Heart Transplantation in a Patient With Rheumatic Heart Disease and Severe Left Atrial Calcification

A 62-year-old woman who had undergone mitral valve replacement 24 years ago was admitted to the hospital with congestive heart failure. She needed heart transplantation for stage D heart failure. Preoperative cardiac computed tomographic scans showed a severely calcified left atrium and a large right atrium. Given that the left atrium's calcification was too severe to suture, the calcified left atrial wall was broadly resected, and the resected left atrial wall was reconstructed with a bovine pericardial patch for anastomosis with the donor's left atrial wall. The operation was completed without heavy bleeding, and the patient was discharged from the hospital with no complications.

Acute Mitral Valve Regurgitation Caused by Left Ventricular Pacing Wire During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement is quickly becoming the standard of care for patients with severe aortic stenosis thanks to its minimally invasive nature and favorable outcomes. Recently, left ventricular pacing has been proposed as a safer alternative to traditional right heart pacing, which could simplify the transcatheter aortic valve replacement procedure overall, although procedural complications may still occur. This report describes a rare case of left ventricular pacing wire-induced acute severe mitral valve regurgitation during transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Cardiogenic Shock in Older Adults: A Focus on Age-Associated Risks and Approach to Management: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Cardiogenic shock continues to portend poor outcomes, conferring short-term mortality rates of 30% to 50% despite recent scientific advances. Age is a nonmodifiable risk factor for mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock and is often considered in the decision-making process for eligibility for various therapies. Older adults have been largely excluded from analyses of therapeutic options in patients with cardiogenic shock. As a result, despite the association of advanced age with worse outcomes, focused strategies in the assessment and management of cardiogenic shock in this high-risk and growing population are lacking. Individual programs oftentimes develop upper age limits for various interventional strategies for their patients, including heart transplantation and durable left ventricular assist devices. However, age as a lone parameter should not be used to guide individual patient management decisions in cardiogenic shock. In the assessment of risk in older adults with cardiogenic shock, a comprehensive, interdisciplinary approach is central to developing best practices. In this American Heart Association scientific statement, we aim to summarize our contemporary understanding of the epidemiology, risk assessment, and in-hospital approach to management of cardiogenic shock, with a unique focus on older adults.

Scrutinizing the Role of Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: Has Clinical Practice Outpaced the Evidence?

The use of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) for temporary mechanical circulatory support in various clinical scenarios has been increasing consistently, despite the lack of sufficient evidence regarding its benefit and safety from adequately powered randomized controlled trials. Although the ARREST trial (Advanced Reperfusion Strategies for Patients with Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest and Refractory Ventricular Fibrillation) and a secondary analysis of the PRAGUE OHCA trial (Prague Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest) provided some evidence in favor of VA-ECMO in the setting of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, the INCEPTION trial (Early Initiation of Extracorporeal Life Support in Refractory Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest) has not found a relevant improvement of short-term mortality with extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation. In addition, the results of the recently published ECLS-SHOCK trial (Extracorporeal Life Support in Cardiogenic Shock) and ECMO-CS trial (Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in the Therapy of Cardiogenic Shock) discourage the routine use of VA-ECMO in patients with infarct-related cardiogenic shock. Ongoing clinical trials (ANCHOR [Assessment of ECMO in Acute Myocardial Infarction Cardiogenic Shock, NCT04184635], REVERSE [Impella CP With VA ECMO for Cardiogenic Shock, NCT03431467], UNLOAD ECMO [Left Ventricular Unloading to Improve Outcome in Cardiogenic Shock Patients on VA-ECMO, NCT05577195], PIONEER [Hemodynamic Support With ECMO and IABP in Elective Complex High-risk PCI, NCT04045873]) may clarify the usefulness of VA-ECMO in specific patient subpopulations and the efficacy of combined mechanical circulatory support strategies. Pending further data to refine patient selection and management recommendations for VA-ECMO, it remains uncertain whether the present usage of this device improves outcomes.

Prediction of In-Hospital Mortality for Ischemic Cardiogenic Shock Requiring Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation

BACKGROUND

Clinical outcome of ischemic cardiogenic shock (CS) requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is highly variable, necessitating appropriate assessment of prognosis. However, a systemic predictive model estimating the mortality of refractory ischemic CS is lacking. The PRECISE (Prediction of In-Hospital Mortality for Patients With Refractory Ischemic Cardiogenic Shock Requiring Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support) score was developed to predict the prognosis of refractory ischemic CS due to acute myocardial infarction.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Data were obtained from the multicenter CS registry RESCUE (Retrospective and Prospective Observational Study to Investigate Clinical Outcomes and Efficacy of Left Ventricular Assist Device for Korean Patients With Cardiogenic Shock) that consists of 322 patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by refractory ischemic CS requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support. Fifteen parameters were selected to assess in-hospital mortality. The developed model was validated internally and externally using an independent external cohort (n=138). Among 322 patients, 138 (42.9%) survived postdischarge. Fifteen predictors were included for model development: age, diastolic blood pressure, hypertension, chronic kidney disease, peak lactic acid, serum creatinine, lowest left ventricular ejection fraction, vasoactive inotropic score, shock to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation insertion time, extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation, use of intra-aortic balloon pump, continuous renal replacement therapy, mechanical ventilator, successful coronary revascularization, and staged percutaneous coronary intervention. The PRECISE score yielded a high area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (0.894 [95% CI, 0.860-0.927]). External validation and calibration resulted in competent sensitivity (area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve, 0.895 [95% CI, 0.853-0.930]).

CONCLUSIONS

The PRECISE score demonstrated high predictive performance and directly translates into the expected in-hospital mortality rate. The PRECISE score may be used to support clinical decision-making in ischemic CS (www.theprecisescore.com).

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02985008.

Reperfusion in Patients With ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction With Cardiogenic Shock and Prolonged Interhospital Transport Times

BACKGROUND

In patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock, primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) is the preferred revascularization option. Little is known about the efficacy and safety of a pharmacoinvasive approach for patients with cardiogenic shock presenting to a non-PCI hospital with prolonged interhospital transport times.

METHODS

In a retrospective analysis of geographically extensive ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction network (2006-2021), 426 patients with cardiogenic shock and ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction presented to a non-PCI-capable hospital and underwent reperfusion therapy (53.8% pharmacoinvasive and 46.2% pPCI). The primary clinical outcome was a composite of in-hospital mortality, renal failure requiring dialysis, cardiac arrest, or mechanical circulatory support, and the primary safety outcome was major bleeding defined as an intracranial hemorrhage or bleeding that required transfusion was compared in an inverse probability weighted model. The electrocardiographic reperfusion outcome of interest was the worst residual ST-segment-elevation.

RESULTS

Patients with pharmacoinvasive treatment had longer median interhospital transport (3 hours versus 1 hour) and shorter median symptom-onset-to-reperfusion (125 minute-to-needle versus 419 minute-to-balloon) times. ST-segment resolution ≥50% on the postfibrinolysis ECG was 56.6%. Postcatheterization, worst lead residual ST-segment-elevation <1 mm (57.3% versus 46.3%; P=0.01) was higher in the pharmacoinvasive compared with the pPCI cohort, but no differences were observed in the worst lead ST-segment-elevation resolution ≥50% (77.4% versus 81.8%; P=0.57). The primary clinical end point was lower in the pharmacoinvasive cohort (35.2% versus 57.0%; inverse probability weighted odds ratio, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.26-0.72]; P<0.01) compared with patients who received pPCI. An interaction between interhospital transfer time and reperfusion strategy with all-cause mortality was observed, favoring a pharmacoinvasive approach with transfer times >60 minutes. The incidence of the primary safety outcome was 10.1% in the pharmacoinvasive arm versus 18.7% in pPCI (adjusted odds ratio, 0.41 [95% CI, 0.14-1.09]; P=0.08).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction presenting with cardiogenic shock and prolonged interhospital transport times, a pharmacoinvasive approach was associated with improved electrocardiographic reperfusion and a lower rate of death, dialysis, or mechanical circulatory support without an increase in major bleeding.

Critical Care Management of Patients After Cardiac Arrest: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association and Neurocritical Care Society

The critical care management of patients after cardiac arrest is burdened by a lack of high-quality clinical studies and the resultant lack of high-certainty evidence. This results in limited practice guideline recommendations, which may lead to uncertainty and variability in management. Critical care management is crucial in patients after cardiac arrest and affects outcome. Although guidelines address some relevant topics (including temperature control and neurological prognostication of comatose survivors, 2 topics for which there are more robust clinical studies), many important subject areas have limited or nonexistent clinical studies, leading to the absence of guidelines or low-certainty evidence. The American Heart Association Emergency Cardiovascular Care Committee and the Neurocritical Care Society collaborated to address this gap by organizing an expert consensus panel and conference. Twenty-four experienced practitioners (including physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and a respiratory therapist) from multiple medical specialties, levels, institutions, and countries made up the panel. Topics were identified and prioritized by the panel and arranged by organ system to facilitate discussion, debate, and consensus building. Statements related to postarrest management were generated, and 80% agreement was required to approve a statement. Voting was anonymous and web based. Topics addressed include neurological, cardiac, pulmonary, hematological, infectious, gastrointestinal, endocrine, and general critical care management. Areas of uncertainty, areas for which no consensus was reached, and future research directions are also included. Until high-quality studies that inform practice guidelines in these areas are available, the expert panel consensus statements that are provided can advise clinicians on the critical care management of patients after cardiac arrest.

Interhospital Variation in Admissions Managed With Critical Care Therapies or Invasive Hemodynamic Monitoring in Tertiary Cardiac Intensive Care Units: An Analysis From the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network Registry

BACKGROUND

Wide interhospital variations exist in cardiovascular intensive care unit (CICU) admission practices and the use of critical care restricted therapies (CCRx), but little is known about the differences in patient acuity, CCRx utilization, and the associated outcomes within tertiary centers.

METHODS

The Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network is a multicenter registry of tertiary and academic CICUs in the United States and Canada that captured consecutive admissions in 2-month periods between 2017 and 2022. This analysis included 17 843 admissions across 34 sites and compared interhospital tertiles of CCRx (eg, mechanical ventilation, mechanical circulatory support, continuous renal replacement therapy) utilization and its adjusted association with in-hospital survival using logistic regression. The Pratt index was used to quantify patient-related and institutional factors associated with CCRx variability.

RESULTS

The median age of the study population was 66 (56-77) years and 37% were female. CCRx was provided to 62.2% (interhospital range of 21.3%-87.1%) of CICU patients. Admissions to CICUs with the highest tertile of CCRx utilization had a greater burden of comorbidities, had more diagnoses of ST-elevation myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest, or cardiogenic shock, and had higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores. The unadjusted in-hospital mortality (median, 12.7%) was 9.6%, 11.1%, and 18.7% in low, intermediate, and high CCRx tertiles, respectively. No clinically meaningful differences in adjusted mortality were observed across tertiles when admissions were stratified by the provision of CCRx. Baseline patient-level variables and institutional differences accounted for 80% and 5.3% of the observed CCRx variability, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large registry of tertiary and academic CICUs, there was a >4-fold interhospital variation in the provision of CCRx that was primarily driven by differences in patient acuity compared with institutional differences. No differences were observed in adjusted mortality between low, intermediate, and high CCRx utilization sites.

Critical Care Echocardiography-A Driven Approach to Undifferentiated Shock

The clinical approach to undifferentiated shock in critically ill patients should be revised to use modern, point-of-care tools that are readily available. With the increasing availability of 2-dimensional ultrasonography and advanced Doppler capabilities, a quick, simplified, and integrated stepwise approach to shock using critical care echocardiography is proposed. Evidence supports the feasibility and usefulness of critical care echo-cardiography in enhancing diagnostic accuracy for shock, but there is a lack of systematic application of the technology in patients with undifferentiated shock. The proposed approach begins with the use of noninvasive ultrasonography with pulsed-wave Doppler capability to determine the flow state by measuring the velocity time integral of the left ventricular outflow tract. This narrative review explores the use left ventricular outflow tract velocity time integral, velocity time integral variation, limited visceral organ Doppler, and lung ultrasonography as a systematic approach for patients with undifferentiated shock.

Standardized Definitions for Cardiogenic Shock Research and Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices: Scientific Expert Panel From the Shock Academic Research Consortium (SHARC)

The Shock Academic Research Consortium is a multi-stakeholder group, including representatives from the US Food and Drug Administration and other government agencies, industry, and payers, convened to develop pragmatic consensus definitions useful for the evaluation of clinical trials enrolling patients with cardiogenic shock, including trials evaluating mechanical circulatory support devices. Several in-person and virtual meetings were convened between 2020 and 2022 to discuss the need for developing the standardized definitions required for evaluation of mechanical circulatory support devices in clinical trials for cardiogenic shock patients. The expert panel identified key concepts and topics by performing literature reviews, including previous clinical trials, while recognizing current challenges and the need to advance evidence-based practice and statistical analysis to support future clinical trials. For each category, a lead (primary) author was assigned to perform a literature search and draft a proposed definition, which was presented to the subgroup. These definitions were further modified after feedback from the expert panel meetings until a consensus was reached. This manuscript summarizes the expert panel recommendations focused on outcome definitions, including efficacy and safety.

Trends and Outcomes of Cardiogenic Shock in Patients With End-Stage Renal Disease: Insights From USRDS Database

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of data regarding epidemiology, temporal trends, and outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) and end-stage renal disease (chronic kidney disease stage V on hemodialysis).

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study using the United States Renal Data System database from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2019. We analyzed trends of CS, percutaneous mechanical support (intraaortic balloon pump, percutaneous ventricular assist device [Impella and Tandemheart], and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation) utilization, index mortality, 30-day mortality, and 1-year all-cause mortality in end-stage renal disease patients.

RESULTS

A total of 43 825 end-stage renal disease patients were hospitalized with CS (median age, 67.8 years [IQR, 59.4-75.8] and 59.1% men). From 2006 to 2019, the incidence of CS increased from 275 to 578 per 100 000 patients (Ptrend<0.001). The index mortality rate declined from 54.1% in 2006 to 40.8% in 2019 (Ptrend=0.44), and the 1-year all-cause mortality decreased from 63% in 2006 to 61.8% in 2018 (Ptrend=0.73), but neither trend was statistically significant. There was a significantly decreased utilization of intra-aortic balloon pumps from 17 832 to 7992 (Ptrend<0.001), increased utilization of percutaneous ventricular assist device from 137 to 5201 (Ptrend<0.001) and increase in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use from 69 to 904 per 100 000 patients (Ptrend<0.001). After adjusting for covariates, there was no significant difference in index mortality between CS patients requiring percutaneous mechanical support versus those not requiring percutaneous mechanical support (odds ratio, 0.97 [CI, 0.91-1.02]; P=0.22). On multivariable regression analysis, older age, peripheral vascular disease, diabetes, and time on dialysis were independent predictors of higher index mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of CS in end-stage renal disease patients has doubled without significant change in the trend of index mortality despite the use of percutaneous mechanical support.

Unloading the Left Ventricle in Venoarterial ECMO: In Whom, When, and How?

Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation provides cardiorespiratory support to patients in cardiogenic shock. This comes at the cost of increased left ventricle (LV) afterload that can be partly ascribed to retrograde aortic flow, causing LV distension, and leads to complications including cardiac thrombi, arrhythmias, and pulmonary edema. LV unloading can be achieved by using an additional circulatory support device to mitigate the adverse effects of mechanical overload that may increase the likelihood of myocardial recovery. Observational data suggest that these strategies may improve outcomes, but in whom, when, and how LV unloading should be employed is unclear; all techniques require balancing presumed benefits against known risks of device-related complications. This review summarizes the current evidence related to LV unloading with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

Exposure to Arterial Hyperoxia During Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenator Support and Mortality in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock

BACKGROUND

Exposure to hyperoxia, a high arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2), may be associated with worse outcomes in patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenator (ECMO) support. We examined hyperoxia in the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Registry among patients receiving venoarterial ECMO for cardiogenic shock.

METHODS

We included Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Registry patients from 2010 to 2020 who received venoarterial ECMO for cardiogenic shock, excluding extracorporeal CPR. Patients were grouped based on PaO2 after 24 hours of ECMO: normoxia (PaO2 60-150 mmHg), mild hyperoxia (PaO2 151-300 mmHg), and severe hyperoxia (PaO2 >300 mmHg). In-hospital mortality was evaluated using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among 9959 patients, 3005 (30.2%) patients had mild hyperoxia and 1972 (19.8%) had severe hyperoxia. In-hospital mortality increased across groups: normoxia, 47.8%; mild hyperoxia, 55.6% (adjusted odds ratio, 1.37 [95% CI, 1.23-1.53]; P<0.001); severe hyperoxia, 65.4% (adjusted odds ratio, 2.20 [95% CI, 1.92-2.52]; P<0.001). A higher PaO2 was incrementally associated with increased in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 1.14 per 50 mmHg higher [95% CI, 1.12-1.16]; P<0.001). Patients with a higher PaO2 had increased in-hospital mortality in each subgroup and when stratified by ventilator settings, airway pressures, acid-base status, and other clinical variables. In the random forest model, PaO2 was the second strongest predictor of in-hospital mortality, after older age.

CONCLUSIONS

Exposure to hyperoxia during venoarterial ECMO support for cardiogenic shock is strongly associated with increased in-hospital mortality, independent from hemodynamic and ventilatory status. Until clinical trial data are available, we suggest targeting a normal PaO2 and avoiding hyperoxia in CS patients receiving venoarterial ECMO.

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in the Therapy of Cardiogenic Shock: Results of the ECMO-CS Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is increasingly being used for circulatory support in patients with cardiogenic shock, although the evidence supporting its use in this context remains insufficient. The ECMO-CS trial (Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in the Therapy of Cardiogenic Shock) aimed to compare immediate implementation of VA-ECMO versus an initially conservative therapy (allowing downstream use of VA-ECMO) in patients with rapidly deteriorating or severe cardiogenic shock.

METHODS

This multicenter, randomized, investigator-initiated, academic clinical trial included patients with either rapidly deteriorating or severe cardiogenic shock. Patients were randomly assigned to immediate VA-ECMO or no immediate VA-ECMO. Other diagnostic and therapeutic procedures were performed as per current standards of care. In the early conservative group, VA-ECMO could be used downstream in case of worsening hemodynamic status. The primary end point was the composite of death from any cause, resuscitated circulatory arrest, and implementation of another mechanical circulatory support device at 30 days.

RESULTS

A total of 122 patients were randomized; after excluding 5 patients because of the absence of informed consent, 117 subjects were included in the analysis, of whom 58 were randomized to immediate VA-ECMO and 59 to no immediate VA-ECMO. The composite primary end point occurred in 37 (63.8%) and 42 (71.2%) patients in the immediate VA-ECMO and the no early VA-ECMO groups, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.46-1.12]; P=0.21). VA-ECMO was used in 23 (39%) of no early VA-ECMO patients. The 30-day incidence of resuscitated cardiac arrest (10.3.% versus 13.6%; risk difference, -3.2 [95% CI, -15.0 to 8.5]), all-cause mortality (50.0% versus 47.5%; risk difference, 2.5 [95% CI, -15.6 to 20.7]), serious adverse events (60.3% versus 61.0%; risk difference, -0.7 [95% CI, -18.4 to 17.0]), sepsis, pneumonia, stroke, leg ischemia, and bleeding was not statistically different between the immediate VA-ECMO and the no immediate VA-ECMO groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate implementation of VA-ECMO in patients with rapidly deteriorating or severe cardiogenic shock did not improve clinical outcomes compared with an early conservative strategy that permitted downstream use of VA-ECMO in case of worsening hemodynamic status.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov; Unique identifier: NCT02301819.

Effects of Escalating Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support in Patients With Worsening Cardiogenic Shock

BACKGROUND

Cardiogenic shock-related mortality is substantial, and temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices are frequently used. The authors aimed to describe patient characteristics and outcomes in patients with worsening cardiogenic shock requiring escalation of temporary MCS devices.

METHODS

Worsening cardiogenic shock was defined as persistent hypotension, increasing doses of vasopressors/inotropes, worsening hypoperfusion, or worsening invasive hemo-dynamics. Escalation of temporary MCS devices was defined as adding or exchanging an existing MCS device. Variables were evaluated by logistic regression models and receiver operating characteristic curves.

RESULTS

From July 1, 2016, to July 1, 2018, a total of 81 consecutive patients experienced worsening cardiogenic shock requiring temporary MCS escalation. The etiology of cardiogenic shock was heterogeneous (33.3% acute myocardial infarction and 61.7% decompen-sated heart failure). Younger age (<62 years), lower body mass index (<28.7 kg/m2), lower preescalation lactate levels (<3.1 mmol/L), higher postescalation blood pressure (>85 mm Hg), and lower postescalation lactate levels (<2.9 mmol/L) were associated with greater odds of survival. The presence of a pulmonary artery catheter at the time of escalation was associated with greater odds of survival (P = .05). Escalation of temporary MCS in Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions stage E shock was associated with 100% mortality (P = .05). The rate of overall survival to discharge was 32%.

CONCLUSION

Patients requiring temporary MCS escalation represent a high-risk cohort. Further work is needed to improve outcomes in this patient population.

Acute Perimyocarditis - an ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Mimicker: A Case Report

BACKGROUND A normal coronary angiogram in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) can be considered a myocardial infarction with non-obstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA) until an alternative diagnosis is obtained. However, the COVID-19 pandemic might delay urgent coronary angiography in a resource-limited setting. Perimyocarditis often causes symptoms, such as chest pain, as well as ST-elevation and high cardiac troponin levels. This STEMI mimicker can also cause cardiogenic shock and death when not treated properly. CASE REPORT A 40-year-old man reported having acute onset of substernal chest pain, which was suspected to be STEMI. The patient was an active smoker without any risk factors or a history of cardiovascular disease. The examination showed elevated cardiac troponin I, ST-elevation in high lateral leads, and regional wall motion abnormality (RWMA) by echocardiogram. Furthermore, thrombolytic therapy had failed, and rescue percutaneous coronary intervention was not performed due to the catheterization laboratory limitation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Before coronary angiography, the patient was scheduled for 2 consecutive days of COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) swabs. On the second day of hospitalization, the patient experienced a cardiogenic shock. The COVID-19 PCR results were negative, while coronary angiography revealed normal coronary arteries. The patient was eventually diagnosed with probable acute perimyocarditis. CONCLUSIONS Myocarditis is implicated in young patients without typical cardiovascular risk factors or in those with recent infection and cardiovascular symptoms mimicking acute coronary syndrome. It might also be present in situations where ST-elevation distribution on the electrocardiogram is discordant with the RWMA observed on the echocardiogram.

Characteristics and outcomes of patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock during COVID-19

Objectives

To evaluate characteristics and outcomes of patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock (AMICS) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic.

Background

The COVID‐19 pandemic has created challenges in delivering acute cardiovascular care. Quality measures and outcomes of patients presenting with AMICS during COVID‐19 in the United States have not been well described.

Methods

We identified 406 patients from the National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative (NCSI) with AMICS and divided them into those presenting before (N = 346, 5/9/2016−2/29/2020) and those presenting during the COVID‐19 pandemic (N = 60, 3/1/2020−11/10/2020). We compared baseline clinical data, admission characteristics, and outcomes.

Results

The median age of the cohort was 64 years, and 23.7% of the group was female. There were no significant differences in age, sex, and medical comorbidities between the two groups. Patients presenting during the pandemic were less likely to be Black compared to those presenting prior. Median door to balloon (90 vs. 88 min, p = 0.38), door to support (88 vs. 78 min, p = 0.13), and the onset of shock to support (74 vs. 62 min, p = 0.15) times were not significantly different between the two groups. Patients presented with ST‐elevation myocardial infarction more often during the COVID‐19 period (95.0% vs. 80.0%, p = 0.005). In adjusted logistic regression models, COVID‐19 period did not significantly associate with survival to discharge (odds ratio [OR] 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.54−2.19, p = 0.81) or with 1‐month survival (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.42−1.61, p = 0.56).

Conclusions

Care of patients presenting with AMICS has remained robust among hospitals participating in the NCSI during the COVID‐19 pandemic.

Escalating and De-escalating Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support in Cardiogenic Shock: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

The use of temporary mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock has increased dramatically despite a lack of randomized controlled trials or evidence guiding clinical decision-making. Recommendations from professional societies on temporary mechanical circulatory support escalation and de-escalation are limited. This scientific statement provides pragmatic suggestions on temporary mechanical circulatory support device selection, escalation, and weaning strategies in patients with common cardiogenic shock causes such as acute decompensated heart failure and acute myocardial infarction. The goal of this scientific statement is to serve as a resource for clinicians making temporary mechanical circulatory support management decisions and to propose standardized approaches for their use until more robust randomized clinical data are available.

Ablation of Refractory Ventricular Tachycardia Using Intramyocardial Needle Delivered Heated Saline-Enhanced Radiofrequency Energy: a First-in-Man Feasibility Trial

BACKGROUND

Ablation of ventricular tachycardia (VT) is limited by the inability to create penetrating lesions to reach intramyocardial origins. Intramural needle ablation using in-catheter, heated saline-enhanced radio frequency (SERF) energy uses convective heating to increase heat transfer and produce deeper, controllable lesions at intramural targets. This first-in-human trial was designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of SERF needle ablation in patients with refractory VT.

METHODS

Thirty-two subjects from 6 centers underwent needle electrode ablation. Each had recurrent drug-refractory monomorphic VT after implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation and prior standard ablation. During the SERF study procedure, one or more VTs were induced and mapped. The SERF needle catheter was used to create intramural lesions at targeted VT site(s). Acute procedural success was defined as noninducibility of the clinical VT after the procedure. Patients underwent follow-up at 30 days, and 3 and 6 months, with implantable cardioverter defibrillator interrogation at follow-up to determine VT recurrence.

RESULTS

These refractory VT patients (91% male, 66±10 years, ejection fraction 35±11%; 56% ischemic, and 44% nonischemic) had a median of 45 device therapies (shock/antitachycardia pacing) for VT in the 3 to 6 months pre-SERF ablation. The study catheter was used to deliver an average of 10±5 lesions per case, with an average of 430±295 seconds of radiofrequency time, 122±65 minute of catheter use time, and a procedural duration of 4.3±1.3 hours. Acute procedural success was 97% for eliminating the clinical VT. At average follow-up of 5 months (n=32), device therapies were reduced by 89%. Complications included 2 periprocedural deaths: an embolic mesenteric infarct and cardiogenic shock, 2 mild strokes, and a pericardial effusion treated with pericardiocentesis (n=1).

CONCLUSIONS

Intramural heated saline needle ablation showed complete acute and satisfactory mid-term control of difficult VTs failing 1 to 5 prior ablations and drug therapy. Further study is warranted to define safety and longer-term efficacy.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov; Unique Identifier: NCT03628534 and NCT02994446.

Cardiogenic Shock From Heart Failure Versus Acute Myocardial Infarction: Clinical Characteristics, Hospital Course, and 1-Year Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Little is known about clinical characteristics, hospital course, and longitudinal outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) related to heart failure (HF-CS) compared to acute myocardial infarction (AMI; CS related to AMI [AMI-CS]).

METHODS

We examined in-hospital and 1-year outcomes of 520 (219 AMI-CS, 301 HF-CS) consecutive patients with CS (January 3, 2017-December 31, 2019) in a single-center registry.

RESULTS

Mean age was 61.5±13.5 years, 71% were male, 22% were Black patients, and 63% had chronic kidney disease. The HF-CS cohort was younger (58.5 versus 65.6 years, P<0.001), had fewer cardiac arrests (15.9% versus 35.2%, P<0.001), less vasopressor utilization (61.8% versus 82.2%, P<0.001), higher pulmonary artery pulsatility index (2.14 versus 1.51, P<0.01), lower cardiac power output (0.64 versus 0.77 W, P<0.01) and higher pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (25.4 versus 22.2 mm Hg, P<0.001) than patients with AMI-CS. Patients with HF-CS received less temporary mechanical circulatory support (34.9% versus 76.3% P<0.001) and experienced lower rates of major bleeding (17.3% versus 26.0%, P=0.02) and in-hospital mortality (23.9% versus 39.3%, P<0.001). Postdischarge, 133 AMI-CS and 229 patients with HF-CS experienced similar rates of 30-day readmission (19.5% versus 24.5%, P=0.30) and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (23.3% versus 28.8%, P=0.45). Patients with HF-CS had lower 1-year mortality (n=123, 42.6%) compared to the patients with AMI-CS (n=110, 52.9%, P=0.03). Cumulative 1-year mortality was also lower in patients with HF-CS (log-rank test, P=0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with HF-CS were younger, and despite lower cardiac power output and higher pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, less likely to receive vasopressors or temporary mechanical circulatory support. Although patients with HF-CS had lower in-hospital and 1-year mortality, both cohorts experienced similarly high rates of postdischarge major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events and 30-day readmission, highlighting that both cohorts warrant careful long-term follow-up.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov; Unique identifier: NCT03378739.

Prophylactic Mechanical Circulatory Support Use in Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease

BACKGROUND

Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices can be used in high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Our objective was to describe trends and outcomes of prophylactic MCS use in elective PCI for patients with stable coronary artery disease in the American College of Cardiology National Cardiovascular Data Registry's CathPCI registry.

METHODS

Among 2 108 715 consecutive patients with stable coronary artery disease undergoing elective PCI in the CathPCI registry between 2009 and 2018, we examined patterns of prophylactic use of MCS. Propensity score models with inverse probability of treatment weighting compared effectiveness (in-hospital death, cardiogenic shock, or new heart failure) and safety (stroke, tamponade, major bleeding, or vascular complication requiring treatment) between patients treated with intra-aortic balloon pump versus other MCS (Impella or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation).

RESULTS

Overall, 6905 (0.3%) patients underwent elective PCI with prophylactic MCS. MCS use trended up from 0.2% of elective PCIs in 2009 to 0.6% in 2018 (P<0.0001), driven by other MCS (P<0.0001), whereas intra-aortic balloon pump use remained low and constant (P=0.12). In-hospital major adverse cardiac events and cardiovascular complications occurred in 7.1% and 18.8% of elective PCI patients with prophylactic MCS use and 0.5% and 2.3% of patients without prophylactic MCS use. Intra-aortic balloon pump use was associated with a higher risk of major adverse cardiac events (9.6% versus 6.0%, adjusted odds ratio, 1.59 [95% CI, 1.32-1.91]) but lower risk of complications (18.2% versus 19.1%, adjusted odds ratio, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.77-0.99]) than use of other MCS.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of prophylactic MCS has increased over time for elective PCI in patients with stable coronary artery disease. Intra-aortic balloon pump was associated with higher major adverse cardiac events but lower risk of procedural complications compared with other MCS.

Use of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation as Bridge to Replacement Therapies in Cardiogenic Shock: Insights From the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization

BACKGROUND

There has been increasing use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) as bridge to heart transplant (orthotopic heart transplant [OHT]) or left ventricular assist device (LVAD) over the last decade. We aimed to provide insights on the population, outcomes, and predictors for the selection of each therapy.

METHODS

Using the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Registry between 2010 and 2019, we compared in-hospital mortality and length of stay, predictors of OHT versus LVAD, and predictors of in-hospital mortality for patients with cardiogenic shock that were bridged with ECMO to OHT or LVAD. One hundred sixty-seven patients underwent LVAD versus 234 patients who underwent OHT.

RESULTS

The overall use of ECMO has increased from 1.7% in 2010 to 22.2% in 2019. Mortality was similar between groups (LVAD: 28.7% versus OHT: 29.1%) while length of stay was longer for OHT (LVAD: 49.6 versus OHT: 59.5 days, P=0.05). Factors associated with OHT included prior transplant (odds ratio [OR]=31.26 [CI, 3.84-780.5]), use of a temporary pacemaker (OR=6.5 [CI, 1.39-50.15]), and increased use of inotropes on ECMO (OR=3.77 [CI, 1.39-11.07]), whereas LVAD use was associated with weight (OR=0.98 [CI, 0.97-0.99]), cardiogenic shock presentation (OR=0.40 [CI, 0.21-0.78]), previous LVAD (OR=0.01 [CI, 0.0001-0.22]), respiratory failure (OR=0.28 [CI, 0.11-0.70]), and milrinone infusion (OR=0.32 [CI, 0.15-0.67]). Older age (OR=1.07 [CI, 1.02-1.12]), cannulation bleeding (OR=26.1 [CI, 4.32-221.3]), and surgical bleeding (OR=6.7 [CI, 1.26-39.9]) in patients receiving LVAD and respiratory failure (OR=5 [CI, 1.17-23.1]) and continuous renal replacement therapy (OR=3.82 [CI, 1.28-11.9]) in patients receiving OHT were associated with increased mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

ECMO use as a bridge to advanced therapies has increased over time, with more patients undergoing LVAD than OHT. Mortality was equal between the 2 groups while length of stay was longer for OHT.

Contemporary Management of Cardiogenic Shock: A RAND Appropriateness Panel Approach

BACKGROUND

Current practice in cardiogenic shock is guided by expert opinion in guidelines and scientific statements from professional societies with limited high quality randomized trial data to inform optimal patient management. An international panel conducted a modified Delphi process with the intent of identifying aspects of cardiogenic shock care where there was uncertainty regarding optimal patient management.

METHODS

An 18-person multidisciplinary panel comprising international experts was convened. A modified RAND/University of California Los Angeles appropriateness methodology was used. A survey comprising 70 statements was completed. Participants anonymously rated the appropriateness of each statement on a scale of 1 to 9: 1 to 3 inappropriate, 4 to 6 uncertain, and 7 to 9 appropriate. A summary of the results was discussed as a group, and the survey was iterated and completed again before final analysis.

RESULTS

There was broad alignment with current international guidelines and consensus statements. Overall, 44 statements were rated as appropriate, 19 as uncertain, and 7 as inappropriate. There was no disagreement with a disagreement index <1 for all statements. Routine fluid administration was deemed to be inappropriate. Areas of uncertainty focused panel on pre-PCI interventions, the use of right heart catheterization to guide management, routine use of left ventricular unloading strategies, and markers of futility when considering escalation to mechanical circulatory support.

CONCLUSIONS

While there was broad alignment with current guidance, an expert panel found several aspects of care where there was clinical equipoise, further highlighting the need for randomized controlled trials to better guide patient management and decision making in cardiogenic shock.

Intra-Aortic Balloon Pumping in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure With Hypoperfusion: From Pathophysiology to Clinical Practice

Trials on intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) use in cardiogenic shock related to acute myocardial infarction have shown disappointing results. The role of IABP in cardiogenic shock treatment remains unclear, and new (potentially more potent) mechanical circulatory supports with arguably larger device profile are emerging. A reappraisal of the physiological premises of intra-aortic counterpulsation may underpin the rationale to maintain IABP as a valuable therapeutic option for patients with acute decompensated heart failure and tissue hypoperfusion. Several pathophysiological features differ between myocardial infarction- and acute decompensated heart failure-related hypoperfusion, encompassing cardiogenic shock severity, filling status, systemic vascular resistances rise, and adaptation to chronic (if preexisting) left ventricular dysfunction. IABP combines a more substantial effect on left ventricular afterload with a modest increase in cardiac output and would therefore be most suitable in clinical scenarios characterized by a disproportionate increase in afterload without profound hemodynamic compromise. The acute decompensated heart failure syndrome is characterized by exquisite afterload-sensitivity of cardiac output and may be an ideal setting for counterpulsation. Several hemodynamic variables have been shown to predict response to IABP within this scenario, potentially guiding appropriate patient selection. Finally, acute decompensated heart failure with hypoperfusion may frequently represent an end stage in the heart failure history: IABP may provide sufficient hemodynamic support and prompt end-organ function recovery in view of more definitive heart replacement therapies while preserving ambulation when used with a transaxillary approach.

MitraClip to Treat Severe Ischemic Mitral Regurgitation During Impella CP Support in a 70-Year-Old Woman

Acute mitral regurgitation is a life-threatening complication of acute myocardial infarction. We present the case of a 70-year-old woman who had acute myocardial infarction complicated by severe mitral regurgitation and cardiogenic shock. Although current guidelines recommend mitral valve surgery for such patients, surgery often carries prohibitive risk of morbidity and mortality. Thus, in certain patients, percutaneous repair may be the only viable treatment option. In this case, we used a 3-step percutaneous approach involving coronary artery revascularization with a drug-eluting stent in the left circumflex coronary artery, mechanical circulatory support with an Impella CP pump for cardiogenic shock, and mitral valve repair with the MitraClip system for severe mitral regurgitation. After successful intervention, our patient regained hemodynamic stability and showed clinical improvement at one-month follow-up.

Clinical Outcomes Associated With Acute Mechanical Circulatory Support Utilization in Heart Failure Related Cardiogenic Shock

BACKGROUND

Cardiogenic shock occurring in the setting of advanced heart failure (HF-CS) is increasingly common. However, recent studies have focused almost exclusively on acute myocardial infarction-related CS. We sought to define clinical, hemodynamic, metabolic, and treatment parameters associated with clinical outcomes among patients with HF-CS, using data from the Cardiogenic Shock Working Group registry.

METHODS

Patients with HF-CS were identified from the multicenter Cardiogenic Shock Working Group registry and divided into 3 outcome categories assessed at hospital discharge: mortality, heart replacement therapy (HRT: durable ventricular assist device or orthotopic heart transplant), or native heart survival. Clinical characteristics, hemodynamic, laboratory parameters, drug therapies, acute mechanical circulatory support device (AMCS) utilization, and Society of Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention stages were compared across the 3 outcome cohorts.

RESULTS

Of the 712 patients with HF-CS identified, 180 (25.3%) died during their index admission, 277 (38.9%) underwent HRT (durable ventricular assist device or orthotopic heart transplant), and 255 (35.8%) experienced native heart survival without HRT. Patients who died had the highest right atrial pressure and heart rate and the lowest mean arterial pressure of the 3 outcome groups (P<0.01 for all). Biventricular and isolated left ventricular congestion were common among patients who died or underwent HRT, respectively. Lactate, blood urea nitrogen, serum creatinine, and aspartate aminotransferase were highest in patients with HF-CS experiencing in-hospital death. Intraaortic balloon pump was the most commonly used AMCS device in the overall cohort and among patients receiving HRT. Patients receiving >1 AMCS device had the highest in-hospital mortality rate irrespective of the number of vasoactive drugs used. Mortality increased with deteriorating Society of Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention stages (stage B: 0%, stage C: 10.7%, stage D: 29.4%, stage E: 54.5%, 1-way ANOVA=<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with HF-CS experiencing in-hospital mortality had a high prevalence of biventricular congestion and markers of end-organ hypoperfusion. Substantial heterogeneity exists with use of AMCS in HF-CS with intraaortic balloon pump being the most common device used and high rates of in-hospital mortality after exposure to >1 AMCS device.

Left Ventricular Unloading Is Associated With Lower Mortality in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock Treated With Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: Results From an International, Multicenter Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is increasingly used to treat cardiogenic shock. However, VA-ECMO might hamper myocardial recovery. The Impella unloads the left ventricle. This study aimed to evaluate whether left ventricular unloading in patients with cardiogenic shock treated with VA-ECMO was associated with lower mortality.

METHODS

Data from 686 consecutive patients with cardiogenic shock treated with VA-ECMO with or without left ventricular unloading using an Impella at 16 tertiary care centers in 4 countries were collected. The association between left ventricular unloading and 30-day mortality was assessed by Cox regression models in a 1:1 propensity score-matched cohort.

RESULTS

Left ventricular unloading was used in 337 of the 686 patients (49%). After matching, 255 patients with left ventricular unloading were compared with 255 patients without left ventricular unloading. In the matched cohort, left ventricular unloading was associated with lower 30-day mortality (hazard ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.63-0.98]; P=0.03) without differences in various subgroups. Complications occurred more frequently in patients with left ventricular unloading: severe bleeding in 98 (38.4%) versus 45 (17.9%), access site-related ischemia in 55 (21.6%) versus 31 (12.3%), abdominal compartment in 23 (9.4%) versus 9 (3.7%), and renal replacement therapy in 148 (58.5%) versus 99 (39.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

In this international, multicenter cohort study, left ventricular unloading was associated with lower mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock treated with VA-ECMO, despite higher complication rates. These findings support use of left ventricular unloading in patients with cardiogenic shock treated with VA-ECMO and call for further validation, ideally in a randomized, controlled trial.

Sex Disparities in the Management and Outcomes of Cardiogenic Shock Complicating Acute Myocardial Infarction in the Young

BACKGROUND

There are limited data on how sex influences the outcomes of acute myocardial infarction-cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) in young adults.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort of AMI-CS admissions aged 18 to 55 years, during 2000 to 2017, was identified using the National Inpatient Sample. Use of coronary angiography, percutaneous coronary intervention, mechanical circulatory support and noncardiac interventions was identified. Outcomes of interest included in-hospital mortality, use of cardiac interventions, hospitalization costs, and length of stay.

RESULTS

A total 90 648 AMI-CS admissions ≤55 years of age were included, of which 26% were women. Higher rates of CS were noted in men (2.2% in 2000 to 4.8% in 2017) compared with women (2.6% in 2000 to 4.0% in 2017; P<0.001). Compared with men, women with AMI-CS were more frequently of Black race, from a lower socioeconomic status, with higher comorbidity, and admitted to rural and small hospitals (all P<0.001). Women had lower rates of ST-segment elevation presentation (73.0% versus 78.7%), acute noncardiac organ failure, cardiac arrest (34.3% versus 35.7%), and received less-frequent coronary angiography (78.3% versus 81.4%), early coronary angiography (49.2% versus 54.1%), percutaneous coronary intervention (59.2% versus 64.0%), and mechanical circulatory support (50.3% versus 59.2%; all P<0.001). Female sex was an independent predictor of in-hospital mortality (23.0% versus 21.7%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.11 [95% CI, 1.07-1.16]; P<0.001). Women had lower hospitalization costs ($156 372±$198 452 versus $167 669±$208 577; P<0.001) but comparable lengths of stay compared with men.

CONCLUSIONS

In young AMI-CS admissions, women are treated less aggressively and experience higher in-hospital mortality than men.

Approach to Acute Cardiovascular Complications in COVID-19 Infection

The novel coronavirus disease 2019, otherwise known as COVID-19, is a global pandemic with primary respiratory manifestations in those who are symptomatic. It has spread to >187 countries with a rapidly growing number of affected patients. Underlying cardiovascular disease is associated with more severe manifestations of COVID-19 and higher rates of mortality. COVID-19 can have both primary (arrhythmias, myocardial infarction, and myocarditis) and secondary (myocardial injury/biomarker elevation and heart failure) cardiac involvement. In severe cases, profound circulatory failure can result. This review discusses the presentation and management of patients with severe cardiac complications of COVID-19 disease, with an emphasis on a Heart-Lung team approach in patient management. Furthermore, it focuses on the use of and indications for acute mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic and/or mixed shock.

Catheter Ablation in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock and Refractory Ventricular Tachycardia

BACKGROUND

There is paucity of data regarding radiofrequency ablation for ventricular tachycardia (VT) in patients with cardiogenic shock and concomitant VT refractory to antiarrhythmic drugs on mechanical support.

METHODS

Patients undergoing VT ablation at our center were enrolled in a prospectively maintained registry and screened for the current study (2010-2017).

RESULTS

All 21 consecutive patients with cardiogenic shock and concomitant refractory ventricular arrhythmia undergoing bailout ablation due to inability to wean off mechanical support were included. Median age was 61 years, 86% were men, median left ventricular ejection fraction was 20%, 81% had ischemic cardiomyopathy, and PAINESD score was 18±5. The type of mechanical support in place before the procedure was intra-aortic balloon pump in 14 patients (67%), Impella CP in 2, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in 2, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and intra-aortic balloon pump in 2, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and Impella CP in 1. Endocardial voltage maps showed myocardial scar in 19 patients (90%). The clinical VTs were inducible in 13 patients (62%), whereas 6 patients had premature ventricular contraction-induced ventricular fibrillation/VT (29%), and VT could not be induced in 2 patients (9%). Activation mapping was possible in all 13 with inducible clinical VTs. Substrate modification was performed in 15 patients with scar (79%). After ablation and scar modification, the arrhythmia was noninducible in 19 patients (91%). Seventeen (81%) were eventually weaned off mechanical support successfully, but 6 (29%) died during the index admission from persistent cardiogenic shock. Patients who had ventricular arrhythmia and cardiogenic shock on presentation had a trend toward lower in-hospital mortality compared with those who presented with cardiogenic shock and later developed ventricular arrhythmia.

CONCLUSIONS

Bailout ablation for refractory ventricular arrhythmia in cardiogenic shock allowed successful weaning from mechanical support in a large proportion of patients. Mortality remains high, but the majority of patients were discharged home and survived beyond 1 year.

Sex-Specific Management in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock: A Substudy of the CULPRIT-SHOCK Trial

BACKGROUND

Women are more likely to suffer and die from cardiogenic shock (CS) as the most severe complication of acute myocardial infarction. Data concerning optimal management for women with CS are scarce. Aim of this study was to better define characteristics of women experiencing CS and to the influence of sex on different treatment strategies.

METHODS

In the CULPRIT-SHOCK trial (The Culprit Lesion Only PCI Versus Multivessel PCI in Cardiogenic Shock), patients with CS complicating acute myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease were randomly assigned to one of the following revascularization strategies: either percutaneous coronary intervention of the culprit-lesion-only or immediate multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention. Primary end point was composite of death from any cause or severe renal failure leading to renal replacement therapy within 30 days. We investigated sex-specific differences in general and according to the revascularization strategies.

RESULTS

Among all 686 randomized patients included in the analysis, 24% were women. Women were older and had more often diabetes mellitus and renal insufficiency, whereas they had less often history of previous acute myocardial infarction and smoking. After 30 days, the primary clinical end point was not significantly different between groups (56% women versus 49% men; odds ratio, 1.29 [95% CI, 0.91-1.84]; P=0.15). There was no interaction between sex and coronary revascularization strategy regarding mortality and renal failure (P_interaction=0.11). The primary end point occurred in 56% of women treated by the culprit-lesion-only strategy versus 42% men, whereas 55% of women and 55% of men in the multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention group.

CONCLUSIONS

Although women presented with a different risk profile, mortality and renal replacement were similar to men. Sex did not influence mortality and renal failure according to the different coronary revascularization strategies. Based on these data, women and men presenting with CS complicating acute myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease should not be treated differently. However, further randomized trials powered to address potential sex-specific differences in CS are still necessary. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01927549.

Hospital Variation in the Utilization of Short-Term Nondurable Mechanical Circulatory Support in Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock

BACKGROUND

Limited knowledge exists on inter-hospital variation in the utilization of short-term, nondurable mechanical circulatory support (MCS) for myocardial infarction (MI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Hospitalizations for MI with CS in 2014 in a nationally representative all-payer database were included. The proportion of hospitalizations for MI with CS using MCS (MCS ratio) and in-hospital mortality were evaluated. Hospital characteristics and outcomes were compared across quartiles of MCS usage. Of 1813 hospitals evaluated, 1440 (79.4%) performed ≥10 percutaneous coronary interventions annually. Of these, 1064 (73.9%) had at least one code for MCS. Forty-one percent of hospitals did not use MCS. The median (interquartile range) proportion of MCS use among admissions for MI with CS was 33.3% (0.0%-50.0%). High MCS utilizing hospitals were larger ( P<0.001). Eighty-five percent (2808/3301) of MCS use was intra-aortic balloon pump. There was significant variation in receipt of MCS at different hospitals (median odds ratio of receiving MCS at 2 random hospitals: 1.58; 95% CI, 1.45-1.70). Adjusted in-hospital mortality was not different across quartiles of MCS use (Q4 versus Q1; odds ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.77-1.16; P=0.58).

CONCLUSIONS

Wide variation exists in hospital use of MCS for MI with CS, unexplained by patient characteristics. The predominant form of MCS use is intra-aortic balloon pump. Risk-adjusted mortality rates were not different between higher and lower MCS-utilizing hospitals.

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Use in Acute Myocardial Infarction in the United States, 2000 to 2014

BACKGROUND

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is increasingly used in acute myocardial infarction (AMI); however, there are limited large-scale national data.

METHODS

Using the National Inpatient Sample database from 2000 to 2014, a retrospective cohort of AMI utilizing ECMO was identified. Use of percutaneous coronary intervention, intra-aortic balloon pump, and percutaneous left ventricular assist device (LVAD) was also identified in this population. Outcomes of interest included temporal trends in utilization of ECMO alone and with concomitant procedures (percutaneous coronary intervention, intra-aortic balloon pump, and percutaneous LVAD), in-hospital mortality, and resource utilization.

RESULTS

In ≈9 million AMI admissions, ECMO was used in 2962 (<0.01%) and implanted a median of 1 day after admission. ECMO was used in 0.5% and 0.3% AMI admissions complicated by cardiogenic shock and cardiac arrest, respectively. ECMO was used more commonly in admissions that were younger, nonwhite, and with less comorbidity. ECMO use was 11× higher in 2014 as compared with 2000 (odds ratio, 11.37 [95% CI, 7.20-17.97]). Same-day percutaneous coronary intervention was performed in 23.1%; intra-aortic balloon pump/percutaneous LVAD was used in 57.9%, of which 30.3% were placed concomitantly. In-hospital mortality with ECMO was 59.2% overall but decreased from 100% (2000) to 45.1% (2014). Durable LVAD and cardiac transplantation were performed in 11.7% as an exit strategy. Of the hospital survivors, 40.8% were discharged to skilled nursing facilities. Older age, male sex, nonwhite race, and lower socioeconomic status were independently associated with higher in-hospital mortality with ECMO use.

CONCLUSIONS

In AMI admissions, a steady increase was noted in the utilization of ECMO alone and with concomitant procedures (percutaneous coronary intervention, intra-aortic balloon pump, and percutaneous LVAD). In-hospital mortality remained high in AMI admissions treated with ECMO.

The Evolving Landscape of Impella Use in the United States Among Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Mechanical Circulatory Support

BACKGROUND

Impella was approved for mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in 2008, but large-scale, real-world data on its use are lacking. Our objective was to describe trends and variations in Impella use, clinical outcomes, and costs across US hospitals in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) treated with MCS (Impella or intra-aortic balloon pump).

METHODS

From the Premier Healthcare Database, we analyzed 48 306 patients undergoing PCI with MCS at 432 hospitals between January 2004 and December 2016. Association analyses were performed at 3 levels: time period, hospital, and patient. Hierarchical models with propensity adjustment were used for association analyses. We examined trends and variations in the proportion of Impella use, and associated clinical outcomes (in-hospital mortality, bleeding requiring transfusion, acute kidney injury, stroke, length of stay, and hospital costs).

RESULTS

Among patients undergoing PCI treated with MCS, 4782 (9.9%) received Impella; its use increased over time, reaching 31.9% of MCS in 2016. There was wide variation in Impella use across hospitals (>5-fold variation). Specifically, among patients receiving Impella, there was a wide variation in outcomes of bleeding (>2.5-fold variation), and death, acute kidney injury, and stroke (all ≈1.5-fold variation). Adverse outcomes and costs were higher in the Impella era (years 2008-2016) versus the pre-Impella era (years 2004-2007). Hospitals with higher Impella use had higher rates of adverse outcomes and costs. After adjustment for the propensity score, and accounting for clustering of patients by hospitals, Impella use was associated with death: odds ratio, 1.24 (95% CI, 1.13-1.36); bleeding: odds ratio, 1.10 (95% CI, 1.00-1.21); and stroke: odds ratio, 1.34 (95% CI, 1.18-1.53), although a similar, nonsignificant result was observed for acute kidney injury: odds ratio, 1.08 (95% CI, 1.00-1.17).

CONCLUSIONS

Impella use is rapidly increasing among patients undergoing PCI treated with MCS, with marked variability in its use and associated outcomes. Although unmeasured confounding cannot be ruled out, when analyzed by time periods, or at the hospital level or the patient level, Impella use was associated with higher rates of adverse events and costs. More data are needed to define the appropriate role of MCS in patients undergoing PCI.

Red Blood Cell Distribution Width Is Associated with All-Cause Mortality in Critically Ill Patients with Cardiogenic Shock

BACKGROUND There is no previously published epidemiological study exploring the association between red blood cell distribution width (RDW) and mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS). The aim of this study was to examine the association between RDW and the risk of all-cause mortality in these patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS We analyzed clinical data from the MIMIC-III V1.4 database. We collected data on each patient's demographic parameters, vital signs, laboratory parameters, vital signs, comorbidities, and scoring systems on ICU admission. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the association between RDW levels and the 30-day, 90-day, and 365-day mortality in patients with CS. RESULTS There were 1131 patients meeting inclusion criteria in our study. In multivariate analysis, following adjustment for age, sex, and ethnicity, higher RDW in tertiles and quintiles were all associated with increased risk of 30-day, 90-day, and 365-day all-cause mortality. Furthermore, after adjusting for more relevant confounders, RDW remained a significant predictor of risk of 30-day, 90-day, and 365-day mortality (tertile 3 versus tertile 1: HR, 95% CI: 1.66, 1.19-2.31; 1.73, 1.28-2.33; 1.80, 1.38-2.34). Similarly significant robust associations were found in RDW levels stratified by quintiles. CONCLUSIONS Higher RDW is associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality in critically ill patients with CS.