Outcomes of Patients Transferred to Tertiary Care Centers for Treatment of Cardiogenic Shock: A Cardiogenic Shock Working Group Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Consensus recommendations for cardiogenic shock (CS) advise transfer of patients in need of advanced options beyond the capability of "spoke" centers to tertiary/"hub" centers with higher capabilities. However, outcomes associated with such transfers are largely unknown beyond those reported in individual health networks. OBJECTIVES: To analyze a contemporary, multicenter CS cohort with the aim of comparing characteristics and outcomes of patients between transfer (between spoke and hub centers) and nontransfer cohorts (those primarily admitted to a hub center) for both acute myocardial infarction (AMI-CS) and heart failure-related HF-CS. We also aim to identify clinical characteristics of the transfer cohort that are associated with in-hospital mortality. METHODS: The Cardiogenic Shock Working Group (CSWG) registry is a national, multicenter, prospective registry including high-volume (mostly hub) CS centers. Fifteen U.S. sites contributed data for this analysis from 2016-2020. RESULTS: Of 1890 consecutive CS patients enrolled into the CSWG registry, 1028 (54.4%) patients were transferred. Of these patients, 528 (58.1%) had heart failure-related CS (HF-CS), and 381 (41.9%) had CS related to acute myocardial infarction (AMI-CS). Upon arrival to the CSWG site, transfer patients were more likely to be in SCAI stages C and D, when compared to nontransfer patients. Transfer patients had higher mortality rates (37% vs 29%, < 0.001) than nontransfer patients; the differences were driven primarily by the HF-CS cohort. Logistic regression identified increasing age, mechanical ventilation, renal replacement therapy, and higher number of vasoactive drugs prior to or within 24 hours after CSWG site transfer as independent predictors of mortality among HF-CS patients. Conversely, pulmonary artery catheter use prior to transfer or within 24 hours of arrival was associated with decreased mortality rates. Among transfer AMI-CS patients, BMI > 28 kg/m2, worsening renal failure, lactate > 3 mg/dL, and increasing numbers of vasoactive drugs were associated with increased mortality rates. CONCLUSION: More than half of patients with CS managed at high-volume CS centers were transferred from another hospital. Although transfer patients had higher mortality rates than those who were admitted primarily to hub centers, the outcomes and their predictors varied significantly when classified by HF-CS vs AMI-CS.

Outcomes With Single-Site Dual-Lumen Versus Multisite Cannulation for Adults With COVID-19 Respiratory Failure Receiving Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether multisite versus single-site dual-lumen (SSDL) cannulation is associated with outcomes for COVID-19 patients requiring venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO). DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Registry. Propensity score matching (2:1 multisite vs SSDL) was used to control for confounders. PATIENTS: The matched cohort included 2,628 patients (1,752 multisite, 876 SSDL) from 170 centers. The mean ( sd ) age in the entire cohort was 48 (11) years, and 3,909 (71%) were male. Patients were supported with mechanical ventilation for a median (interquartile range) of 79 (113) hours before VV-ECMO support. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was 90-day survival. Secondary outcomes included survival to hospital discharge, duration of ECMO support, days free of ECMO support at 90 days, and complication rates. MAIN RESULTS: There was no difference in 90-day survival (49.4 vs 48.9%, p = 0.66), survival to hospital discharge (49.8 vs 48.2%, p = 0.44), duration of ECMO support (17.9 vs 17.1 d, p = 0.82), or hospital length of stay after cannulation (28 vs 27.4 d, p = 0.37) between multisite and SSDL groups. More SSDL patients were extubated within 24 hours (4% vs 1.9%, p = 0.001). Multisite patients had higher ECMO flows at 24 hours (4.5 vs 4.1 L/min, p < 0.001) and more ECMO-free days at 90 days (3.1 vs 2.0 d, p = 0.02). SSDL patients had higher rates of pneumothorax (13.9% vs 11%, p = 0.03). Cannula site bleeding (6.4% vs 4.7%, p = 0.03), oxygenator failure (16.7 vs 13.4%, p = 0.03), and circuit clots (5.5% vs 3.4%, p = 0.02) were more frequent in multisite patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective study of COVID-19 patients requiring VV-ECMO, 90-day survival did not differ between patients treated with a multisite versus SSDL cannulation strategy and there were only modest differences in major complication rates. These findings do not support the superiority of either cannulation strategy in this setting.

Socioeconomic status and in-hospital outcomes for patients undergoing heart transplantation or ventricular assist device implantation.

INTRODUCTION: Although lower socioeconomic status (SES) has been associated with worse in-hospital outcomes among patients with heart failure, the in-hospital outcomes for patients undergoing durable Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD) implantation or Heart Transplantation (HT) based on SES have not been well characterized. METHODS: We analyzed data from the National Inpatient Sample of hospitalizations between January 2016 and December 2020 of patients aged 18 and over who underwent a HT or newly implanted LVAD. Quartile classification of the median household income of the patient's residential zip code was used to estimate SES. Multivariable analyses with logistic and linear regression were used to evaluate the effects of SES on inpatient outcomes including inpatient mortality, length of stay, and key inpatient complications. RESULTS: A total of 16,265 weighted hospitalizations for new LVAD implantation and 14,320 weighted hospitalizations for HT were identified. In multivariable analysis, among patients undergoing HT or LVAD implantation respectively, there were no significant differences between the lowest and highest SES quartiles among important in-hospital outcomes including length of stay (adj B-coeff .56, (-3.59)-(4.71), p = .79 and adj B-coeff 2.40, (-.21)-(5.02), p = .07) and mortality (aOR 1.02, .61-1.70, p = .94 and aOR 1.08, .72-1.62, p = .73). There were also no differences based on SES quartile in important inpatient complications including stroke and cardiac arrest. CONCLUSION: In this analysis from the National Inpatient Sample, we demonstrate that SES, evaluated by median zip code income, was not associated with important in-hospital metrics including mortality and length of stay among patients undergoing LVAD or HT.

Impella percutaneous left ventricular assist device as mechanical circulatory support for cardiogenic shock: A retrospective analysis from a tertiary academic medical center.

OBJECTIVES: To describe hemodynamic efficacy and clinical outcomes of Impella percutaneous left ventricular assist device (pLVAD) in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS). BACKGROUND: Percutaneous LVADs are increasingly used in CS management. However, device-related outcomes and optimal utilization remain active areas of investigation. METHODS: All CS patients receiving pLVAD as mechanical circulatory support (MCS) between 2011 and 2017 were identified. Clinical characteristics and outcomes were analyzed. A multivariable logistic regression model was created to predict MCS escalation despite pLVAD. Outcomes were compared between early and late implantation. RESULTS: A total of 115 CS patients (mean age 63.6 ± 13.8 years; 69.6% male) receiving pLVAD as MCS were identified, the majority with CS secondary to acute myocardial infarction (AMI; 67.0%). Patients experienced significant cardiac output improvement (median 3.39 L/min to 3.90 L/min, p = .002) and pharmacological support reduction (median vasoactive-inotropic score [VIS] 25.4 to 16.4, p = .049). Placement of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) occurred in 48 (41.7%) of patients. Higher pre-pLVAD VIS was associated with subsequent MCS escalation in the entire cohort and AMI subgroup (OR 1.27 [95% CI 1.02-1.58], p = .034 and OR 1.72 [95% CI 1.04-2.86], p = .035, respectively). Complications were predominantly access site related (bleeding [9.6%], vascular injury [5.2%], and limb ischemia [2.6%]). In-hospital mortality was 57.4%, numerically greater survival was noted with earlier device implantation. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with pLVAD for CS improved hemodynamic status but did not uniformly obviate MCS escalation. Mortality in CS remains high, though earlier device placement for appropriately selected patients may be beneficial.

Value of Hemodynamic Monitoring in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support.

The recent widespread availability and use of mechanical circulatory support is transforming the management and outcomes of cardiogenic shock (CS). Clinical decision-making regarding the optimization of therapies for patients with CS can be guided effectively by hemodynamic monitoring with a pulmonary artery catheter (PAC). Because several studies regarding the benefit of PACs are ambiguous, the use of PACs is variable among clinicians treating patients with CS. More notable is that PAC use has not been studied as part of a randomized, controlled trial in patients with CS with or without mechanical circulatory support. Standardized approaches to hemodynamic monitoring in these patients can improve decision-making and outcomes. In this review, we summarize the hemodynamics of CS and mechanical circulatory support with PAC-derived measurements, and provide a compelling rationale for the use of PAC monitoring in patients with CS receiving mechanical circulatory support.

Estimation of Stressed Blood Volume in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock From Acute Myocardial Infarction and Decompensated Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Sympathetically mediated redistribution of blood from the unstressed venous reservoir to the hemodynamically active stressed compartment is thought to contribute to congestion in cardiogenic shock (CS). We used a novel computational method to estimate stressed blood volume (SBV) in CS and assess its relationship with clinical outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: Hemodynamic parameters including estimated SBV (eSBV) were compared among patients from the Cardiogenic Shock Working Group registry with a complete set of hemodynamic data. eSBV was compared across shock etiologies (acute myocardial infarction and CS (AMI-CS) vs heart failure with CS (HF-CS), Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions stage, and between survivors and nonsurvivors. Among 528 patients with patients analyzed, the mean eSBV was 2423 mL/70 kg and increased with increasing Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions stage (B, 2029 mL/70 kg; C, 2305 mL/70 kg; D, 2496 mL/70 kg; E, 2707 mL/70 kg; P < .001). The eSBV was significantly greater among patients with HF-CS who died compared with survivors (2733 vs 2357 mL/70 kg; P < .001), whereas no significant difference was observed between outcome groups in AMI-CS (2501 mL/70 kg vs 2384 mL/70 kg; P = .19). CONCLUSIONS: eSBV is a novel integrated index of congestion which correlates with shock severity. eSBV was higher in patients with HF-CS who died; no difference was observed in patients with AMI-CS, suggesting that congestion may play a more significant role in the deterioration of patients with HF-CS.

Risk Prediction in Cardiogenic Shock: Current State of Knowledge, Challenges and Opportunities.

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a condition associated with high mortality rates in which prognostication is uncertain for a variety of reasons, including its myriad causes, its rapidly evolving clinical course and the plethora of established and emerging therapies for the condition. A number of validated risk scores are available for CS prognostication; however, many of these are tedious to use, are designed for application in a variety of populations and fail to incorporate contemporary hemodynamic parameters and contemporary mechanical circulatory support interventions that can affect outcomes. It is important to separate patients with CS who may recover with conservative pharmacological therapies from those in who may require advanced therapies to survive; it is equally important to identify quickly those who will succumb despite any therapy. An ideal risk-prediction model would balance incorporation of key hemodynamic parameters while still allowing dynamic use in multiple scenarios, from aiding with early decision making to device weaning. Herein, we discuss currently available CS risk scores, perform a detailed analysis of the variables in each of these scores that are most predictive of CS outcomes and explore a framework for the development of novel risk scores that consider emerging therapies and paradigms for this challenging clinical entity.

Increased Aortic Stiffness Is Associated With Higher Rates of Stroke, Gastrointestinal Bleeding and Pump Thrombosis in Patients With a Continuous Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device.

BACKGROUND: In the general population, increased aortic stiffness is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events. Previous studies have demonstrated an increase in aortic stiffness in patients with a continuous flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD). However, the association between aortic stiffness and common adverse events is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: Forty patients with a HeartMate II (HMII) (51 $ 11 years; 20% female; 25% ischemic) implanted between January 2011 and September 2017 were included. Two-dimensional transthoracic echocardiograms of the ascending aorta, obtained before HMII placement and early after heart transplant, were analyzed to calculate the aortic stiffness index (AO-SI). The study cohort was divided into patients who had an increased vs decreased AO-SI after LVAD support. A composite outcome of gastrointestinal bleeding, stroke, and pump thrombosis was defined as the primary end point and compared between the groups. While median AO-SI increased significantly after HMII support (AO-SI 4.4-6.5, P = .012), 16 patients had a lower AO-SI. Patients with increased (n = 24) AO-SI had a significantly higher rate of the composite end point (58% vs 12%, odds ratio 9.8, P < .01). Similarly, those with increased AO-SI tended to be on LVAD support for a longer duration, had higher LVAD speed and reduced use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers. CONCLUSIONS: Increased aortic stiffness in patients with a HMII is associated with a significantly higher rates of adverse events. Further studies are warranted to determine the causality between aortic stiffness and adverse events, as well as the effect of neurohormonal modulation on the conduit vasculature in patients with a CF-LVAD.

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.

Impact of Bridge to Transplantation With Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Devices on Posttransplantation Mortality.

BACKGROUND: Bridge to transplantation (BTT) with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) is a mainstay of therapy for heart failure in patients awaiting heart transplantation (HT). Criteria for HT listing do not differ between patients medically managed and those mechanically bridged to HT. The objectives of the present study were to evaluate the impact of BTT with LVAD on posttransplantation survival, to describe differences in causes of 1-year mortality in medically and mechanically bridged patients, and to evaluate differences in risk factors for 1-year mortality between those with and those without LVAD at the time of HT. METHODS: Using the United Network of Organ Sharing database, we identified 5486 adult, single-organ HT recipients transplanted between 2008 and 2015. Patients were propensity matched for likelihood of LVAD at the time of HT. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were used to assess the impact of BTT on 1- and 5-year mortality. Logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the odds ratio of 1-year mortality for patients BTT with LVAD compared with those with medical management across clinically significant variables at various thresholds. RESULTS: Early mortality was higher in mechanically bridged patients: 9.5% versus 7.2% mortality at 1 year (P<0.001). BTT patients incurred an increased risk of 1-year mortality with an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 40 to 60 mL·min-1·1.73 m-2 (odds ratio, 1.69; P=0.003) and <40 mL·min-1·1.73 m-2 (odds ratio, 2.16; P=0.005). A similar trend was seen in patients with a body mass index of 25 to 30 kg/m2 (odds ratio, 1.88; P=0.024) and >30 kg/m2 (odds ratio, 2.11; P<0.001). When patients were stratified by BTT status and the presence of risk factors, including age >60 years, estimated glomerular filtration rate <40 mL·min-1·1.73 m-2, and body mass index >30 kg/m2, there were significant differences in 1-year mortality between medium- and high-risk medically and mechanically bridged patients, with 1-year mortality in high-risk BTT patients at 17.6% compared with 10.4% in high-risk medically managed patients. CONCLUSIONS: Bridge to HT with LVAD, although necessary because of organ scarcity and capable of improving wait list survival, confers a significantly higher risk of early posttransplantation mortality. Patients bridged with mechanical support may require more careful consideration for transplant eligibility after LVAD placement.

Ten-year outcomes of extracorporeal life support for in-hospital cardiac arrest at a tertiary center.

Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) is controversial, given both the lack of evidence for improved outcomes and clarity on appropriate candidacy during time-sensitive cardiac arrest situations. The primary objective of our study was to identify factors predicting successful outcomes in ECPR patients.Between March 2007 and November 2018, 112 patients were placed on extracorporeal life support (ECLS) during active CPR (ECPR) at our institution. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge. Survivors and non-survivors were compared in terms of pre-cannulation comorbidities, laboratory values, and overall outcomes. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify pre-cannulation predictors of in-hospital mortality. Among 112 patients, 44 (39%) patients survived to decannulation and 31 (28%) survived to hospital discharge. The median age was 60 years (IQR 45-72) with a median ECLS duration of 2.2 days (IQR 0.6-5.1). Patients who survived to discharge had lower rates of chronic kidney disease than non-survivors (19% vs. 41%, p = 0.046) and lower baseline creatinine values [median 1.2 mg/dL (IQR 0.8-1.7) vs. 1.7 (0.7-2.7), p = 0.008]. Median duration from CPR initiation to cannulation was 40 min (IQR 30-50) with no difference between survivors and non-survivors (p = 0.453). When controlling for age and CPR duration, multivariable logistic regression with pre-procedural risk factors identified pre-arrest serum creatinine as an independent predictor of mortality [OR 3.25 (95% CI 1.22-8.70), p = 0.019] and higher pre-arrest serum albumin as protective [OR 0.32 (95% CI 0.14-0.74), p = 0.007]. In our cohort, pre-arrest creatinine and albumin were independently predictive of in-hospital mortality during ECPR, while age and CPR duration were not.

Minimally invasive central venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for long-term ambulatory support as a bridge to heart-lung transplant.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is becoming a key tool for bridge to heart, lung, or heart-lung transplantation, and ambulatory ECMO support offers many advantages to prepare the patients. We here present a case of successful en bloc heart and lung transplantation after long-term ambulatory support with a minimally invasive central venoarterial ECMO approach as bridge to transplant.

Comparison of Percutaneous and Surgical Right Ventricular Assist Device Support After Durable Left Ventricular Assist Device Insertion.

BACKGROUND: Early right ventricular (RV) failure after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation increases morbidity and mortality. Percutaneous right ventricular assist device (pRVAD) support is an alternative to more invasive surgical RVAD (sRVAD). METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively reviewed patients receiving isolated pRVAD or sRVAD after durable LVAD at our center in the years 2007-2018. Hemodynamic parameters before and after implantation and survival outcomes were compared among groups. Nineteen patients received pRVAD and 21 sRVAD. Hemodynamic parameters improved immediately with the use of pRVAD; central venous pressure decreased (from 15.9 ± 2.4 to 12.3 ± 3.2 mm Hg; P<.001) and cardiac index increased (from 2.4 ± 0.5 to 3.5 ± 0.8 L·min-1·m-2; P<.001). These were sustained after device removal and were similar to those with the use of sRVAD. Patients with pRVAD required fewer blood transfusions and mechanically ventilated days than those with sRVAD. Among survivors, intensive care unit and hospital days were fewer with the use of pRVAD: 21 (16-27) versus 34 (27-46) ICU days (P = .01); 43.5 (30-66) versus 91 (62-111) hospital days (P = .03). There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality with the use of pRVAD compared with sRVAD (21.1% vs 42.9%; P = .14), but there was a trend toward a higher rate of discharge free from hemodialysis (73.7% vs 47.6%; P = .09). CONCLUSIONS: Novel pRVAD systems for RV failure provide hemodynamic benefits similar to sRVAD, are associated with less morbidity, and should be considered as an alternative to sRVAD.

Hypertension and Stroke in Patients with Left Ventricular Assist Devices (LVADs).

Stroke is one of the most dreaded complications of left ventricular assist device therapy in patients with end-stage congestive heart failure. There is strong evidence linking anticoagulation and infection with ischemic and hemorrhagic strokes, though recent data has emerged regarding the importance of elevated blood pressure. In the recently completed Heartware Ventricular Assist Device studies, a mean arterial pressure greater than 90 mmHg was associated with greater stroke risk, particularly the hemorrhagic subtype. In this review, we discuss recent evidence regarding deleterious effects of uncontrolled hypertension in patients with left ventricular devices, and propose measurement and management strategies.

Clinical outcomes among cardiogenic shock patients supported with high-capacity Impella axial flow pumps: A report from the Cardiogenic Shock Working Group.

BACKGROUND: The Impella 5.0 and 5.5 pumps (Abiomed, Danvers, MA) are large-bore transvalvular micro-axial assist devices used in cardiogenic shock (CS) for patients requiring high-capacity flow. Despite their increasing use, real-world data regarding indications, rates of utilization and clinical outcomes with this therapy are limited. The objective of our study was to examine clinical profiles and outcomes of patients in a contemporary, real-world CS registry of patients who received an Impella 5.0/5.5 alone or in combination with other temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) devices. METHODS: The CS Working Group (CSWG) Registry includes patients from 34 US hospitals. For this analysis, data from patients who received an Impella 5.0/5.5 between 2020-2023 were analyzed. Use of Impella 5.0/5.5 with or without additional tMCS therapies, duration of support, adverse events and outcomes at hospital discharge were studied. Adverse events including stroke, limb ischemia, bleeding and hemolysis were not standardized by the registry but reported per individual CSWG Primary Investigator discretion. For those who survived, rates of native heart recovery (NHR) or heart replacement therapy (HRT) including heart transplant (HT), or durable ventricular assist device (VAD) were recorded. We also assessed outcomes based on shock etiology (acute myocardial infarction or MI-CS vs. heart failure-related CS or HF-CS). RESULTS: Among 6,205 patients, 754 received an Impella 5.0/5.5 (12.1%), including 210 MI-CS (27.8%) and 484 HF-CS (64.1%) patients. Impella 5.0/5.5 was used as the sole tMCS device in 32% of patients, while 68% of patients received a combination of tMCS devices. Impella cannulation sites were available for 524/754 (69.4%) of patients, with 93.5% axillary configuration. Survival to hospital discharge for those supported with an Impella 5.0/5.5 was 67%, with 20.4% NHR and 45.5% HRT. Compared to HF-CS, patients with MI-CS supported on Impella 5.0/5.5 had higher in-hospital mortality (45.2% vs 26.2%, p < 0.001) and were less likely to receive HRT (22.4% vs 56.6%, p < 0.001. For patients receiving a combination of tMCS during hospitalization, this was associated with higher rates of limb ischemia (9% vs. 3%, p < 0.01), bleeding (52% vs 33%, p < 0.01), and mortality (38% vs 25%; p < 0.001) compared to Impella 5.0/5.5 alone. Among Impella 5.0/5.5 recipients, the median duration of pump support was 12.9 days (IQR: 6.8-22.9) and longer in patients bridged to HRT (14 days; IQR: 7.7-28.4). CONCLUSIONS: In this multi-center cohort of patients with CS, use of Impella 5.0/5.5 was associated with an overall survival of 67.1% and high rates of HRT. Lower adverse event rates were observed when Impella 5.0/5.5 was the sole support device used. Further study is required to determine whether a strategy of early Impella 5.0/5.5 use for CS improves survival. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: High capacity Impella heart pumps are capable of provide up to 5.5 liter/min of flow while upper body surgical placement allows for ambulation. Patients with advanced cardiogenic shock from acute myocardial infarction or heart failure requiring temporary mechanical circulatory support may benefit from upfront use of Impella 5.5 to improve overall survival, including native heart recovery or successful bridge to durable left ventricular assist device surgery or heart transplantation.

Outcomes With Peripheral Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Suspected Acute Myocarditis: 10-Year Experience From the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Registry.

BACKGROUND: Acute myocarditis can result in severe hemodynamic compromise requiring venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). Outcomes and factors associated with mortality among myocarditis patients are not well described in the modern ECMO era. METHODS: We queried the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization registry from 2011 to 2020 for adults with suspected acute myocarditis undergoing peripheral VA-ECMO support. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality and was compared to all-comers receiving VA-ECMO in the registry over the same period. Secondary outcomes were rates of bridging to advanced therapies and ECMO complications. We used multivariable logistic regression to examine factors associated with in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Among 850 patients with suspected acute myocarditis receiving peripheral VA-ECMO, the mean age was 41 years, 52% were men, 39% Asian race, and 14.8% underwent extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation. During the study period, in-hospital mortality steadily declined and was 58.3% for all all-comers receiving VA-ECMO compared with 34.9% for patients with myocarditis (P<0.001). After multivariable modeling, risk factors for mortality were earlier year of support, older age, higher weight, Asian race, need for extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation, sepsis, and lower mean arterial pressure and pH prior to ECMO initiation. ECMO complications including bleeding, limb ischemia, infections and ischemic stroke were more common among nonsurvivors and significantly declined during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with all-comers supported with VA-ECMO, in-hospital mortality for patients with acute myocarditis is significantly lower, with nearly two-thirds of patients surviving to discharge. Major modifiable risk factors for mortality were ongoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation requiring ECMO and markers of illness severity prior to ECMO.

Application of Cardiogenic Shock Working Group-defined Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (CSWG-SCAI) Staging of Cardiogenic Shock to the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV (MIMIC-IV) database.

BACKGROUND: The optimal parameters for defining stages of cardiogenic shock (CS) are not yet known. The Cardiogenic Shock Working Group-defined Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (CSWG-SCAI) staging of CS was developed to provide simple and specific parameters for risk-stratifying patients. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to test whether the Cardiogenic Shock Working Group-defined Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (CSWG-SCAI) staging is associated with in-hospital mortality, using the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV (MIMIC-IV) database. METHODS: We utilized the open-access MIMIC-IV database, which includes >300,000 patients admitted between 2008 and 2019. We extracted the clinical profile of patients admitted with CS and stratified them into different SCAI stages at admission based on the CSWG criteria. We then tested the association between in-hospital mortality and parameters of hypotension, hypoperfusion, and overall CSWG-SCAI stage. RESULTS: Of the 2463 patients, CS was predominantly caused by heart failure (HF; 54.7 %) or myocardial infarction (MI; 26.3 %). Mortality was 37.5 % for the total cohort, 32.7 % for patients with HF, and 40 % for patients with MI (p < 0.001). Mortality was higher among patients with mean arterial pressure < 65 mmHg, lactate >2 mmol/L, ALT >200 IU/L, pH ≤ 7.2, and more than one drug/device support at baseline. Increasing CSWG-SCAI stages at baseline and maximum CSWG-SCAI stage achieved were significantly associated with in-hospital mortality (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The CSWG-SCAI stages are significantly associated with in-hospital mortality and may be used to identify hospitalized patients at risk of worsening cardiogenic shock severity. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: We analyzed data from 2463 patients with cardiogenic shock using the MIMIC-IV database to investigate the relationship between the Cardiogenic Shock Working Group-defined Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (CSWG-SCAI) staging and in-hospital mortality. The main causes of cardiogenic shock were heart failure (54.7 %) and myocardial infarction (26.3 %). The overall mortality rate was 37.5 %, with a higher rate among patients with myocardial infarction (40 %) compared to those with heart failure (32.7 %). Mean arterial pressure < 65 mmHg, lactate >2 mmol/L, ALT >200 IU/L, and pH ≤ 7.2 were significantly associated with mortality. Increasing CSWG-SCAI stages at baseline and maximum achieved stages were strongly associated with higher mortality (p < 0.05). Therefore, the CSWG-SCAI staging system can be used to risk-stratify patients with cardiogenic shock.

Clinical Presentation and In-Hospital Trajectory of Heart Failure and Cardiogenic Shock.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure-related cardiogenic shock (HF-CS) remains an understudied distinct clinical entity. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to profile a large cohort of patients with HF-CS focused on practical application of the SCAI (Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions) staging system to define baseline and maximal shock severity, in-hospital management with acute mechanical circulatory support (AMCS), and clinical outcomes. METHODS: The Cardiogenic Shock Working Group registry includes patients with CS, regardless of etiology, from 17 clinical sites enrolled between 2016 and 2020. Patients with HF-CS (non-acute myocardial infarction) were analyzed and classified based on clinical presentation, outcomes at discharge, and shock severity defined by SCAI stages. RESULTS: A total of 1,767 patients with HF-CS were included, of whom 349 (19.8%) had de novo HF-CS (DNHF-CS). Patients were more likely to present in SCAI stage C or D and achieve maximum SCAI stage D. Patients with DNHF-CS were more likely to experience in-hospital death and in- and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, and they escalated more rapidly to a maximum achieved SCAI stage, compared to patients with acute-on-chronic HF-CS. In-hospital cardiac arrest was associated with greater in-hospital death regardless of clinical presentation (de novo: 63% vs 21%; acute-on-chronic HF-CS: 65% vs 17%; both P < 0.001). Forty-five percent of HF-CS patients were exposed to at least 1 AMCS device throughout hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: In a large contemporary HF-CS cohort, we identified a greater incidence of in-hospital death and cardiac arrest as well as a more rapid escalation to maximum SCAI stage severity among DNHF-CS. AMCS use in HF-CS was common, with significant heterogeneity among device types. (Cardiogenic Shock Working Group Registry [CSWG]; NCT04682483).

Clinical Course of Patients in Cardiogenic Shock Stratified by Phenotype.

BACKGROUND: Cardiogenic shock (CS) patients remain at 30% to 60% in-hospital mortality despite therapeutic innovations. Heterogeneity of CS has complicated clinical trial design. Recently, 3 distinct CS phenotypes were identified in the CSWG (Cardiogenic Shock Working Group) registry version 1 (V1) and external cohorts: I, "noncongested;" II, "cardiorenal;" and III, "cardiometabolic" shock. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to confirm the external reproducibility of machine learning-based CS phenotypes and to define their clinical course. METHODS: The authors included 1,890 all-cause CS patients from the CSWG registry version 2. CS phenotypes were identified using the nearest centroids of the initially reported clusters. RESULTS: Phenotypes were retrospectively identified in 796 patients in version 2. In-hospital mortality rates in phenotypes I, II, III were 23%, 41%, 52%, respectively, comparable to the initially reported 21%, 45%, and 55% in V1. Phenotype-related demographic, hemodynamic, and metabolic features resembled those in V1. In addition, 58.8%, 45.7%, and 51.9% of patients in phenotypes I, II, and III received mechanical circulatory support, respectively (P = 0.013). Receiving mechanical circulatory support was associated with increased mortality in cardiorenal (OR: 1.82 [95% CI: 1.16-2.84]; P = 0.008) but not in noncongested or cardiometabolic CS (OR: 1.26 [95% CI: 0.64-2.47]; P = 0.51 and OR: 1.39 [95% CI: 0.86-2.25]; P = 0.18, respectively). Admission phenotypes II and III and admission Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions stage E were independently associated with increased mortality in multivariable logistic regression compared to noncongested "stage C" CS (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The findings support the universal applicability of these phenotypes using supervised machine learning. CS phenotypes may inform the design of future clinical trials and enable management algorithms tailored to a specific CS phenotype.

Impact of Female Sex on Cardiogenic Shock Outcomes: A Cardiogenic Shock Working Group Report.

BACKGROUND: Studies reporting cardiogenic shock (CS) outcomes in women are scarce. OBJECTIVES: The authors compared survival at discharge among women vs men with CS complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMI-CS) and heart failure (HF-CS). METHODS: The authors analyzed 5,083 CS patients in the Cardiogenic Shock Working Group. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed with the use of baseline characteristics. Logistic regression was performed for log odds of survival. RESULTS: Among 5,083 patients, 1,522 were women (30%), whose mean age was 61.8 ± 15.8 years. There were 30% women and 29.1% men with AMI-CS (P = 0.03). More women presented with de novo HF-CS compared with men (26.2% vs 19.3%; P < 0.001). Before PSM, differences in baseline characteristics and sex-specific outcomes were seen in the HF-CS cohort, with worse survival at discharge (69.9% vs 74.4%; P = 0.009) and a higher rate of maximum Society for Cardiac Angiography and Interventions stage E (26% vs 21%; P = 0.04) in women than in men. Women were less likely to receive pulmonary artery catheterization (52.9% vs 54.6%; P < 0.001), heart transplantation (6.5% vs 10.3%; P < 0.001), or left ventricular assist device implantation (7.8% vs 10%; P = 0.01). Regardless of CS etiology, women had more vascular complications (8.8% vs 5.7%; P < 0.001), bleeding (7.1% vs 5.2%; P = 0.01), and limb ischemia (6.8% vs 4.5%; P = 0.001). More vascular complications persisted in women after PSM (10.4% women vs 7.4% men; P = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: Women with HF-CS had worse outcomes and more vascular complications than men with HF-CS. More studies are needed to identify barriers to advanced therapies, decrease complications, and improve outcomes of women with CS.