地中海队列中不同病因导致的心源性休克死亡率:Shock-CAT 研究的结果。

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Cosme García-García, Teresa López-Sobrino, Esther Sanz-Girgas, Maria R Cueto, Jaime Aboal, Pablo Pastor, Irene Buera, Alessandro Sionis, Rut Andrea, Judit Rodríguez-López, Jose Carlos Sánchez-Salado, Carlos Tomas, Jordi Bañeras, Albert Ariza, Josep Lupón, Antoni Bayés-Genís, Ferran Rueda
{"title":"地中海队列中不同病因导致的心源性休克死亡率:Shock-CAT 研究的结果。","authors":"Cosme García-García, Teresa López-Sobrino, Esther Sanz-Girgas, Maria R Cueto, Jaime Aboal, Pablo Pastor, Irene Buera, Alessandro Sionis, Rut Andrea, Judit Rodríguez-López, Jose Carlos Sánchez-Salado, Carlos Tomas, Jordi Bañeras, Albert Ariza, Josep Lupón, Antoni Bayés-Genís, Ferran Rueda","doi":"10.1002/ehf2.15148","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Mortality in cardiogenic shock (CS) remains elevated, with the potential for CS causes to impact prognosis and risk stratification. The aim was to investigate in-hospital prognosis and mortality in CS patients according to aetiology. We also assessed the prognostic accuracy of CardShock and IABP-SHOCK II scores.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Shock-CAT study was a multicentre, prospective, observational study conducted from December 2018 to November 2019 in eight university hospitals in Catalonia, including non-selected consecutive CS patients. Data on clinical presentation, management, including mechanical circulatory support (MCS) were analysed comparing acute myocardial infarction (AMI) related CS and non-AMI-CS. The accuracy of CardShock and IABP-SHOCK II scores to assess 90 day mortality risk were also compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 382 CS patients were included, age 65.3 (SD 13.9) years, 75.1% men. Patients were classified as AMI-CS (n = 232, 60.7%) and non-AMI-CS (n = 150, 39.3%). In the AMI-CS group, 77.6% were STEMI. Main aetiologies for non-AMI-CS were heart failure (36.2%), arrhythmias (22.1%) and valve disease (8.0%). AMI-CS patients required more MCS than non-AMI-CS (43.1% vs. 16.7%, P < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was higher in AMI-CS (37.1 vs. 26.7%, P = 0.035), with a two-fold increased risk after multivariate adjustment (odds ratio 2.24, P = 0.019). The IABP-SHOCK II had superior discrimination for predicting 90 day mortality when compared with CardShock in AMI-CS patients [area under the curve (AUC) 0.74 vs. 0.66, P = 0.047] although both scores performed similarly in non-AMI-CS (AUC 0.64 vs. 0.62, P = 0.693).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In our cohort, AMI-CS mortality was increased by two-fold when compared with non-AMI-CS. IABP-SHOCK II score provides better 90 day mortality risk prediction than CardShock score in AMI-CS, but both scores performed similar in non-AMI-CS patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":11864,"journal":{"name":"ESC Heart Failure","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cardiogenic shock mortality according to Aetiology in a Mediterranean cohort: Results from the Shock-CAT study.\",\"authors\":\"Cosme García-García, Teresa López-Sobrino, Esther Sanz-Girgas, Maria R Cueto, Jaime Aboal, Pablo Pastor, Irene Buera, Alessandro Sionis, Rut Andrea, Judit Rodríguez-López, Jose Carlos Sánchez-Salado, Carlos Tomas, Jordi Bañeras, Albert Ariza, Josep Lupón, Antoni Bayés-Genís, Ferran Rueda\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ehf2.15148\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Mortality in cardiogenic shock (CS) remains elevated, with the potential for CS causes to impact prognosis and risk stratification. The aim was to investigate in-hospital prognosis and mortality in CS patients according to aetiology. We also assessed the prognostic accuracy of CardShock and IABP-SHOCK II scores.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Shock-CAT study was a multicentre, prospective, observational study conducted from December 2018 to November 2019 in eight university hospitals in Catalonia, including non-selected consecutive CS patients. Data on clinical presentation, management, including mechanical circulatory support (MCS) were analysed comparing acute myocardial infarction (AMI) related CS and non-AMI-CS. The accuracy of CardShock and IABP-SHOCK II scores to assess 90 day mortality risk were also compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 382 CS patients were included, age 65.3 (SD 13.9) years, 75.1% men. Patients were classified as AMI-CS (n = 232, 60.7%) and non-AMI-CS (n = 150, 39.3%). In the AMI-CS group, 77.6% were STEMI. Main aetiologies for non-AMI-CS were heart failure (36.2%), arrhythmias (22.1%) and valve disease (8.0%). AMI-CS patients required more MCS than non-AMI-CS (43.1% vs. 16.7%, P < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was higher in AMI-CS (37.1 vs. 26.7%, P = 0.035), with a two-fold increased risk after multivariate adjustment (odds ratio 2.24, P = 0.019). The IABP-SHOCK II had superior discrimination for predicting 90 day mortality when compared with CardShock in AMI-CS patients [area under the curve (AUC) 0.74 vs. 0.66, P = 0.047] although both scores performed similarly in non-AMI-CS (AUC 0.64 vs. 0.62, P = 0.693).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In our cohort, AMI-CS mortality was increased by two-fold when compared with non-AMI-CS. IABP-SHOCK II score provides better 90 day mortality risk prediction than CardShock score in AMI-CS, but both scores performed similar in non-AMI-CS patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11864,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ESC Heart Failure\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ESC Heart Failure\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/ehf2.15148\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ESC Heart Failure","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ehf2.15148","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

摘要

目的:心源性休克(CS)的死亡率仍然很高,CS病因可能会影响预后和风险分层。我们的目的是根据病因调查 CS 患者的院内预后和死亡率。我们还评估了 CardShock 和 IABP-SHOCK II 评分的预后准确性:Shock-CAT研究是一项多中心、前瞻性、观察性研究,于2018年12月至2019年11月在加泰罗尼亚地区的8所大学医院进行,包括非选择性连续CS患者。研究分析了与急性心肌梗死(AMI)相关的CS和非AMI-CS的临床表现、管理,包括机械循环支持(MCS)的数据。同时还比较了CardShock和IABP-SHOCK II评分评估90天死亡风险的准确性:共纳入 382 名 CS 患者,年龄为 65.3 (SD 13.9) 岁,75.1% 为男性。患者被分为AMI-CS组(n = 232,60.7%)和非AMI-CS组(n = 150,39.3%)。在 AMI-CS 组中,77.6% 为 STEMI。非 AMI-CS 的主要病因是心力衰竭(36.2%)、心律失常(22.1%)和瓣膜病(8.0%)。与非 AMI-CS 患者相比,AMI-CS 患者需要更多的 MCS(43.1% 对 16.7%,P 结论:在我们的队列中,AMI-CS 患者比非 AMI-CS 患者需要更多的 MCS:在我们的队列中,与非 AMI-CS 相比,AMI-CS 死亡率增加了两倍。与 CardShock 评分相比,IABP-SHOCK II 评分能更好地预测 AMI-CS 患者 90 天的死亡风险,但这两个评分在非 AMI-CS 患者中的表现相似。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cardiogenic shock mortality according to Aetiology in a Mediterranean cohort: Results from the Shock-CAT study.

Aims: Mortality in cardiogenic shock (CS) remains elevated, with the potential for CS causes to impact prognosis and risk stratification. The aim was to investigate in-hospital prognosis and mortality in CS patients according to aetiology. We also assessed the prognostic accuracy of CardShock and IABP-SHOCK II scores.

Methods: Shock-CAT study was a multicentre, prospective, observational study conducted from December 2018 to November 2019 in eight university hospitals in Catalonia, including non-selected consecutive CS patients. Data on clinical presentation, management, including mechanical circulatory support (MCS) were analysed comparing acute myocardial infarction (AMI) related CS and non-AMI-CS. The accuracy of CardShock and IABP-SHOCK II scores to assess 90 day mortality risk were also compared.

Results: A total of 382 CS patients were included, age 65.3 (SD 13.9) years, 75.1% men. Patients were classified as AMI-CS (n = 232, 60.7%) and non-AMI-CS (n = 150, 39.3%). In the AMI-CS group, 77.6% were STEMI. Main aetiologies for non-AMI-CS were heart failure (36.2%), arrhythmias (22.1%) and valve disease (8.0%). AMI-CS patients required more MCS than non-AMI-CS (43.1% vs. 16.7%, P < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was higher in AMI-CS (37.1 vs. 26.7%, P = 0.035), with a two-fold increased risk after multivariate adjustment (odds ratio 2.24, P = 0.019). The IABP-SHOCK II had superior discrimination for predicting 90 day mortality when compared with CardShock in AMI-CS patients [area under the curve (AUC) 0.74 vs. 0.66, P = 0.047] although both scores performed similarly in non-AMI-CS (AUC 0.64 vs. 0.62, P = 0.693).

Conclusions: In our cohort, AMI-CS mortality was increased by two-fold when compared with non-AMI-CS. IABP-SHOCK II score provides better 90 day mortality risk prediction than CardShock score in AMI-CS, but both scores performed similar in non-AMI-CS patients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信