Dataset Information

Rapid Classification and Treatment Algorithm of Cardiogenic Shock Complicating Acute Coronary Syndromes: The SAVE ACS Classification.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

We aimed to identify the independent "frontline" predictors of 30-day mortality in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and propose a rapid cardiogenic shock (CS) classification and management pathway.

Materials and methods

From 2011 to 2019, a total of 11439 incident ACS patients were treated in our institution. Forward conditional logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the "frontline" predictors of 30 day mortality. The C-statistic assessed the discriminatory power of the model. As a validation cohort, we used 431 incident ACS patients admitted from January 1, 2020, to July 20, 2020.

Results

Independent predictors of 30-day mortality included age (OR 1.05; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.07, p < 0.001), intubation (OR 7.4; 95% CI 4.3 to 12.74, p < 0.001), LV systolic impairment (OR _{severe_vs_normal} 1.98; 95% CI 1.14 to 3.42, p=0.015, OR _{moderate_vs_normal} 1.84; 95% CI 1.09 to 3.1, p=0.022), serum lactate (OR 1.25; 95% CI 1.12 to 1.41, p < 0.001), base excess (OR 1.1; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.07, p < 0.001), and systolic blood pressure (OR 0.99; 95% CI 0.982 to 0.999, p=0.024). The model discrimination was excellent with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.879 (0.851 to 0.908) (p < 0.001). Based on these predictors, we created the SAVE (SBP, Arterial blood gas, and left Ventricular Ejection fraction) ACS classification, which showed good discrimination for 30-day AUC 0.814 (0.782 to 0.845) and long-term mortality (p _log-rank < 0.001). A similar AUC was demonstrated in the validation cohort (AUC 0.815).

Conclusions

In the current study, we introduce a rapid way of classifying CS using frontline parameters. The SAVE ACS classification could allow for future randomized studies to explore the benefit of mechanical circulatory support in different CS stages in ACS patients.

SUBMITTER: Panoulas V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8769867 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:With percutaneous left ventricular mechanical circulatory support devices becoming increasingly available for patients with cardiogenic shock due to acute myocardial infarction and the lack of a clear mortality benefit to date, identifying optimal candidates for this technology is crucial. We studied the effectiveness of Impella Cardiac Pow (Abiomed, Danvers, MA) in various stages of cardiogenic shock and elderly cohorts.DesignRetrospective review.SettingData were collected for patients at a single community hospital between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2019.SubjectsThirty-one consecutive adult patients with cardiogenic shock due to acute myocardial infarction who received Impella Cardiac Pow support. Shock stages were defined by the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention (Stages A-E).InterventionsNone.Measurements and main resultsThe primary outcome was in-hospital death across Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention cardiogenic shock stages and in patients greater than or equal to 80 and less than 80 years old. Secondary outcomes were Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 vascular and bleeding complications, stroke, and renal failure requiring dialysis. The median age of the study population was 64 years, with seven patients (23%) being greater than or equal to 80 years old. No patients were in Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention Stage A, whereas there were seven in B, eight in C, six in D, and 10 (32%) in E. Overall in-hospital mortality occurred in 61% of patients. All 10 patients in Stage E died before hospital discharge. Mortality occurred in 54% of patients (13/24) age less than 80 years compared with 86% of those 80 years or older (6/7). A total of 38.7% of patients (12/31) and 32.3% of patients (10/31) experienced Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 bleeding and vascular events, which were evenly distributed across Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention cardiogenic shock Stages.ConclusionsIn conclusion, patients with shock in extremis and those 80 years old and older may have a prohibitively high mortality despite Impella use. These findings merit further prospective investigation in a larger number of patients to evaluate the effectiveness of Impella (and other left ventricular mechanical circulatory devices) and the inherent resource utilization in advanced cardiogenic shock and the elderly.

Project description:Background: Early risk stratification is necessary for optimal determination of the treatment strategy in cardiogenic shock (CS) complicating acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Therefore, we evaluated the prognostic impact of an intra-aortic balloon pump on the cardiogenic shock (IABP-SHOCK) II score according to the treatment strategies in ACS complicated by CS using the RESCUE (REtrospective and prospective observational Study to investigate Clinical oUtcomes and Efficacy of left ventricular assist device for Korean patients with cardiogenic shock) registry. Methods: The RESCUE registry contains multicenter observational retrospective and prospective cohorts that include 1247 patients with CS from 12 centers in Korea. A total of 865 patients with ACS complicated by CS were selected and stratified into low-, intermediate- and high-risk categories according to their IABP-SHOCK II scores and then according to treatment: non-mechanical support, IABP, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenators (ECMOs). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality during follow-up. Results: The observed mortality rates for the low-, intermediate-, and high-IABP-SHOCK II score risk categories were 28.8%, 52.4%, and 69.8%, respectively (p < 0.01). Patients in the non-mechanical support and IABP groups showed an increasingly elevated risk of all-cause mortality as their risk scores increased from low to high. In the ECMO group, the risk of all-cause mortality did not differ between the intermediate- and high-risk categories (HR = 1.21, 95% CI: 0.81-1.81, p = 0.33). The IABP-SHOCK II scores for the non-mechanical support and IABP groups showed a better predictive performance (area under curve [AUC] = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.65-0.76) for mortality compared with the EMCO group (AUC = 0.61, 95% CI 0.54-0.67; p-value for comparison = 0.02). Conclusions: Risk stratification using the IABP-SHOCK II score is useful for predicting mortality in ACS complicated by CS when patients are treated with non-mechanical support or IABP. However, its prognostic value may be unsatisfactory in severe cases where patients require ECMOs.