+ Site Statistics
References:
54,258,434
Abstracts:
29,560,870
PMIDs:
28,072,757
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

The prognostic impact of malnutrition in patients with severely decompensated acute heart failure, as assessed using the Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI) and Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) score



The prognostic impact of malnutrition in patients with severely decompensated acute heart failure, as assessed using the Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI) and Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) score



Heart and Vessels 33(2): 134-144



Patients with heart failure (HF) are sometimes classified as malnourished, but the prognostic value of nutritional status in acute HF (AHF) remains largely unstudied. 1214 patients who were admitted to the intensive care unit between January 2000 and June 2016 were screened based on their serum albumin, lymphocyte count, and total cholesterol measures. A total of 458 HF patients were enrolled in this study. The Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI) is calculated as 10 × serum albumin (g/dL) + 0.005 × lymphocyte count (per mm3) (lower = worse). The Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) score is points based, and is calculated using serum albumin, total cholesterol, and lymphocyte count (range 0-12, higher = worse). Patients were divided into three groups according to PNI: high-PNI (PNI < 35, n = 331), middle-PNI (35 ≤ PNI < 38, n = 50), and low-PNI (PNI ≥ 38, n = 77). They were also divided into four groups according to CONUT score: normal-CONUT (0-1, n = 128), mild-CONUT (2-4, n = 179), moderate-CONUT (5-8, n = 127), and severe-CONUT (≥9, n = 24). The PNI, which exhibited a good balance between sensitivity and specificity for predicting in-hospital mortality [66.1 and 68.4%, respectively; area under the curve (AUC) 0.716; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.638-0.793), was 39.7 overall, while the CONUT score was 5 overall (61.4 and 68.4%, respectively; AUC 0.697; 95% CI 0.618-0.775). A Kaplan-Meier curve indicated that the prognosis, including all-cause death, was significantly (p < 0.001) poorer in low-PNI patients than in high-PNI groups and was also significantly poorer in severe-CONUT patients than in normal-CONUT and mild-CONUT groups. A multivariate Cox regression model showed that the low-PNI and severe-CONUT categories were independent predictors of 365-day mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 2.060, 95% CI 1.302-3.259 and HR 2.238, 95% CI 1.050-4.772, respectively). Malnutrition, as assessed using both the PNI and the CONUT score, has a prognostic impact in patients with severely decompensated AHF.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 060376209

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 28803356

DOI: 10.1007/s00380-017-1034-z


Related references

Prognostic Impact of Nutritional Status Assessed by the Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) Score in Patients with Surgically Treated Renal Cell Carcinoma. Nutrition and Cancer 2018: 1-9, 2018

Prognostic value of malnutrition assessed by Controlling Nutritional Status score for long-term mortality in patients with acute heart failure. International Journal of Cardiology 230: 529-536, 2017

Nutritional screening based on the controlling nutritional status (CONUT) score at the time of admission is useful for long-term prognostic prediction in patients with heart failure requiring hospitalization. Heart and Vessels 32(11): 1337-1349, 2017

Utility of the Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) score in patients admitted due to acute heart failure. International Journal of Cardiology 235: 203, 2017

Usefulness of Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index for Assessing Nutritional Status and Its Prognostic Impact in Patients Aged ≥65 Years With Acute Heart Failure. American Journal of Cardiology 118(4): 550-555, 2017

The Association between the Prognostic Value and the Nutritional CONUT Scores in Elderly Patients Hospitalization for Decompensated Heart Failure. Journal of Cardiac Failure 22(9): S218-S219, 2016

Prognostic impact of nutritional status assessed by the Controlling Nutritional Status score in patients with stable coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Clinical Research in Cardiology 106(11): 875-883, 2017

Prognostic Value of Combined Tumor Marker and Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) Score in Colorectal Cancer Patients. Yonago Acta Medica 62(1): 124-130, 2019

Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) score is a prognostic marker for gastric cancer patients after curative resection. Gastric Cancer 21(2): 204-212, 2017

Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) Score Is a Prognostic Marker in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients Receiving First-line Chemotherapy. Anticancer Research 38(8): 4883-4888, 2018

Prognostic Significance of Preoperative Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) Score in Patients Undergoing Hepatic Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma. World Journal of Surgery 41(11): 2805-2812, 2017

Malnutrition as assessed by nutritional risk index is associated with worse outcome in patients admitted with acute decompensated heart failure: an ACAP-HF data analysis. Heart International 6(1): E2, 2011

The Nutritional CONUT Score Predicts Short- and Long-Term Prognosis in Super-Elderly Patients with Acute Decompensated Heart Failure. Journal of Cardiac Failure 21(10): S182-S183, 2015

P-045 * The pretreatment Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) score as an independent prognostic factor in patients with clinical Stage I-III esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Annals of Oncology 26(Suppl 4): Iv12-Iv13, 2015

SUN-LB041: Preoperative Prediction on Postoperative Complications and Prognosis by Nutritional Status Assessed by Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) Score. Clinical Nutrition 34: S249-S250, 2015