SCAI cardiogenic shock classification after out of hospital cardiac arrest and association with outcome

Hemodynamic Characteristics and Prognostic Implication of Modified Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions Shock Classification in Comatose Patients With Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

BACKGROUND

Cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction is associated with a high mortality rate. Cardiogenic shock after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) can be due to transient myocardial stunning but also reflect the increasing severity of ongoing heart failure. The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) proposed a division of cardiogenic shock into 5 phenotypes, with cardiac arrest being a modifier. The objective was to apply SCAI shock classification to a well-characterized OHCA population and describe the hemodynamic characteristics and prognostic significance of increasing SCAI classes.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This is a post hoc analysis of data from the BOX (Blood Pressure and Oxygenation Targets in Post Resuscitation Care) trial of comatose patients with OHCA. Patients were classified according to SCAI class upon hospital admission. Invasive arterial and pulmonary arterial measurements were obtained the first 72 hours after admission, and perfusion pressure, cardiac index and cardiac power output were calculated. Of 789 patients included, 31.6% were classified as SCAI class B/C, 29.9% as SCAI class D, and 38.5% as SCAI class E. The first recorded perfusion pressure differed between SCAI class B/C, D, and E being lower in higher SCAI classes. The difference was found only at the first measurement. Cardiac index and cardiac power output did not differ at any time point between classes. The 1-year mortality rate increased with SCAI Class B/C to E (21.3%, 34.3%, and 48.4%, respectively; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The 1-year mortality rate after OHCA increased with increasing SCAI classes, but cardiac index, cardiac power output, and perfusion pressure remained notably similar in the first 72 hours after admission. This challenges whether all OHCAs should be recorded as SCAI class E by default.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03141099.

Cardiogenic shock severity predicts bleeding events in patients with temporary mechanical circulatory support

BACKGROUND

Data on shock severity and bleeding events in patients with temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) are limited. We investigated the relationship between the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) shock stage classification and bleeding events in patients with tMCS.

METHODS

We evaluated the data of 285 consecutive patients with tMCS who were admitted to our institution between June 2019 and May 2022. At the time of tMCS initiation, 81 patients (28.4%) were in SCAI stage A, 38 (13.3%) in stage B, 69 (24.2%) in stage C, 33 (11.6%) in stage D, and 64 (22.5%) in stage E. Multivariable logistic regression modeling was used to assess the association between the SCAI shock stage and in-hospital bleeding events.

RESULTS

In-hospital bleeding occurred in 100 patients (35.1%). The bleeding event rate increased incrementally across the SCAI shock stages (stage A, 11.1%; stage B, 15.8%; stage C, 37.7%; stage D, 54.6%; stage E, 64.1%). In-hospital bleeding was associated with the SCAI shock stage (p < 0.001). Compared with stage A, the adjusted odds ratios for in-hospital bleeding were 1.48 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47-4.66), 6.47 (95% CI 2.61-10.66), 11.59 (95% CI 3.77-35.64), and 7.85 (95% CI 2.51-24.55) for stages B, C, D, and E, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The SCAI shock stage predicted subsequent bleeding events in patients with tMCS. This simple scheme may be useful for tailored risk-based clinical assessment and management of patients with tMCS.

Prognostic performance of the SCAI shock classification at admission and during ICU treatment: A retrospective, observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is characterized by high mortality and requires accurate prognostic tools to predict outcomes and guide treatment. The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) shock classification indicates shock severity and can be used for outcome prediction.

OBJECTIVE

Here, we compare the prognostic performance of SCAI shock classification determined on admission and during intensive care unit (ICU) stay.

METHODS

We included all patients with CS or conditions associated with developing CS based on ICD codes. SCAI shock stages were determined on admission and during the first 5 days of ICU stay. Receiver operating curves were used to compare the prognostic performance of SCAI stages on admission, SCAI stages during ICU stay and CS evolution (absent, resolved, persistent and new onset) for in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

Between 01/2018 and 06/2022, 1303 patients were identified and 862 patients were included. On admission, 50.6 % patients had SCAI shock stage A, 3.9 % SCAI shock stage B, 17.7 % SCAI shock stage C, 7.0 % SCAI shock stage D and 20.8 % SCAI shock stage E. Shock stage distribution changed dynamically during ICU stay. Compared to SCAI stage on admission (AUC 0.80; 95 % CI 0.77-0.83), highest achieved SCAI stage during ICU (AUC 0.86, 95 % CI 0.83-0.89, p < 0.0001) and shock evolution (AUC 0.87, 95 % CI 0.85-0.90, p < 0.0001) yielded better prognostic performance.

CONCLUSIONS

SCAI shock stages changed dynamically during ICU stay, and prognostic performance can be improved by considering highest achieved SCAI shock stage as well as the evolution of CS compared to SCAI shock stage on admission.

Prognostic Factors Associated with Mortality in Cardiogenic Shock - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Cardiogenic shock remains highly associated with early mortality, with mortality often exceeding 50%. We sought to determine the association between prognostic factors and in-hospital and 30-day mortality in cardiogenic shock.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of prognostic factors in cardiogenic shock, searching MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for records up to June 5, 2023. English-language studies that investigated prognostic factors and in-hospital and/or 30-day mortality in cardiogenic shock were included. Studies were excluded if they evaluated the pediatric population, were postmortem studies, or included fewer than 100 patients. The primary aim was to identify modifiable and non-modifiable prognostic factors associated with in-hospital and 30-day mortality in cardiogenic shock.

RESULTS

We identified 160 studies, including 2,459,703 patients with a median in-hospital mortality of 41.4% (interquartile range, 33.6% to 49.2%). The majority were retrospective cohort studies. Patient factors potentially associated with an increase in early mortality included an age greater than or equal to 75 years of age, peripheral arterial disease, chronic kidney disease, and female sex. Procedural and presentation factors potentially associated with increased mortality included out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, left main culprit artery, left ventricular ejection fraction less than 30%, dialysis, and need for mechanical circulatory support. Revascularization in the form of coronary artery bypass graft and percutaneous coronary intervention were potentially associated with reduced in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis quantifies the association between patient, presentation, and treatment-related factors and early mortality in cardiogenic shock. Increased certainty in the association of these prognostic factors with cardiogenic shock outcomes can aid in clinical risk assessment, development of risk tools, and analysis of clinical trials.

Validation of the CREST model and comparison with SCAI shock classification for the prediction of circulatory death in resuscitated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

AIMS

We validated the CREST model, a 5 variable score for stratifying the risk of circulatory aetiology death (CED) following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and compared its discrimination with the SCAI shock classification. Circulatory aetiology death occurs in approximately a third of patients admitted after resuscitated OHCA. There is an urgent need for improved stratification of the patient with OHCA on arrival to a cardiac arrest centre to improve patient selection for invasive interventions.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The CREST model and SCAI shock classification were applied to a dual-centre registry of 723 patients with cardiac aetiology OHCA, both with and without ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), between May 2012 and December 2020. The primary endpoint was a 30-day CED. Of 509 patients included (62.3 years, 75.4% male), 125 patients had CREST = 0 (24.5%), 162 had CREST = 1 (31.8%), 140 had CREST = 2 (27.5%), 75 had CREST = 3 (14.7%), 7 had a CREST of 4 (1.4%), and no patients had CREST = 5. Circulatory aetiology death was observed in 91 (17.9%) patients at 30 days [STEMI: 51/289 (17.6%); non-STEMI (NSTEMI): 40/220 (18.2%)]. For the total population, and both NSTEMI and STEMI subpopulations, an increasing CREST score was associated with increasing CED (all P < 0.001). The CREST score and SCAI classification had similar discrimination for the total population [area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) = 0.72/calibration slope = 0.95], NSTEMI cohort (AUC = 0.75/calibration slope = 0.940), and STEMI cohort (AUC = 0.69 and calibration slope = 0.925). Area under the receiver operating curve meta-analyses demonstrated no significant differences between the two classifications.

CONCLUSION

The CREST model and SCAI shock classification show similar prediction results for the development of CED after OHCA.

Microbiological Profiles after Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: Exploring the Relationship between Infection, Inflammation, and the Potential Effects of Mechanical Circulatory Support

Background: Cardiogenic shock (CS) following an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) poses significant management challenges, exacerbated by inflammatory responses and infectious complications. This study investigates the microbiological profiles and impacts of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) on inflammation and infection in OHCA patients. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed microbiological data from various specimens of 372 OHCA patients, who were treated at the Cardiac Arrest Center of the University Hospital of Marburg from January 2018 to December 2022. Clinical outcomes were evaluated to investigate the potential impact of MCS on infection and inflammation. Results: Of the study cohort, 115 patients received MCS. The microbiological analysis revealed a higher incidence of positive blood cultures in the MCS group vs. the non-MCS group (39% vs. 27.7%, p = 0.037), with predominantly Gram-positive bacteria. Patients with positive microbiological findings had longer in-hospital stays and prolonged periods of mechanical ventilation. The levels of inflammatory markers such as C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT) differed, suggesting a more pronounced inflammatory response in MCS patients, especially in the later ICU stages. Notably, despite the higher infection rate in the MCS group, the survival rates did not significantly differ in the two groups. Conclusions: MCS appears to influence the microbiological and inflammatory landscape in OHCA patients, increasing the susceptibility to certain infections but not affecting the overall mortality. This study underscores the complexity of managing post-resuscitation care and highlights the need for tailored therapeutic strategies to effectively mitigate infectious and inflammatory complications.

Machine Learning Identifies Higher Survival Profile In Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation

OBJECTIVES

Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) has been shown to improve neurologically favorable survival in patients with refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) caused by shockable rhythms. Further refinement of patient selection is needed to focus this resource-intensive therapy on those patients likely to benefit. This study sought to create a selection model using machine learning (ML) tools for refractory cardiac arrest patients undergoing ECPR.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Cardiac ICU in a Quaternary Care Center.

PATIENTS

Adults 18-75 years old with refractory OHCA caused by a shockable rhythm.

METHODS

Three hundred seventy-six consecutive patients with refractory OHCA and a shockable presenting rhythm were analyzed, of which 301 underwent ECPR and cannulation for venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Clinical variables that were widely available at the time of cannulation were analyzed and ranked on their ability to predict neurologically favorable survival.

INTERVENTIONS

ML was used to train supervised models and predict favorable neurologic outcomes of ECPR. The best-performing models were internally validated using a holdout test set.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Neurologically favorable survival occurred in 119 of 301 patients (40%) receiving ECPR. Rhythm at the time of cannulation, intermittent or sustained return of spontaneous circulation, arrest to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation perfusion time, and lactic acid levels were the most predictive of the 11 variables analyzed. All variables were integrated into a training model that yielded an in-sample area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.89 and a misclassification rate of 0.19. Out-of-sample validation of the model yielded an AUC of 0.80 and a misclassification rate of 0.23, demonstrating acceptable prediction ability.

CONCLUSIONS

ML can develop a tiered risk model to guide ECPR patient selection with tailored arrest profiles.

Shock Severity Classification and Mortality in Adults With Cardiac, Medical, Surgical, and Neurological Critical Illness

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) Shock Classification could perform risk stratification in a mixed cohort of intensive care unit (ICU) patients, similar to its validation in patients with acute cardiac disease.

METHODS

We included 21,461 adult Mayo Clinic ICU patient admissions from December 1, 2014, to February 28, 2018, including cardiac ICU (16.7%), medical ICU (37.4%), neurosciences ICU (27.7%), and surgical ICU (18.2%). The SCAI Shock Classification (a 5-stage classification from no shock [A] to refractory shock [E]) was assigned in each 4-hour period during the first 24 hours of ICU admission.

RESULTS

The median age was 65 years, and 43.2% were female. In-hospital mortality occurred in 1611 (7.5%) patients, with a stepwise increase in in-hospital mortality in each higher maximum SCAI Shock stage overall: A, 4.0%; B, 4.6%; C, 7.0%; D, 13.9%; and E, 40.2%. The SCAI Shock Classification provided incremental mortality risk stratification in each ICU, with the best performance in the cardiac ICU and the worse performance in the neurosciences ICU. The SCAI Shock Classification was associated with higher adjusted in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 1.32 per each stage; 95% CI, 1.24 to 1.41; P<.001); this association was not observed in the neurosciences ICU when considered separately.

CONCLUSION

The SCAI Shock Classification provided incremental mortality risk stratification beyond established prognostic markers across the spectrum of medical and surgical critical illness, proving utility outside its original intent.

Prognostic Utility of Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions Shock Stage Approach for Classifying Cardiogenic Shock Severity in Takotsubo Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a significant complication of Takotsubo syndrome (TTS), contributing to heightened mortality and morbidity. Despite this, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) staging system for CS severity lacks validation in patients with TTS and CS. This study aimed to characterize a patient cohort with TTS using the SCAI staging system and assess its utility in cases of TTS complicated by CS.

METHODS AND RESULTS

From a TTS national registry, 1591 consecutive patients were initially enrolled and stratified into 5 SCAI stages (A through E). Primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality; secondary end points were TTS-related in-hospital complications and 1-year all-cause mortality. After exclusions, the final cohort comprised 1163 patients, mean age 71.0±11.8 years, and 87% were female. Patients were categorized across SCAI shock stages as follows: A 72.1%, B 12.2%, C 11.2%, D 2.7%, and E 1.8%. Significant variations in baseline demographics, comorbidities, clinical presentations, and in-hospital courses were observed across SCAI shock stages. After multivariable adjustment, each higher SCAI shock stage showed a significant association with increased in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio: 1.77-29.31) compared with SCAI shock stage A. Higher SCAI shock stages were also associated with increased 1-year mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large multicenter patient cohort with TTS, the functional SCAI shock stage classification effectively stratified mortality risk, revealing a continuum of escalating shock severity with higher stages correlating with increased in-hospital mortality. This study highlights the applicability and prognostic value of the SCAI staging system in TTS-related CS.

Revisiting nitrates use in pre-shock state of contemporary cardiogenic shock classification

Patients at each shock stage may behave and present differently with a spectrum of shock severity and adverse outcomes. Shock severity, shock aetiology, and several factors should be integrated in management decision-making. Although the contemporary shock stages classification provided a standardized shock severity assessment, individual agents or management strategy has not yet been studied in the context of each shock stage. The pre-shock state may comprise a wide range of presentations. Nitrate therapy has potential benefit in myocardial infarction and acute heart failure. Herein, this review aims to discuss the potential use of nitrate therapy in the context of the pre-shock state or stage B of the contemporary shock classification given its various presentations.

Systematic Assessment of Shock Severity in Postoperative Cardiac Surgery Patients

BACKGROUND

The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) shock classification has been shown to provide robust mortality risk stratification in a variety of cardiovascular patients.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to evaluate the SCAI shock classification in postoperative cardiac surgery intensive care unit (CSICU) patients.

METHODS

This study retrospectively analyzed 26,792 postoperative CSICU admissions at a heart center between 2012 and 2022. Patients were classified into SCAI shock stages A to E using electronic health record data. Moreover, the impact of late deterioration (LD) as an additional risk modifier was investigated.

RESULTS

The proportions of patients in SCAI shock stages A to E were 24.4%, 18.8%, 8.4%, 35.5%, and 12.9%, and crude hospital mortality rates were 0.4%, 0.6%, 3.3%, 4.9%, and 30.2%, respectively. Similarly, the prevalence of postoperative complications and organ dysfunction increased across SCAI shock stages. After multivariable adjustment, each higher SCAI shock stage was associated with increased hospital mortality (adjusted OR: 1.26-16.59) compared with SCAI shock stage A, as was LD (adjusted OR: 8.2). The SCAI shock classification demonstrated a strong diagnostic performance for hospital mortality (area under the receiver operating characteristic: 0.84), which noticeably increased when LD was incorporated into the model (area under the receiver operating characteristic: 0.90).

CONCLUSIONS

The SCAI shock classification effectively risk-stratifies postoperative CSICU patients for mortality, postoperative complications, and organ dysfunction. Its application could, therefore, be extended to the field of cardiac surgery as a triage tool in postoperative care and as a selection criterion in research.

Distribution and 24-hour transition of SCAI shock stages and their association with 30-day mortality in acute myocardial infarction

The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) shock classification has been shown to predict mortality in acute myocardial infarction (AMI). However, data on the transition of SCAI stages and their association with mortality after AMI are limited. All patients with AMI admitted to Vietnam National Heart Institute between August 2022 and February 2023 were classified into SCAI stages A, B, and C/D/E at admission and were reevaluated in 24 hours. We used Kaplan-Meier estimate and multivariable Cox regression analysis to assess the association between SCAI stages transition and 30-day mortality. We included 139 patients (median age 69 years, 29.5% female). On admission, 50.4%, 20.1%, and 29.5% of patients were classified as SCAI stage A, B, and C/D/E, respectively. The proportion of patients whose SCAI stage improved, remained stable, or worsened after 24 hours was 14.4%, 66.2%, and 19.4%, respectively. The 30-day mortality in patients with initial SCAI stages A, B, and C/D/E on admission was 2.9%, 21.4%, and 61.0%, respectively (P < .001). The 30-day mortality was 2.4% for patients with baseline SCAI stage A/B who remained unchanged or improved, 30.0% for patients with baseline SCAI stage C/D/E who remained unchanged or improved, and 92.6% for patients with SCAI stage B/C/D/E who worsened at 24 hours after admission (log-rank P < .001). In patients with AMI, evaluating the SCAI stage shock stage on admission and reevaluating after 24 hours added more information about 30-day mortality.

Cardiogenic Shock Classification and Associated Mortality Risk

The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) Shock Classification was developed to create standardized language describing the severity of cardiogenic shock (CS). The purposes of this review were to evaluate short-term and long-term mortality rates at each SCAI shock stage for patients with or at risk for CS, which has not been studied previously, and to propose using the SCAI Shock Classification to develop algorithms for clinical status monitoring. A detailed literature search was conducted for articles published from 2019 through 2022 in which the SCAI shock stages were used to assess the mortality risk. In total, 30 articles were reviewed. The SCAI Shock Classification at hospital admission revealed a consistent and reproducible graded association between shock severity and mortality risk. Furthermore, shock severity correlated incrementally with mortality risk even after patients were stratified for diagnosis, treatment modalities, risk modifiers, shock phenotype, and underlying cause. The SCAI Shock Classification system can be used to evaluate mortality across populations of patients with or at risk for CS including those with different causes, shock phenotypes, and comorbid conditions. We propose an algorithm that uses clinical parameters incorporating the SCAI Shock Classification into the electronic health record to continually reassess and reclassify the presence and severity of CS across time throughout hospitalization. The algorithm has the potential to alert the care team and a CS team, leading to earlier recognition and stabilization of the patient, and may facilitate the use of treatment algorithms and prevent CS deterioration, leading to improved outcomes.

Early Recognition and Risk Stratification in Cardiogenic Shock: Well Begun Is Half Done

Cardiogenic shock is a complex syndrome manifesting with distinct phenotypes depending on the severity of the primary cardiac insult and the underlying status. As long as therapeutic interventions fail to divert its unopposed rapid evolution, poor outcomes will continue challenging health care systems. Thus, early recognition in the emergency setting is a priority, in order to avoid delays in appropriate management and to ensure immediate initial stabilization. Since advanced therapeutic strategies and specialized shock centers may provide beneficial support, it seems that directing patients towards the recently described shock network may improve survival rates. A multidisciplinary approach strategy commands the interconnections between the strategic role of the ED in affiliation with cardiac shock centers. This review outlines critical features of early recognition and initial therapeutic management, as well as the utility of diagnostic tools and risk stratification models regarding the facilitation of patient trajectories through the shock network. Further, it proposes the implementation of precise criteria for shock team activation and the establishment of definite exclusion criteria for streaming the right patient to the right place at the right time.

Clinician and Algorithmic Application of the 2019 and 2022 Society of Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention Shock Stages in the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network Registry

BACKGROUND

Algorithmic application of the 2019 Society of Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention (SCAI) shock stages effectively stratifies mortality risk for patients with cardiogenic shock. However, clinician assessment of SCAI staging may differ. Moreover, the implications of the 2022 SCAI criteria update remain incompletely defined.

METHODS

The Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network is a multicenter registry of cardiac intensive care units (CICUs). Between 2019 and 2021, participating centers (n=32) contributed at least a 2-month snapshot of consecutive medical CICU admissions. In-hospital mortality was assessed across 3 separate staging methods: clinician assessment, Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network algorithmic application of the 2019 SCAI criteria, and a revision of the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network application using the 2022 SCAI criteria.

RESULTS

Of 9612 admissions, 1340 (13.9%) presented with cardiogenic shock with in-hospital mortality of 35.2%. Both clinician and algorithm-based staging using the 2019 SCAI criteria identified a stepwise gradient of mortality risk (stage C-E: 19.0% to 83.7% and 14.6% to 52.2%, respectively; Ptrend<0.001 for each). Clinician assignment of SCAI stages identified higher risk patients compared with algorithm-based assignment (stage D: 49.9% versus 29.3%; stage E: 83.7% versus 52.2%). Algorithmic application of the 2022 SCAI criteria, with incorporation of the vasoactive-inotropic score, more closely approximated clinician staging (mortality for stage C-E: 21.9% to 70.5%; Ptrend<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Both clinician and algorithm-based application of the 2019 SCAI stages identify a stepwise gradient of mortality risk, although clinician-staging may better allocate higher risk patients into advanced SCAI stages. Updated algorithmic staging using the 2022 SCAI criteria and vasoactive-inotropic score further refines risk stratification.

Contemporary Management of Concomitant Cardiac Arrest and Cardiogenic Shock Complicating Myocardial Infarction

Cardiogenic shock (CS) and cardiac arrest (CA) are the most life-threatening complications of acute myocardial infarction. Although there is a significant overlap in the pathophysiology with approximately half the patients with CS experiencing a CA and approximately two-thirds of patients with CA developing CS, comprehensive guideline recommendations for management of CA + CS are lacking. This paper summarizes the current evidence on the incidence, pathophysiology, and short- and long-term outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by concomitant CA + CS. We discuss the hemodynamic factors and unique challenges that need to be accounted for while developing treatment strategies for these patients. A summary of expert-based step-by-step recommendations to the approach and treatment of these patients, both in the field before admission and in-hospital management, are presented.

SCAI Cardiogenic Shock Classification for Predicting In-Hospital and Long-Term Mortality in Acute Heart Failure

Background

SCAI classification in cardiogenic shock is simple and suitable for rapid assessment. Its predictive behavior in patients with primary acute heart failure (AHF) is not fully known. We aimed to evaluate the ability of the SCAI classification to predict in-hospital and long-term mortality in AHF.

Methods

We conducted a single-center study and performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of consecutive patients admitted with AHF between 2015 and 2020. The primary end points were in-hospital and long-term mortality from all causes.

Results

In total, 856 patients were included. The unadjusted in-hospital mortality was as follows: A, 0.6%; B, 2.7%; C, 21.5%; D 54.3%; and E, 90.6% (log rank, P < .0001), and long-term mortality was as follows: A, 24.9%; B, 24%; C, 49.6%; D, 62.9%; and E, 95.5% (log rank, P < .0001). After multivariable adjustment, each SCAI SHOCK stage remained associated with increased mortality (all P < .001 compared with stage A). With the exception of the long-term end point, there were no differences between stages A and B for adjusted mortality (P = .1).

Conclusions

In a cohort of patients with AHF, SCAI cardiogenic shock classification was associated with in-hospital and long-term mortality. This finding supports the rationale of the classification in this setting.

Advances in the Staging and Phenotyping of Cardiogenic Shock: Part 1 of 2

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a heterogeneous syndrome reflecting a broad spectrum of shock severity, diverse etiologies, variable cardiac function, different hemodynamic trajectories, and concomitant organ dysfunction. These factors influence the clinical presentation, management, response to therapy, and outcomes of CS patients, necessitating a tailored approach to care. To better understand the variability inherent to CS populations, recent algorithms for staging the severity of CS have been described and validated. This paper is part 1 of a 2-part state-of-the-art review. In this first article, we consider the context for clinical staging and stratification in CS with a focus on established severity staging systems for CS and their use for risk stratification and clinical care. We describe the use of staging for predicting outcomes in populations with or at risk for CS, including risk modifiers that provide more nuanced risk stratification, and highlight how these approaches may allow individualized care.

Application of the SCAI classification to admission of patients with cardiogenic shock: Analysis of a tertiary care center in a middle-income country

Aims

The Society of Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) shock stages have been applied and validated in high-income countries with access to advanced therapies. We applied the SCAI scheme at the time of admission in order to improve the risk stratification for 30-day mortality in a retrospective cohort of patients with STEMI in a middle-income country hospital at admission.

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study, we analyzed 7,143 ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. At admission, patients were stratified by the SCAI shock stages. Multivariate analysis was used to assess the association between SCAI shock stages to 30-day mortality.

Results

The distribution of the patients across SCAI shock stages was 82.2%, 9.3%, 1.2%, 1.5%, and 0.8% to A, B, C, D, and E, respectively. Patients with SCAI stages C, D, and E were more likely to have high-risk features. There was a stepwise significant increase in unadjusted 30-day mortality across the SCAI shock stages (6.3%, 8.4%, 62.4%, 75.2% and 88.3% for A, B, C, D and E, respectively; P < 0.0001, C-statistic, 0.64). A trend toward a lower 30-day survival probability was observed in the patients with advanced CS (30.3, 15.4%, and 8.3%, SCAI shock stages C, D, and E, respectively, Log-rank P-value <0.0001). After multivariable adjustment, SCAI shock stages C, D, and E were independently associated with an increased risk of 30-day death (hazard ratio 1.42 [P = 0.02], 2.30 [P<0.0001], and 3.44 [P<0.0001], respectively).

Conclusion

The SCAI shock stages applied in patients con STEMI at the time of admission, is a useful tool for risk stratification in patients across the full spectrum of CS and is a predictor of 30-day mortality.

Determinants of Undertaking Coronary Angiography and Adverse Prognostic Predictors Among Patients Presenting With Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest and a Shockable Rhythm

Characteristics of patients presenting with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) selected for coronary angiography (CA) and factors predicting in-hospital mortality remain unclear. We assessed clinical characteristics associated with undertaking CA in patients presenting with OHCA and shockable rhythm (CA group). Predictors of in-hospital mortality were evaluated with multivariable analysis. Of 1,552 patients presenting with cardiac arrest between 2014 and 2018 to 2 health services in Victoria, Australia, 213 patients with OHCA and shockable rhythm were stratified according to CA status. The CA group had shorter cardiopulmonary resuscitation duration (17 vs 25 minutes) and time to return of spontaneous circulation (17 vs 26 minutes) but higher proportion of ST-elevation on electrocardiogram (48% vs 24%) (all p <0.01). In-hospital mortality was 38% (n = 81) for the overall cohort, 32% (n = 54) in the CA group, and 61% (n = 27) in the no-CA group. Predictors of in-hospital mortality included non-selection for CA (odds ratio 4.5, 95% confidence interval 1.5 to 14), adrenaline support (3.9, 1.3 to 12), arrest at home (2.7, 1.1 to 6.6), longer time to defibrillation (2.5, 1.5 to 4.2 per 5-minute increase), lower blood pH (2.1, 1.4 to 3.2 per 0.1 decrease), lower albumin (2.0, 1.2 to 3.3 per 5 g/L decrease), higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score (1.7, 1.0 to 3.0 per 5-point increase), and advanced age (1.4, 1.0 to 2.0 per 10-year increase) (all p ≤0.05). In conclusion, non-selection for CA, concomitant cardiogenic shock requiring inotropic support, poor initial resuscitation (arrest at home, longer time to defibrillation and lower pH), greater burden of co-morbidities (higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score and lower albumin), and advanced age were key adverse prognostic indicators among patients with OHCA and shockable rhythm.

Early risk stratification in patients with cardiogenic shock irrespective of the underlying cause - The Cardiogenic Shock Score (CSS)

AIMS

Early risk stratification is essential to guide treatment in cardiogenic shock (CS). Existing CS risk scores were derived in selected cohorts, without accounting for the heterogeneity of CS. The aim of this study was to develop a universal risk score (CSS) for all CS patients, irrespective of underlying cause.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Within a registry of 1,308 CS unselected patients admitted to a tertiary-care hospital between 2009 and 2019, a Cox regression model was fitted to derive the CSS, with 30-day mortality as main outcome. CSS's predictive ability was compared to the IABP-Shock-II score, the CardShock score and SCAI classification by C-indices and validated in an external cohort of 934 CS patients. Based on the Cox regression, 9 predictors were included in the CSS: age, sex, acute myocardial infarction (AMI-CS), systolic blood pressure, heart rate, pH, lactate, glucose and cardiac arrest. CSS had the highest C-index in the overall cohort (0.740 vs. 0.677/0.683 for IABP-Shock-II score/CardShock score), in patients with AMI-CS (0.738 vs. 0.675/0.689 for IABP-Shock-II score/CardShock score) and in patients with non-AMI-CS (0.734 vs. 0.677/0.669 for IABP-Shock-II score/CardShock score). In the external validation cohort, the CSS had a C-index of 0.73, which was higher than all other tested scores.

CONCLUSION

The CSS provides improved information on the risk of death in unselected patients with CS compared to existing scores, irrespective of its cause. Because it is based on point-of-care variables which can be obtained even in critical situations, the CSS has the potential to guide treatment decisions in CS. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention Shock Classification Predicts Mortality After Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

BACKGROUND

Shock is common in patients resuscitated from out-of-hospital-cardiac arrest (OHCA). Shock severity can be classified using the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention (SCAI) Shock Classification. We aimed to examine the association of SCAI Shock Stage with in-hospital mortality and neurological outcome in comatose OHCA patients undergoing targeted temperature management (TTM).

METHODS

This study included 213 comatose adult patients who underwent TTM after OHCA between January 2007 and December 2017. SCAI shock stage (A through E) was assigned using data from the first 24 hours, with shock defined as SCAI shock stage C/D/E. Good neurological outcome was defined as a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) less than 3.

RESULTS

In-hospital mortality was higher in the 144 (67.6%) patients with shock (46.5% v. 23.2%, unadjusted OR 2.88, 95% CI 1.51-5.51, p = 0.001). After multivariable adjustment, each SCAI shock stage was incrementally associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality (adjusted OR 1.80 per stage, 95% CI 1.20-2.71, p = 0.003). Good neurological outcome was less likely in patients with shock (31.9% vs. 53.6%, unadjusted OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.23-0.73, p = 0.002) and a higher SCAI shock stage was incrementally associated with a lower likelihood of good neurological outcome after multivariable adjustment (adjusted OR 0.67 per stage, 95% CI 0.48-0.93, p = 0.015).

CONCLUSION

Higher shock severity, defined using the SCAI Shock Classification, was associated with increased in-hospital mortality and a lower likelihood of good neurological outcome in OHCA patients treated with TTM.

Temporary mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock

Cardiogenic shock (CS) represents one of the foremost concerns in the field of acute cardiovascular medicine. Despite major advances in treatment, mortality of CS remains high. International societies recommend the development of expert CS centers with standardized protocols for CS diagnosis and treatment. In these terms, devices for temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS) can be used to support the compromised circulation and could improve clinical outcome in selected patient populations presenting with CS. In the past years, we have witnessed an immense increase in the utilization of MCS devices to improve the clinical problem of low cardiac output. Although some treatment guidelines include the use of temporary MCS up to now no large randomized controlled trial confirmed a reduction in mortality in CS patients after MCS and additional research evidence is necessary to fully comprehend the clinical value of MCS in CS. In this article, we provide an overview of the most important diagnostic and therapeutic modalities in CS with the main focus on contemporary MCS devices, current state of art and scientific evidence for its clinical application and outline directions of future research efforts.

Right Ventricular Dysfunction Is Common and Identifies Patients at Risk of Dying in Cardiogenic Shock

BACKGROUND

Understanding the prognostic impact of right ventricular dysfunction (RVD) in cardiogenic shock (CS) is a key step toward rational diagnostic and treatment algorithms and improved outcomes. Using a large multicenter registry, we assessed (1) the association between hemodynamic markers of RVD and in-hospital mortality, (2) the predictive value of invasive hemodynamic assessment incorporating RV evaluation, and (3) the impact of RVD severity on survival in CS.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Inpatients with CS owing to acute myocardial infarction (AMI) or heart failure (HF) between 2016 and 2019 were included. RV parameters (right atrial pressure, right atrial/pulmonary capillary wedge pressure [RA/PCWP], pulmonary artery pulsatility index [PAPI], and right ventricular stroke work index [RVSWI]) were assessed between survivors and nonsurvivors, and between etiology and SCAI stage subcohorts. Multivariable logistic regression analysis determined hemodynamic predictors of in-hospital mortality; the resulting models were compared with SCAI staging alone. Nonsurvivors had a significantly higher right atrial pressure and RA/PCWP and lower PAPI and RVSWI than survivors, consistent with more severe RVD. Compared with AMI, patients with HF had a significantly lower RA/PCWP (0.58 vs 0.66, P = .001) and a higher PAPI (2.71 vs 1.78, P < .001) and RVSWI (5.70 g-m/m² vs 4.66 g-m/m², P < .001), reflecting relatively preserved RV function. Paradoxically, multiple RVD parameters (PAPI, RVSWI) were associated with mortality in the HF but not the AMI cohort. RVD was more severe with advanced SCAI stage, although its prognostic value was progressively diluted in stages D and E. Multivariable modelling incorporating the RA/PCWP improved the predictive value of SCAI staging (area under the curve [AUC] 0.78 vs 0.73, P < .001), largely driven by patients with HF (AUC 0.82 vs 0.71, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

RVD is associated with poor outcomes in CS, with key differences across etiology and shock severity. Further studies are needed to assess the usefulness of RVD assessment in guiding therapy.

Lingua Franca of Cardiogenic Shock: Speaking the Same Language

Cardiogenic shock has remained a vexing clinical problem over the last 20 years despite progressive development of increasingly capable percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices. It is increasingly clear that the published trials of various percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices have compared heterogenous populations of cardiogenic shock patients, and therefore have not yielded a single result where one approach improved survival. To classify patients, various risk scores such as the CARDSHOCK and IABP-Shock-II scores have been developed and validated but they have not been broadly applied. The Society for Cardiac Angiography and Intervention Expert Consensus on Classification of Cardiogenic Shock has been widely studied since its publication in 2019, and is reviewed at length. In particular, there have been numerous validation studies done and these are reviewed. Finally, the directions for future research are reviewed.

Describing and Classifying Shock: Recent Insights

Cardiogenic shock continues to present a daunting challenge to clinicians, despite an increasing array of percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices. Mortality for cardiogenic shock has not changed meaningfully in more than 20 years. There have been many attempts to generate risk scores or frameworks to evaluate cardiogenic shock and optimize the use of resources and assist with prognostication. These include the Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump in Cardiogenic Shock (IABP-SHOCK) II risk score, the CardShock score and the new CLIP biomarker score. This article reviews the Society for Cardiac Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) classification of cardiogenic shock and subsequent validation studies. The SCAI classification is simple for clinicians to use as it is based on readily available information and can be adapted depending on the data set that can be accessed. The authors consider the future of the field. Underlying all these efforts is the hope that a better understanding and classification of shock will lead to meaningful improvements in mortality rates.

Management of cardiogenic shock

Despite the rapidly evolving evidence base in modern cardiology, progress in the area of cardiogenic shock remains slow, with short-term mortality still reaching 40-50%, relatively unchanged in recent years. Despite advances with an increase in the number of clinical trials taking place in this admittedly difficult-to-study area, the evidence base on which we make day-to-day decisions in clinical practice remains relatively sparse. With only definitive evidence for early revascularisation and the relative ineffectiveness of intra-aortic balloon pumping, most aspects of patient management are based on expert consensus, rather than randomised controlled trials. This updated 2020 review will outline the management of CS mainly after acute myocardial infarction with major focus on state-of-the-art treatment based on randomised clinical trials or matched comparisons if available.

Targeted temperature management following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of temperature targets

PURPOSE

Targeted temperature management (TTM) may improve survival and functional outcome in comatose survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), though the optimal target temperature remains unknown. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of deep hypothermia (31-32 °C), moderate hypothermia (33-34 °C), mild hypothermia (35-36 °C), and normothermia (37-37.8 °C) during TTM.

METHODS

We searched six databases from inception to June 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating TTM in comatose OHCA survivors. Two reviewers performed screening, full text review, and extraction independently. The primary outcome of interest was survival with good functional outcome. We used GRADE to rate our certainty in estimates.

RESULTS

We included 10 RCTs (4218 patients). Compared with normothermia, deep hypothermia (odds ratio [OR] 1.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73-2.30), moderate hypothermia (OR 1.34, 95% CI 0.92-1.94) and mild hypothermia (OR 1.44, 95% CI 0.74-2.80) may have no effect on survival with good functional outcome (all low certainty). Deep hypothermia may not improve survival with good functional outcome, as compared to moderate hypothermia (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.61-1.54, low certainty). Moderate hypothermia (OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.86-1.77) and deep hypothermia (OR 1.27, 95% CI 0.70-2.32) may have no effect on survival, as compared to normothermia. Finally, incidence of arrhythmia was higher with moderate hypothermia (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.08-1.94) and deep hypothermia (OR 3.58, 95% CI 1.77-7.26), compared to normothermia (both high certainty).

CONCLUSIONS

Mild, moderate, or deep hypothermia may not improve survival or functional outcome after OHCA, as compared to normothermia. Moderate and deep hypothermia were associated with higher incidence of arrhythmia. Routine use of moderate or deep hypothermia in comatose survivors of OHCA may potentially be associated with more harm than benefit.

Vasoactive pharmacologic therapy in cardiogenic shock: a critical review

BACKGROUND

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is an acute complex condition leading to morbidity and mortality. Vasoactive medications, such as vasopressors and inotropes are considered the cornerstone of pharmacological treatment of CS to improve end-organ perfusion by increasing cardiac output (CO) and blood pressure (BP), thus preventing multiorgan failure.

OBJECTIVE

A critical review was conducted to analyze the currently available randomized studies of vasoactive agents in CS to determine the indications of each agent and to critically appraise the methodological quality of the studies.

METHODS

PubMed database search was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on vasoactive therapy in CS. After study selection, the internal validity of the selected studies was critically appraised using the three-item Jadad scale.

RESULTS

Nine studies randomized 2388 patients with a mean age ranged between 62 and 69 years, were identified. Seven of studies investigated CS in the setting of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The studies evaluated the comparisons of norepinephrine (NE) vs. dopamine, epinephrine vs. NE, levosimendan vs. dobutamine, enoximone or placebo, and nitric oxide synthase inhibitors (NOSi) vs. placebo. The mean Jadad score of the nine studies was 3.33, with only three studies of a score of 5.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence from the studies of vasoactive agents in CS carries uncertainties. The methodological quality between the studies is variable due to the inherent difficulties to conduct a study in CS. Vasopressors and inotropes continue to have a fundamental role given the lack of pharmacological alternatives.

The Stages of CS: Clinical and Translational Update

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

With improvements in cardiovascular care, and routine percutaneous coronary intervention for ST elevation myocardial infarction, more patients are surviving following acute coronary syndromes. However, a minority of patients develop cardiogenic shock which results in approximately 50% 30-day mortality. There are various ways to classify cardiogenic shock, and much has been written about this topic in recent years. This review will examine recent developments and put them in context.

RECENT FINDINGS

The large randomized trials of cardiogenic shock treatments such as the IABP-SHOCK II trial used a clinical definition of shock including hypotension (systolic blood pressure of 90 mmHg or less, or requirement of vasopressors to maintain such a blood pressure), as well as hypoperfusion. However, while this defines a minimum standard to define cardiogenic shock, it does not distinguish between a patient on a single vasoconstrictor and one who is on multiple high dose infusions or one on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. The Society for Cardiac Angiography and Intervention recently published an expert consensus statement defining stages of cardiogenic shock, from at risk to beginning, classic, deteriorating, and extremis cardiogenic shock stages. The simple framework has been validated rapidly in multiple populations including the intensive care unit, a post-myocardial infarction population, an out of hospital cardiac arrest population, and most recently in a multicenter shock collaborative, Classification is fundamental to understanding a disease state, and crafting solutions to improve outcomes. The last 20 years has witnessed an explosion of percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices of increasing sophistication and capability, and yet there has been little progress in improving outcomes of cardiogenic shock. Hopefully, the next 20 years will see massive advances in understanding of the complexities of the various stages of cardiogenic shock. With such knowledge, it is likely that targeted treatments will be developed and the mortality of this disease will finally plummet.

Prospective validation of the SCAI shock classification: Single center analysis

BACKGROUND

The Society for Cardiac Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) Shock Classification has been retrospectively validated by several groups. We sought to prospectively study outcomes of consecutive patients with reference to initial SCAI Shock Stage and therapeutic strategy as well as 24 hr SCAI Shock Stage reassessment.

METHODS

Kaplan Meier method was used to describe survival and Cox Proportional hazards modeling used to assess predictors of survival.

RESULTS

Over an 18-month period, 166 patients were referred for evaluation. Demographics, hemodynamics, and most laboratory findings were similar between SCAI stages, which were assigned by the team. Initial SCAI Stage was a strong predictor of survival. Thirty-day survival was 100, 65.4, 44.2, and 60% for patients with initial SCAI shock stage B, C, D, and E respectively (p = .0004). Age and initial SCAI Shock Stage were shown to be the strongest predictors of survival by Cox proportional hazards. Mode of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) or lack of such was not a predictor of outcome. Shock stage at 24 hr was also examined. Thirty-day survival was 100, 96.7, 66.9, 21.6, and 6.2% for patients with 3-4 SCAI stage improvement, 2 stage improvement, 1 stage improvement, no change in SCAI stage and worsening of SCAI stage respectively (p < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Initial SCAI Shock stage predicts the survival of unselected patients with a variety of MCS interventions and medical therapy alone. The 24-hr reassessment of shock stage further refines the prognosis.