• Clinical transplantation · Oct 1995

    Comparative Study

    Comparison of APACHE II scoring in liver and kidney transplant recipients versus trauma and general surgical patients in a single intensive-care unit.

    • R G Sawyer, C G Durbin, L K Rosenlof, and T L Pruett.
    • University of Virgina, Department of Surgery, Charlottesville, USA.
    • Clin Transplant. 1995 Oct 1; 9 (5): 401-5.

    AbstractOver a 26-month period we assessed the ability of APACHE II, scored on admission to the surgical intensive care unit (SICU), to predict the in-hospital mortality of liver and kidney transplant recipients either post-operatively or after subsequent complications, and compared these results to non-transplant SICU admissions. There were 866 SICU admissions, of which 128 were liver transplant recipients, 112 were renal transplant recipients, 211 were trauma admissions and 415 were non-transplant/non-trauma admissions. In hospital mortalities among all liver transplant admissions were 0%, 10%, 38%, and 82% for APACHE II ranges of 0-10, 11-20, 21-30 and > 30, respectively, with differences between the second and third, and third and fourth ranges significant (p < or = 0.05 by chi-square analysis). These differences were also seen when examining scores following the primary transplantation alone. Mortalities in corresponding APACHE II ranges for trauma and nontransplant/nontrauma admissions were similar. APACHE II scoring was not useful for renal transplant recipient, as it consistently overpredicted mortality. We conclude that APACHE II scoring may be useful in predicting outcome in post-operative liver transplant recipients, but is not useful in stratifying risk in renal transplant recipients due to the inherently low mortality involved.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,706,642 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.