Abstract
Background: Risk-stratifying patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) is a major unmet need. The recently proposed Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) staging system for CS severity lacks uniform criteria defining each stage. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to test parameters that define SCAI stages and explore their utility as predictors of in-hospital mortality in CS. Methods: The CS Working Group registry includes patients from 17 hospitals enrolled between 2016 and 2021 and was used to define clinical profiles for CS. We selected parameters of hypotension and hypoperfusion and treatment intensity, confirmed their association with mortality, then defined formal criteria for each stage and tested the association between both baseline and maximum Stage and mortality. Results: Of 3,455 patients, CS was caused by heart failure (52%) or myocardial infarction (32%). Mortality was 35% for the total cohort and higher among patients with myocardial infarction, out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, and treatment with increasing numbers of drugs and devices. Systolic blood pressure, lactate level, alanine transaminase level, and systemic pH were significantly associated with mortality and used to define each stage. Using these criteria, baseline and maximum stages were significantly associated with mortality (n = 1,890). Lower baseline stage was associated with a higher incidence of stage escalation and a shorter duration of time to reach maximum stage. Conclusions: We report a novel approach to define SCAI stages and identify a significant association between baseline and maximum stage and mortality. This approach may improve clinical application of the staging system and provides new insight into the trajectory of hospitalized CS patients.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 185-198 |
Number of pages | 14 |
Journal | Journal of the American College of Cardiology |
Volume | 80 |
Issue number | 3 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Jul 19 2022 |
Funding
This work was supported by National Institutes of Health RO1 grants (to Dr Kapur) (R01HL139785-01; R01HL159089-01) and institutional grants from Abiomed Inc, Boston Scientific Inc, Abbott Laboratories, Getinge Inc, and LivaNova Inc to Tufts Medical Center. The sponsors had no input on collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data, nor in the preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript. Dr Kapur has received consulting honoraria and institutional grant support from Abbott Laboratories, Abiomed Inc, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, LivaNova, Getinge, and Zoll. Dr Kanwar has served on the advisory board for Abiomed Inc. Dr Sinha has served as a consultant for Abiomed Inc. Dr Garan has served as a consultant for NuPulseCV; has served on the scientific advisory board for Abiomed; and is a recipient of research support from Verantos and Abbott. Dr Hernandez-Montfort has served as a consultant for Abiomed Inc. Dr Abraham has served as a consultant for Abbott Laboratories and Abiomed Inc. Dr Nathan has received consulting honoraria from Abiomed, Getinge, and CSI. Dr Hall has served as a consultant to Abiomed, Abbott, and Medtronic. Dr Mahr has served as a consultant to Abbott, Abiomed, and Syncaria. Dr Burkhoff has received an unrestricted, educational grant from Abiomed Inc. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose. One of the key goals of introducing the SCAI classifications was to enhance clinical communication and expedite decision-making by standardizing definitions of shock severity. The descriptors of shock staging include key parameters derived from physical examination, biochemical markers, and hemodynamics.13 However, for these classifications to be reproducibly and consistently assignable at bedside requires specific threshold values for the parameters used to define hypotension and hypoperfusion. Moreover, there is increasing use of multidrug and device-based strategies, which needs to be taken into account during staging. The criteria we now propose accounts for many of these variables, including treatment intensity (vasoactive agents, inotropes, and AMCS devices), OHCA, and specific cutoff values for noninvasive hemodynamics (SBP) and laboratory data (lactate, ALT, and pH) to classify patients into individual stages. These parameters were chosen for ease of access at bedside, and were based on prior publications and further supported by data from the CSWG registry. 17-22 This approach allows clinicians to risk-stratify CS patients into SCAI stages using consistent, uniform definitions of hypotension and hypoperfusion.
Keywords
- acute myocardial infarction
- cardiogenic shock
- heart failure
- hemodynamics
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine