Outcome of Patients with Systemic Sclerosis in the Intensive Care Unit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc) are prone to disease-specific or treatment-related life-threatening complications that may warrant intensive care unit (ICU) admission. We assessed the characteristics and current outcome of patients with SSc admitted to the ICU. METHODS: We performed a single-center retrospective study over 6 years (November 2006-December 2012). All patients with SSc admitted to the ICU were enrolled. Short-term (in-ICU and in-hospital) and longterm (6-mo and 1-yr) mortality rates were studied, and the prognostic factors were analyzed. RESULTS: Forty-one patients with a median age of 50 years [interquartile range (IQR) 40-65] were included. Twenty-nine patients (72.5%) displayed diffuse cutaneous SSc. The time from diagnosis to ICU admission was 78 months (IQR 34-128). Twenty-eight patients (71.7%) previously had pulmonary fibrosis, and 12 (31.5%) had pulmonary hypertension. The main reason for ICU admission was acute respiratory failure in 27 patients (65.8%). Noninvasive ventilation was first attempted in 13 patients (31.7%) and was successful in 8 of them, whereas others required endotracheal intubation within 24 h. Altogether, 13 patients (31.7%) required endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation. The overall in-ICU, in-hospital, 6-month, and 1-year mortality rates were 31.8%, 39.0%, 46.4%, and 61.0%, respectively. Invasive mechanical ventilation was the worst prognostic factor, associated with an in-hospital mortality rate of 84.6%. CONCLUSION: This study provides reliable prognostic data in patients with SSc who required ICU admission. The devastating outcome of invasive mechanical ventilation in patients with SSc requires a reappraisal of indications for ICU admission and early identification of patients likely to benefit from noninvasive ventilation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".