic Criteria Determination. Does Celecoxib Actually Reduce Mortality in Patients with Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage? Hemoglobin Decrements are Associated with Ischemic Brain Lesions and Poor Outcomes in Patients with Intracerebral Hemorrhage. Safety Analysis of Visual Percutaneous Tracheostomy in Neurocritical Care Patients with Anticoagulation and Antithrombosis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1