Pre-admission beta-blocker therapy and outcomes in cardiogenic shock: Insights from the Altshock-2 Registry

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Matteo Pagnesi, Mauro Riccardi, Alice Sacco, Giovanni Tavecchia, Giovanna Viola, Simone Frea, Martina Briani, Letizia Fausta Bertoldi, Maurizio Bertaina, Luciano Potena, Serafina Valente, Marco Marini, Gaetano Maria De Ferrari, Nicoletta D'Ettore, Astrid Cardinale, Rita Camporotondo, Matteo Rota, Guido Tavazzi, Nuccia Morici, Federico Pappalardo, Marco Metra, Altshock-2 investigators
{"title":"Pre-admission beta-blocker therapy and outcomes in cardiogenic shock: Insights from the Altshock-2 Registry","authors":"Matteo Pagnesi,&nbsp;Mauro Riccardi,&nbsp;Alice Sacco,&nbsp;Giovanni Tavecchia,&nbsp;Giovanna Viola,&nbsp;Simone Frea,&nbsp;Martina Briani,&nbsp;Letizia Fausta Bertoldi,&nbsp;Maurizio Bertaina,&nbsp;Luciano Potena,&nbsp;Serafina Valente,&nbsp;Marco Marini,&nbsp;Gaetano Maria De Ferrari,&nbsp;Nicoletta D'Ettore,&nbsp;Astrid Cardinale,&nbsp;Rita Camporotondo,&nbsp;Matteo Rota,&nbsp;Guido Tavazzi,&nbsp;Nuccia Morici,&nbsp;Federico Pappalardo,&nbsp;Marco Metra,&nbsp;Altshock-2 investigators","doi":"10.1002/ehf2.15322","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aims</h3>\n \n <p>We aimed to assess the impact of pre-admission beta-blocker (BB) therapy on the clinical characteristics, in-hospital treatment and outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock (CS).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>All patients enrolled in the multicentre prospective Altshock-2 registry since March 2020 with available data on pre-admission BB therapy were included. Clinical characteristics, in-hospital management, haemodynamic parameters and clinical outcomes were compared in patients with versus without BB therapy. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>A total of 668 patients were included [median age 66 (56–74) years, male sex 76.5%]: 299 patients (44.8%) with and 369 patients (55.2%) without previous BB therapy. Patients receiving pre-admission BB therapy had more frequently heart failure-related CS (43.8% vs. 17.9%) and less frequently cardiac arrest at presentation (20.1% vs. 27.8%, <i>P</i> = 0.027). Levosimendan was used less frequently and dobutamine was used more frequently in patients with baseline BB therapy (<i>P</i> = 0.033 and <i>P</i> = 0.043, respectively). Differences in the early haemodynamic response to vasoactive drugs were observed between patients with and without previous BB therapy, with a significant impact of baseline BB on mean arterial pressure (MAP) response during norepinephrine infusion (<i>P</i> = 0.012) and with dobutamine having a reduced response in MAP and heart rate in patients receiving BBs before admission (<i>P</i> = 0.023 and <i>P</i> = 0.001, respectively). In-hospital mortality was not significantly different between the BB and no-BB groups (40% vs. 33.7%; adjusted odds ratio 1.32, 95% confidence interval 0.84–2.07, <i>P</i> = 0.224). Similarly, baseline BB therapy was not independently associated with 48 h mortality (12.7% vs. 14.6%; adjusted odds ratio 1.09, 95% confidence interval 0.64–1.87, <i>P</i> = 0.749). The lack of association between baseline BB therapy and mortality was also confirmed at inverse probability of treatment weighting-adjusted analysis.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>In a real-world, contemporary cohort of patients with CS, previous BB therapy influenced the haemodynamic response to vasoactive drugs, but it was not associated with in-hospital mortality.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":11864,"journal":{"name":"ESC Heart Failure","volume":"12 4","pages":"2565-2577"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ehf2.15322","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ESC Heart Failure","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ehf2.15322","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims

We aimed to assess the impact of pre-admission beta-blocker (BB) therapy on the clinical characteristics, in-hospital treatment and outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock (CS).

Methods

All patients enrolled in the multicentre prospective Altshock-2 registry since March 2020 with available data on pre-admission BB therapy were included. Clinical characteristics, in-hospital management, haemodynamic parameters and clinical outcomes were compared in patients with versus without BB therapy. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality.

Results

A total of 668 patients were included [median age 66 (56–74) years, male sex 76.5%]: 299 patients (44.8%) with and 369 patients (55.2%) without previous BB therapy. Patients receiving pre-admission BB therapy had more frequently heart failure-related CS (43.8% vs. 17.9%) and less frequently cardiac arrest at presentation (20.1% vs. 27.8%, P = 0.027). Levosimendan was used less frequently and dobutamine was used more frequently in patients with baseline BB therapy (P = 0.033 and P = 0.043, respectively). Differences in the early haemodynamic response to vasoactive drugs were observed between patients with and without previous BB therapy, with a significant impact of baseline BB on mean arterial pressure (MAP) response during norepinephrine infusion (P = 0.012) and with dobutamine having a reduced response in MAP and heart rate in patients receiving BBs before admission (P = 0.023 and P = 0.001, respectively). In-hospital mortality was not significantly different between the BB and no-BB groups (40% vs. 33.7%; adjusted odds ratio 1.32, 95% confidence interval 0.84–2.07, P = 0.224). Similarly, baseline BB therapy was not independently associated with 48 h mortality (12.7% vs. 14.6%; adjusted odds ratio 1.09, 95% confidence interval 0.64–1.87, P = 0.749). The lack of association between baseline BB therapy and mortality was also confirmed at inverse probability of treatment weighting-adjusted analysis.

Conclusions

In a real-world, contemporary cohort of patients with CS, previous BB therapy influenced the haemodynamic response to vasoactive drugs, but it was not associated with in-hospital mortality.

Abstract Image

入院前β受体阻滞剂治疗和心源性休克的结果:来自Altshock-2注册的见解。
目的:我们旨在评估入院前β受体阻滞剂(BB)治疗对心源性休克(CS)患者的临床特征、住院治疗和结局的影响。方法:纳入自2020年3月以来纳入Altshock-2多中心前瞻性登记的所有患者,并提供入院前BB治疗的可用数据。比较了接受和未接受BB治疗的患者的临床特征、住院管理、血流动力学参数和临床结果。主要终点是住院死亡率。结果:共纳入668例患者[中位年龄66(56-74)岁,男性76.5%]:299例患者(44.8%)接受过BB治疗,369例患者(55.2%)未接受过BB治疗。入院前接受BB治疗的患者出现心力衰竭相关CS的频率更高(43.8%对17.9%),就诊时心脏骤停的频率更低(20.1%对27.8%,P = 0.027)。基线BB治疗患者左西孟旦使用频率较低,多巴酚丁胺使用频率较高(P = 0.033和P = 0.043)。观察既往接受过和未接受过BB治疗的患者对血管活性药物的早期血流动力学反应的差异,基线BB对去甲肾上腺素输注期间平均动脉压(MAP)反应的显著影响(P = 0.012),多巴酚丁胺对入院前接受BB治疗的患者MAP和心率的反应降低(P = 0.023和P = 0.001)。住院死亡率在BB组和无BB组之间无显著差异(40% vs. 33.7%;校正优势比1.32,95%可信区间0.84 ~ 2.07,P = 0.224)。同样,基线BB治疗与48小时死亡率没有独立相关性(12.7% vs. 14.6%;校正优势比1.09,95%可信区间0.64-1.87,P = 0.749)。基线BB治疗与死亡率之间缺乏关联也在治疗权重调整后的逆概率分析中得到证实。结论:在现实世界的当代CS患者队列中,先前的BB治疗影响了对血管活性药物的血流动力学反应,但与住院死亡率无关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
ESC Heart Failure
ESC Heart Failure Medicine-Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
7.90%
发文量
461
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: ESC Heart Failure is the open access journal of the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology dedicated to the advancement of knowledge in the field of heart failure. The journal aims to improve the understanding, prevention, investigation and treatment of heart failure. Molecular and cellular biology, pathology, physiology, electrophysiology, pharmacology, as well as the clinical, social and population sciences all form part of the discipline that is heart failure. Accordingly, submission of manuscripts on basic, translational, clinical and population sciences is invited. Original contributions on nursing, care of the elderly, primary care, health economics and other specialist fields related to heart failure are also welcome, as are case reports that highlight interesting aspects of heart failure care and treatment.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信