• Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases
• /
• v.57 no.4
• /
• pp.329-335
• /
• 2004

Background : The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score can help to assess organ failure over time and is useful to evaluate morbidity. The aim of this study is to evaluate the performance of SOFA score as a descriptor of multiple organ failure in critically ill patients in a local unit hospital, and to compare with APACHE III scoring system. Methods : This study was carried out prospectively. A total of ninety one patients were included who admitted to the medical intensive care unit (ICU) in Chuncheon Sacred Heart Hospital from May 1 through June 30, 2000. We excluded patients with a length of stay in the ICU less than 2 days following scheduled procedure, admissions for ECG monitoring, other department and patients transferred to other hospital. The SOFA score and APACHE III score were calculated on admission and then consecutively every 24 hours until ICU discharge. Results : The ICU mortality rate was 20%. The non-survivors had a higher SOFA score within 24 hours after admission. The number of organ failure was associated with increased mortality. The evaluation of a subgroup of 74 patients who stayed in the ICU for at least 48 hours showed that survivors and non-survivors followed a different course. In this subgroup, the total SOFA score increased in 81% of the non-survivors but in only 21% of the survivors. Conversely, the total SOFA score decreased in 48% of the survivors compared with 6% of the non-survivors. The non-survivors also had a higher APACHE III score within 24 hours and there was a correlation between SOFA score and APACHE III score. Conclusion : The SOFA score is a simple, but effective method to assess organ failure and to predict mortality in critically ill patients. Regular and repeated scoring enables patient's condition and clinical course to be monitored and better understood. The SOFA score well correlates with APACHE III score.

• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• v.41 no.3
• /
• pp.320-328
• /
• 2008

Background: Numerous surgical devices for mitral repair have been used in the past with good results. In this study we describe a simple annuloplasty technique with using a new device ($Mitracon^{(R)}$). The aim of this study was to assess its efficacy and surgical results with using $Mitracon^{(R)}$. Material and Method: From May 2003 to October 2005, 46 patients (21 women and 25 men (mean age of $51.4{\pm}17.8$ years) with mitral regurgitation from various causes were treated with either the $Mitracon^{(R)}$ (the $Mitracon^{(R)}$ group) or the Capentier Edward rigid ring (the CE group). The median follow-up duration was 18.9 months. Result: The mean grade of mitral regurgitation before and immediately after surgery in the $Mitracon^{(R)}$ group and the CE group decreased from $3.2{\pm}0.8$ to $0.6{\pm}0.7$ and $3.4{\pm}0.7$ to $0.3{\pm}0.5$, respectively. There were no significant changes in the ejection fraction either between the two groups or before and immediately after surgery. No deaths were seen in either group. Early postoperative echocardiography of all 46 patients showed only trivial mitral regurgitation or none at all. Echocardiography at a median of 18.9 months also showed no progression in mitral regurgitation. The mean grade of mitral regurgitation in the $Mitracon^{(R)}$ group at this time point decreased from $3.2{\pm}0.8$ to $0.8{\pm}0.7$ (p<0.05). The CE group also showed a similar degree of decrease from $3.4{\pm}0.7$ to $0.3{\pm}0.6$ (p<0.05). The mitral valve area in the $Mitracon^{(R)}$ group at 1 year follow-up was $3.3{\pm}0.9cm^2$. The mitral valve area in the CE group was $2.7{\pm}0.6cm^2$. The mean mitral pressure gradient in the $Mitracon^{(R)}$ group at 1 year follow-up was $3.1{\pm}1.3$ mmHg. The mean pressure gradient in the CE group was $4.5{\pm}2.1$ mmHg, although any statistical significant difference for this between the groups was not reached. Conclusion: The present study showed the described technique to be safe and effective in the intermediate term. Because long term results are unavailable, a more extensive prospective randomized multicenter trial may be warranted to determine whether this procedure should be generally applied for repair of mitral valve disease.