4.5 Article

Clinical Presentation and In-Hospital Trajectory of Heart Failure and Cardiogenic Shock

Journal

JACC-HEART FAILURE
Volume 11, Issue 2, Pages 176-187

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jchf.2022.10.002

Keywords

cardiogenic shock; heart failure; heart replacement therapy; native heart survival

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aimed to define the severity of cardiogenic shock in patients with heart failure-related cardiogenic shock (HF-CS) using the SCAI staging system. The results showed that patients with de novo HF-CS had a higher risk of in-hospital death and cardiac arrest, and their condition escalated more rapidly. AMCS devices were commonly used in HF-CS patients, but there was significant heterogeneity among device types.
BACKGROUND Heart failure-related cardiogenic shock (HF-CS) remains an understudied distinct clinical entity.OBJECTIVES The authors sought to profile a large cohort of patients with HF-CS focused on practical application of the SCAI (Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions) staging system to define baseline and maximal shock severity, in-hospital management with acute mechanical circulatory support (AMCS), and clinical outcomes.METHODS The Cardiogenic Shock Working Group registry includes patients with CS, regardless of etiology, from 17 clinical sites enrolled between 2016 and 2020. Patients with HF-CS (non-acute myocardial infarction) were analyzed and classified based on clinical presentation, outcomes at discharge, and shock severity defined by SCAI stages.RESULTS A total of 1,767 patients with HF-CS were included, of whom 349 (19.8%) had de novo HF-CS (DNHF-CS). Patients were more likely to present in SCAI stage C or D and achieve maximum SCAI stage D. Patients with DNHF-CS were more likely to experience in-hospital death and in-and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, and they escalated more rapidly to a maximum achieved SCAI stage, compared to patients with acute-on-chronic HF-CS. In-hospital cardiac arrest was associated with greater in-hospital death regardless of clinical presentation (de novo: 63% vs 21%; acute-on-chronic HF-CS: 65% vs 17%; both P < 0.001). Forty-five percent of HF-CS patients were exposed to at least 1 AMCS device throughout hospitalization.CONCLUSIONS In a large contemporary HF-CS cohort, we identified a greater incidence of in-hospital death and cardiac arrest as well as a more rapid escalation to maximum SCAI stage severity among DNHF-CS. AMCS use in HF-CS was common, with significant heterogeneity among device types. (Cardiogenic Shock Working Group Registry [CSWG]; NCT04682483) (J Am Coll Cardiol HF 2023;11:176-187) (c) 2023 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available