Predictive Biomarkers for ICU-Acquired Weakness in Shock Patients

Predictive Biomarkers for ICU-Acquired Weakness in Shock Patients


Single-center, prospective, observational study evaluating the clinical characteristics and predictive biomarkers of intensive care unit-acquired weakness (ICU-AW) in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) requiring mechanical circulatory support (MCS). Conducted at Kyushu University, Japan, the study focused on identifying factors associated with ICU-AW, defined by a Medical Research Council (MRC) score < 48 points after awakening.

  • 20 patients enrolled (23 analyzed for MRC score) at 1 academic hospital in Japan.
  • Patients aged ≥16 years with CS requiring MCS (e.g., ECMO, Impella, or intra-aortic balloon pump).
  • ICU-AW diagnosed based on MRC score < 48 points post-awakening; non-ICU-AW group had MRC score ≥ 48 points.
  • Primary focus: Clinical characteristics (e.g., patient demographics, MCS duration) and biomarkers (e.g., inflammatory markers, organ function indicators) associated with ICU-AW.
  • Secondary focus: Exploratory analysis of potential early predictors of ICU-AW, such as lactate, renal, and liver biomarkers.
  • Conducted per the Declaration of Helsinki, with ethics approval (license number: 2019–585) and informed consent.
  • Of 20 patients evaluated, 13 (56.5%) developed ICU-AW (MRC score < 48).
  • Creatine kinase and troponin T levels were significantly higher in the ICU-AW group (p < 0.05), while hemoglobin and albumin levels were significantly lower in the ICU-AW group than the non-ICU-AW group.
  • The ICU-AW group showed significantly elevated IL-15, indicating multiple organ damage, compared to the non-ICU-AW group.
  • Median %grip strength were 75% and 77% in the ICU-AW and non-ICU groups, respectively.
    • Both groups showed lower grip strength than adults of similar age
  • %Peak VO2 at 6 months were also low but comparable between the groups (54% in the ICU-AW group vs. 50% in the non-ICU-AW group, p = 0.53)
  • Serum IL-15 level on day 1 demonstrated a strong negative correlation (r=− 0.75, p < 0.001) with the initial MRC score
  • IL-15 exhibited an even stronger correlation (r=− 0.81, p < 0.001) with the lowest MRC score during the study. IL-15 levels were significantly higher in the ICU-AW group on days 1, 3, and 7, with no significant between-group difference (p = 0.48) at discharge
  • ICU-AW group had longer MCS duration (median 7 vs. 3 days, p=0.02) and higher rates of acute kidney injury (76.9% vs. 30%, p=0.03).
  • ICU-AW patients had prolonged ICU stays (median 14 vs. 7 days, p=0.01) and higher in-hospital mortality (38.5% vs. 10%, p=0.09, not statistically significant).
  • Early lactate levels and renal dysfunction were identified as potential predictors of ICU-AW, though no single biomarker was definitive.

The authors concluded that ICU-AW is common in CS patients requiring MCS, associated with prolonged MCS duration, acute kidney injury, and elevated lactate and liver enzymes. Early identification of these factors may help predict ICU-AW risk, but further studies are needed to validate biomarkers and develop targeted interventions. IL-15 may be a valuable predictive biomarker of ICU-AW, which may be useful for early identification of ICU-AW in patients with CS using MCS

Detailed gripes below, but key limitations include:

  • Small sample size (28 enrolled, 23 analyzed) limits statistical power and generalizability.
  • Single-center design may not reflect diverse patient populations or clinical practices.
  • Observational nature prevents causal conclusions about ICU-AW predictors.
  • Limited biomarker panel; novel markers (e.g., dipeptidyl peptidase-3) not explored.
  • Lack of long-term functional outcomes or rehabilitation data.
  • Potential confounding by unmeasured variables (e.g., sedation protocols, nutritional status).
  • High dropout rate (5 patients not evaluated for MRC score due to death or other reasons).
  • No standardized MCS protocol, potentially affecting outcomes.

In CS patients requiring MCS, ICU-AW was frequent (56.5%) and linked to longer MCS duration, acute kidney injury, and elevated lactate and liver enzymes. This study highlights the burden of ICU-AW in this population and suggests early lactate and renal dysfunction as potential predictors. However, its small, single-center, observational design calls for larger, multicenter trials to confirm findings and explore targeted interventions.

Who’s worked on this before?

  • Small sample size and high dropout rate: Only 28 patients were enrolled, with 5 excluded from MRC score analysis due to death or other reasons, reducing statistical power and introducing potential bias. A larger sample is needed to confirm findings.
  • Single-center design: Conducted at Kyushu University, limiting generalizability due to potential variations in MCS protocols, patient demographics, and ICU practices across centers.
  • Observational study limitations: The non-interventional design cannot establish causality between biomarkers (e.g., lactate, liver enzymes) and ICU-AW, only associations.
  • Limited biomarker exploration: The study focused on traditional biomarkers (lactate, renal, liver markers) but did not assess newer candidates like dipeptidyl peptidase-3, which may be relevant in CS.
  • No long-term outcomes: The study focused on ICU stay and in-hospital mortality but lacked data on long-term functional recovery or rehabilitation, critical for ICU-AW patients.
  • Potential confounders: Variables like sedation protocols, nutritional support, or physical therapy, which could influence ICU-AW, were not detailed or controlled for.
  • MCS heterogeneity: Patients received varied MCS devices (e.g., ECMO, Impella), but the impact of device type on ICU-AW was not analyzed, potentially confounding results.
  • Statistical concerns: The small sample size and non-significant p-values (e.g., mortality, p=0.09) suggest underpowering for some outcomes, limiting the reliability of conclusions.
  • Lack of standardized MRC timing: MRC scores were assessed “after awakening,” but the timing was not standardized, potentially affecting consistency of ICU-AW diagnosis.
  • Exclusion criteria: Patients <16 years or those unable to undergo MRC testing were excluded, potentially narrowing the study’s applicability to broader CS populations.

This study sheds light on the high prevalence of ICU-AW in CS patients on MCS, linking it to prolonged MCS use, acute kidney injury, and elevated lactate and liver enzymes. It’s a valuable step toward identifying at-risk patients, but the small, single-center, observational design and limited biomarker scope temper its impact. The findings scream for validation in larger, multicenter studies with standardized protocols and broader biomarker panels. Until then, it’s a tantalizing hint at predictive tools for ICU-AW, but we’re not ready to rewrite the playbook on CS management. Stay tuned for the next chapter!

Written by JW



Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *