Dataset Information

Implementation of a Cardiogenic Shock Team and Clinical Outcomes (INOVA-SHOCK Registry): Observational and Retrospective Study.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:The development and implementation of a Cardiogenic Shock initiative focused on increased disease awareness, early multidisciplinary team activation, rapid initiation of mechanical circulatory support, and hemodynamic-guided management and improvement of outcomes in cardiogenic shock. OBJECTIVE:The objectives of this study are (1) to collect retrospective clinical outcomes for acute decompensated heart failure cardiogenic shock and acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock, and compare current versus historical survival rates and clinical outcomes; (2) to evaluate Inova Heart and Vascular Institute site specific outcomes before and after initiation of the Cardiogenic Shock team on January 1, 2017; (3) to compare outcomes related to early implementation of mechanical circulatory support and hemodynamic-guided management versus historical controls; (4) to assess survival to discharge rate in patients receiving intervention from the designated shock team and (5) create a clinical archive of Cardiogenic Shock patient characteristics for future analysis and the support of translational research studies. METHODS:This is an observational, retrospective, single center study. Retrospective and prospective data will be collected in patients treated at the Inova Heart and Vascular Institute with documented cardiogenic shock as a result of acute decompensated heart failure or acute myocardial infarction. This registry will include data from patients prior to and after the initiation of the multidisciplinary Cardiogenic Shock team on January 1, 2017. Clinical outcomes associated with early multidisciplinary team intervention will be analyzed. In the study group, all patients evaluated for documented cardiogenic shock (acute decompensated heart failure cardiogenic shock, acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock) treated at the Inova Heart and Vascular Institute by the Cardiogenic Shock team will be included. An additional historical Inova Heart and Vascular Institute control group will be analyzed as a comparator. Means with standard deviations will be reported for outcomes. For categorical variables, frequencies and percentages will be presented. For continuous variables, the number of subjects, mean, standard deviation, minimum, 25th percentile, median, 75th percentile and maximum will be reported. Reported differences will include standard errors and 95% CI. RESULTS:Preliminary data analysis for the year 2017 has been completed. Compared to a baseline 2016 survival rate of 47.0%, from 2017 to 2018, CS survival rates were increased to 57.9% (58/110) and 81.3% (81/140), respectively (P=.01 for both). Study data will continue to be collected until December 31, 2018. CONCLUSIONS:The preliminary results of this study demonstrate that the INOVA SHOCK team approach to the treatment of Cardiogenic Shock with early team activation, rapid initiation of mechanical circulatory support, hemodynamic-guided management, and strict protocol adherence is associated with superior clinical outcomes: survival to discharge and overall survival when compared to 2015 and 2016 outcomes prior to Shock team initiation. What may limit the generalization of these results of this study to other populations are site specific; expertise of the team, strict algorithm adherence based on the INOVA SHOCK protocol, and staff commitment to timely team activation. Retrospective clinical outcomes (acute decompensated heart failure cardiogenic shock, acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock) demonstrated an increase in current survival rates when compared to pre-Cardiogenic Shock team initiation, rapid team activation and diagnosis and timely utilization of mechanical circulatory support. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03378739; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03378739 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/701vstDGd).

SUBMITTER: Tehrani B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6043735 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Implementation of a Cardiogenic Shock Team and Clinical Outcomes (INOVA-SHOCK Registry): Observational and Retrospective Study.

Tehrani Behnam B Truesdell Alexander A Singh Ramesh R Murphy Charles C Saulino Patricia P

JMIR research protocols 20180628 6

<h4>Background</h4>The development and implementation of a Cardiogenic Shock initiative focused on increased disease awareness, early multidisciplinary team activation, rapid initiation of mechanical circulatory support, and hemodynamic-guided management and improvement of outcomes in cardiogenic shock.<h4>Objective</h4>The objectives of this study are (1) to collect retrospective clinical outcomes for acute decompensated heart failure cardiogenic shock and acute myocardial infarction cardiogeni ...[more]

PMID: 29954728

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLimited data are available on the clinical significance of lactate clearance (LC) in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS). This study investigated the prognostic role of LC in CS patients.MethodsWe analyzed data from 628 patients in the RESCUE registry, a multicenter, observational cohort enrolled between January 2014 and December 2018. Univariable logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the prognostic implications of 24 h LC, and then patients were divided into two groups according to the cut-off value of 24 h LC (high lactate clearance [HLC] group vs. low lactate clearance [LLC] group). The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. We also assessed all-cause mortality at 12 month follow-up and compared the prognostic performance of 24 h LC according to initial serum lactate level.ResultsIn the univariable logistic regression analysis, 24 h LC was associated with in-hospital mortality (odds ratio 0.989, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.985-0.993, p < 0.001), and the cut-off value for the LC of the study population was 64%. The HLC group (initial 24 h LC ≥ 64%, n = 333) had a significantly lower incidence of in-hospital death than the LLC group (n = 295) (25.5% in the HLC group vs. 42.7% in the LLC group, p < 0.001). During 12 months of follow-up, the cumulative incidence of all-cause death was significantly lower in the HLC group than in the LLC group (33.0% vs. 48.8%; hazard ratio 0.55; 95% CI 0.42-0.70; p < 0.001). In subgroup analysis, 24 h LC predicted in-hospital mortality better in patients with initial serum lactate > 5 mmol/L than in those with serum lactate ≤ 5 mmol/L (c-statistics of initial serum lactate > 5 mmol/L = 0.782 vs. c-statistics of initial serum lactate ≤ 5 mmol/L = 0.660, p = 0.011).ConclusionsHigher LC during the early phase of CS was associated with reduced risk of in-hospital and 12 month all-cause mortalities. Patients with LC ≥ 64% during the 24 h after CS onset could expect a favorable prognosis, especially those with an initial serum lactate > 5 mmol/L.Trial registrationRESCUE (REtrospective and prospective observational Study to investigate Clinical oUtcomes and Efficacy of left ventricular assist device for Korean patients with cardiogenic shock), NCT02985008, Registered December 5, 2016-retrospectively and prospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT02985008.

Project description:IntroductionPatients with cardiogenic shock (CS) are at a high risk of developing infectious complications; however, their early detection is difficult, mainly due to a frequently occurring noninfectious inflammatory response, which accompanies an extensive myocardial infarction (MI) or a postcardiac arrest syndrome. The goal of our prospective study was to describe infectious complications in CS and the immune/inflammatory response based on a serial measurement of several blood-based inflammatory biomarkers.MethodsEighty patients with CS were evaluated and their infections were monitored. Inflammatory markers (C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, pentraxin 3, presepsin) were measured seven times per week. The control groups consisted of 11 patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction without CS and without infection, and 22 patients in septic shock.ResultsInfection was diagnosed in 46.3% of patients with CS; 16 patients developed an infection within 48?h. Respiratory infection was most common, occurring in 33 out of 37 patients. Infection was a significant or even the main reason of death only in 3.8% of all patients with CS, and we did not find statistically significant difference in 3-month mortality between group of patients with CS with and without infection. There was no statistically significant prolongation of the duration of mechanical ventilation associated with infection. Strong inflammatory response is often in patients with CS due to MI, but we found no significant difference in the course of the inflammatory response expressed by evaluated biomarkers in patients with CS with and without infection. We found a strong relationship between the elevated inflammatory markers (sampled at 12?h) and the 3-month mortality: the area under the curve of receiver operating characteristic ranged between 0.683 and 0.875.ConclusionThe prevalence of infection in patients with CS was 46.3%, and respiratory tract infections were the most common type. Infections did not prolong statistically significantly the duration of mechanical ventilation and did not increase the prevalence of hospital mortality in this high-risk CS population. CS due to acute myocardial infarction was accompanied by a strong and highly variable inflammatory response, but it did not reach the intensity of the inflammatory response observed in patients with septic shock. An extensive immune/inflammatory response in patients with CS is linked to a poor prognosis.

Dataset Information

Implementation of a Cardiogenic Shock Team and Clinical Outcomes (INOVA-SHOCK Registry): Observational and Retrospective Study.

Publications

Implementation of a Cardiogenic Shock Team and Clinical Outcomes (INOVA-SHOCK Registry): Observational and Retrospective Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets