Cost-effectiveness of population screening for aortic stenosis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Aortic stenosis (AS) is a progressive disease predominantly affecting elderly patients that carries significant morbidity and mortality without aortic valve replacement, the only proven treatment. Our objective was to determine the cost-effectiveness of AS screening using transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) in a geriatric population from the perspective of the publicly funded healthcare system in Canada. METHODS: Markov models estimating the cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for AS screening with a one-time TTE were developed. The model included diagnosed and undiagnosed AS health states, hospitalizations, TAVR and post-TAVR health states. Primary analysis included screening at 70 and 80 years of age with intervention at symptom onset, with scenario analysis included for early intervention at the time of severe asymptomatic AS diagnosis. Monte Carlo simulation of 5000 replications was completed with a lifetime horizon and 1.5% discount for costs and outcomes. RESULTS: Screening for AS at the age of 70 years was associated with an ICER of $156,722 and screening at 80 years of age was associated with an ICER of $28,005, suggesting that screening at 80 years of age is cost-effective when willingness-to-pay per QALY is $50,000. Scenario analysis with early intervention was not cost-effective with an ICER of $142,157 at 70 years, and $124,651 at 80 years. CONCLUSION: Screening for AS at 80 years of age with a one-time TTE, in a Canadian population, improves quality of life and is cost-effective in a publicly funded healthcare system providing TAVR is reserved for symptomatic patients.

Diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care ultrasound with artificial intelligence-assisted assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction.

Focused cardiac ultrasound (FoCUS) is becoming standard practice in a wide spectrum of clinical settings. There is limited data evaluating the real-world use of FoCUS with artificial intelligence (AI). Our objective was to determine the accuracy of FoCUS AI-assisted left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) assessment and compare its accuracy between novice and experienced users. In this prospective, multicentre study, participants requiring a transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) were recruited to have a FoCUS done by a novice or experienced user. The AI-assisted device calculated LVEF at the bedside, which was subsequently compared to TTE. 449 participants were enrolled with 424 studies included in the final analysis. The overall intraclass coefficient was 0.904, and 0.921 in the novice (n = 208) and 0.845 in the experienced (n = 216) cohorts. There was a significant bias of 0.73% towards TTE (p = 0.005) with a level of agreement of 11.2%. Categorical grading of LVEF severity had excellent agreement to TTE (weighted kappa = 0.83). The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.98 for identifying an abnormal LVEF (<50%) with a sensitivity of 92.8%, specificity of 92.3%, negative predictive value (NPV) of 0.97 and a positive predictive value (PPV) of 0.83. In identifying severe dysfunction (<30%) the AUC was 0.99 with a sensitivity of 78.1%, specificity of 98.0%, NPV of 0.98 and PPV of 0.76. Here we report that FoCUS AI-assisted LVEF assessments provide highly reproducible LVEF estimations in comparison to formal TTE. This finding was consistent among senior and novice echocardiographers suggesting applicability in a variety of clinical settings.

Efficacy of Milrinone and Dobutamine in Cardiogenic Shock: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Inotropic support is commonly used in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS). High-quality data guiding the use of dobutamine or milrinone among this patient population is limited. We compared the efficacy and safety of these two inotropes among patients with low cardiac output states (LCOS) or CS. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched up to February 1, 2023, using key terms and index headings related to LCOS or CS and inotropes. DATA EXTRACTION: Two independent reviewers included studies that compared dobutamine to milrinone on all-cause in-hospital mortality, length of ICU stay, length of hospital stay, and significant arrhythmias in hospitalized patients. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of eleven studies with 21,084 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Only two randomized controlled trials were identified. The primary outcome, all-cause mortality, favored milrinone in observational studies only (odds ratio [OR] 1.19 (95% CI, 1.02-1.39; p = 0.02). In-hospital length of stay (LOS) was reduced with dobutamine in observational studies only (mean difference -1.85 d; 95% CI -3.62 to -0.09; p = 0.04). There was no difference in the prevalence of significant arrhythmias or in ICU LOS. CONCLUSIONS: Only limited data exists supporting the use of one inotropic agent over another exists. Dobutamine may be associated with a shorter hospital LOS; however, there is also a potential for increased all-cause mortality. Larger randomized studies sufficiently powered to detect a difference in these outcomes are required to confirm these findings.

Rationale and Design of the Rivaroxaban Post-Transradial Access for the Prevention of Radial Artery Occlusion Trial (CAPITAL-RAPTOR).

INTRODUCTION: Transradial access (TRA) has rapidly emerged as the preferred vascular access site for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention. Radial artery occlusion (RAO) remains as an important complication of TRA as it precludes future ipsilateral transradial procedures. While intraprocedural anticoagulation has been studied extensively, the definitive role of postprocedural anticoagulation has not yet been established. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Rivaroxaban Post-Transradial Access for the Prevention of Radial Artery Occlusion trial is a multicentre, prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint design study investigating the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban to reduce the incidence of RAO. Eligible patients will undergo randomisation to receive either rivaroxaban 15 mg once daily for 7 days or to no additional postprocedural anticoagulation. Doppler ultrasound to assess radial artery patency will be performed at 30 days. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol has been approved by the Ottawa Health Science Network Research Ethics Board (approval number 20180319-01H). The study results will be disseminated via conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03630055.

Arrhythmic Events and Mortality in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock on Inotropic Support: Results of the DOREMI Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Inotropic support is widely used in the management of cardiogenic shock (CS). Existing data on the incidence and significance of arrhythmic events in patients with CS on inotropic support is at high risk of bias. METHODS: The Dobutamine Compared to Milrinone (DOREMI) trial randomized patients to receive dobutamine or milrinone in a double-blind fashion. Patients with and without arrhythmic events (defined as arrhythmias requiring intervention or sustained ventricular arrhythmias) were compared to identify factors associated with their occurrence, and to examine their association with in-hospital mortality and secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Ninety-two patients (47.9%) had arrhythmic events, occurring equally with dobutamine and milrinone (P = 0.563). The need for vasopressor support at initiation of the inotrope and a history of atrial fibrillation were positively associated with arrhythmic events, whereas predominant right ventricular dysfunction, previous myocardial infarction, and increasing left ventricular ejection fraction were negatively associated with them. Supraventricular arrhythmic events were not associated with mortality (relative risk [RR], 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68-1.40; P = 0.879) but were positively associated with resuscitated cardiac arrests and hospital length of stay. Ventricular arrhythmic events were positively associated with mortality (RR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.13-2.43; P = 0.026) and resuscitated cardiac arrests. Arrhythmic events were most often treated with amiodarone (97%) and electrical cardioversion (27%), which were not associated with mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Clinically relevant arrhythmic events occur in approximately one-half of patients with CS treated with dobutamine or milrinone and are associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Five factors may help to identify patients most at risk of arrhythmic events.

Impact of intracoronary assessments on revascularization decisions: A contemporary evaluation.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the real-world implementation of intracoronary assessment (ICA) techniques and evaluate their impact on clinical decisions regarding the management of coronary artery disease (CAD) in contemporary practice. BACKGROUND: Coronary angiogram is the gold standard used to diagnose vessel stenosis and guide percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI); however, it is limited by its two-dimensional imaging capabilities. ICA techniques like intravascular ultrasound and optical coherence tomography capture the vessel in three-dimensional images. Comparatively, fractional flow reserve provides information on the physiologic significance of coronary stenosis. Both techniques may improve PCI outcomes if they routinely change physician behavior. METHODS: Patients who underwent ICA between August 2015 and March 2020 were included in the study. The primary outcome was the clinical impact of ICA on physician clinical decision making of a stenotic vessel. The secondary outcome was the clinical changes that occurred following ICA. RESULTS: A total of 1135 patients were included in the study. Physiologic assessment (PA) and image assessment (IA) were performed in 61.4% and 38.6% respectively. Management plans were changed in 38.1% and 23.9% of patients who received PA and IA. Over half of the management change resulted in physicians deciding to not intervene on the stenotic vessel. One-year outcome of these decisions showed no significant increase in major adverse cardiac events (hazard ratio [HR], 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40-1.15; p = 0.15) or unplanned revascularization (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.35-1.74; p = 0.55) suggesting reliance on PA/IA data did not increase risk. CONCLUSION: Selected ICA alters physician management of CAD in one-third of patients being evaluated for revascularization-typically leading to fewer interventions. All cause death is numerally lower in patients that received a change in management. However, the 1-year outcome of these altered decisions does not appear to be significantly different.

Impact of atrial fibrillation on the risk of major adverse cardiac events following coronary revascularisation.

OBJECTIVE: Atrial fibrillation (AF) remains a highly prevalent arrhythmia with significant burden on morbidity and mortality. The impact of AF in the revascularised population remains incompletely described. Given the high prevalence of AF in the revascularised population, we sought to evaluate the incidence and prognosis in patients with pre-existing and new-onset AF following revascularisation. METHODS: We used the University of Ottawa Heart Institute Revascularisation Registry to identify patients who underwent revascularisation between August 2015 and March 2020, who were prospectively followed for an average of one year. We conducted a retrospective cohort study analysing the association between AF and clinical outcomes. The primary outcome of interest was 1-year major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as a composite of death, myocardial infarction, unplanned revascularisation and cerebrovascular accidents. Moreover, secondary outcomes include the individual components of MACE and bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 6704 patients underwent revascularisation and completed 1-year clinical follow-up. Median time to follow-up was 12.8 (IQR 11.2-15.9) months. One-year MACE occurred in 166 (21.8%) and 683 (11.5%) patients in AF and non-AF groups, respectively (adjusted HR, 1.61; 95% CI 1.29 to 2.01; p<0.0001). AF was independently predictive of 1-year mortality, myocardial infarction, unplanned revascularisation, cerebrovascular accident and bleeding. Within 1 year, 299 (4.5%) episodes of new-onset AF was observed. New-onset AF following revascularisation was also associated with 1-year MACE, mortality, myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accident and unplanned revascularisation. CONCLUSIONS: Preprocedural and new-onset AF following revascularisation remains highly predictive 1-year MACE. AF should be considered in addition to traditional risk factors for adverse outcomes following revascularisation.

Transcatheter mitral valve repair for inotrope dependent cardiogenic shock - Design and rationale of the CAPITAL MINOS trial.

BACKGROUND: Functional mitral regurgitation (MR) is an important clinical consideration in patients with heart failure. Transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) has emerged as a useful therapeutic tool for patients with chronic heart failure, however the role of TEER in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) and MR has not yet been studied in a randomized trial. The Transcatheter Mitral Valve Repair for Inotrope Dependent Cardiogenic Shock (CAPITAL MINOS) trial was therefore designed to determine if TEER improves clinical outcomes in the CS population. METHODS AND DESIGN: The CAPITAL MINOS trial is an open-label, multi-center randomized clinical trial comparing TEER to medical therapy in patients with CS and MR. A total of 144 patients with Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) class C or D CS and at least 3+ MR will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to TEER or medical therapy alone. The primary outcome will be a composite of in-hospital all-cause mortality, cardiac transplantation, implantation of durable left ventricular assist device, or discharge on palliative inotropic therapy. Patients will be followed for the duration of their index hospitalization for the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes include 6 month mortality. IMPLICATIONS: The CAPITAL MINOS trial will determine whether TEER improves outcomes in patients with CS and MR and will be an important step in optimizing treatment for this high-risk patient population.

No sex-based difference in cardiogenic shock: A post-hoc analysis of the DOREMI trial.

BACKGROUND: Cardiogenic shock (CS) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality; however, there are limited randomized data evaluating the association between sex and clinical outcomes in patients with CS. Patients with CS enrolled in the DObutamine compaREd with MIlrinone (DOREMI) trial were evaluated in this post-hoc analysis. METHODS: The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, resuscitated cardiac arrest, cardiac transplant or mechanical circulatory support, non-fatal myocardial infarction, transient ischemic attack or stroke, or initiation of renal replacement therapy. Secondary outcomes included the individual components of the primary outcome. We analyzed the primary and secondary outcomes using unadjusted relative risks and performed adjusted analysis for the primary outcome and all-cause mortality using the covariates mean arterial pressure <70 mmHg at inotrope initiation, age, and acute myocardial infarction CS. RESULTS: Among 192 participants in the DOREMI study, 70 patients (36 %) were female. The primary outcome occurred in 38 female patients (54 %) compared to 61 male patients (50 %) [adjusted relative risk (aRR) 1.23; 95 % CI 0.78-1.95, p = 0.97]. When stratified by inotrope, there was no difference in the primary outcome comparing females to males receiving dobutamine (RR 1.14; 95 % CI 0.79-1.65, p = 0.50) nor milrinone (RR 1.03; 95 % CI 0.68-1.57, p = 0.87). There was no difference in all-cause mortality comparing females to males (aRR 1.51; 95 % CI 0.78-2.94, p = 0.88). Additionally, there were no differences in any secondary outcomes between males and females (p > 0.05 for all endpoints). CONCLUSION: In patients presenting with CS treated with milrinone or dobutamine, no differences in clinical outcomes were observed between males and females.

Significant Valvular Dysfunction and Outcomes in Cardiogenic Shock: Insights From the Randomized DOREMI Trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) suffer high rates of in-hospital mortality, with little evidence guiding management. The impact of valvular heart disease in patients with CS remains unclear. We therefore conducted a post hoc analysis of the randomized Dobutamine Compared to Milrinone (DOREMI) trial to determine the impact of valvular disease on outcomes in patients with CS. METHODS: We defined significant valvular disease as moderate to severe or greater valvular stenosis or regurgitation and divided participants into a group of those with significant valvular disease and those without. Our primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality. Secondary endpoints included resuscitated cardiac arrest; cardiac transplantation or mechanical circulatory support; nonfatal myocardial infarction; stroke; initiation of renal replacement therapy; as well as changes in renal function, perfusion, and hemodynamics over time. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-nine (98.4%) participants from the DOREMI trial were included in our analysis, and 74 (39.2%) had significant valvular dysfunction. Thirty-six (48.7%) patients with valvular disease died in hospital, compared with 37 (32.2%) in the comparator group (relative risk, 1.5; 95% confidence interval 1.06-2.15; P = 0.02). Patients with aortic stenosis (2.42, 1.56-3.75; P < 0.01) and patients with mitral regurgitation (1.63, 1.1-2.43; P = 0.02) also had increased incidence of in-hospital mortality. There was no significant difference in any secondary outcomes among groups, apart from variances in mean arterial pressure observed in patients with valvular disease (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Significant valvular dysfunction is associated with increased in-hospital mortality in patients with CS. Randomized clinical trial data are needed to further elucidate the role of transcatheter valvular interventions as a therapeutic target in this population.

Lactate Clearance as a Surrogate for Mortality in Cardiogenic Shock: Insights From the DOREMI Trial.

Background Recent studies have shown improved outcomes in cardiogenic shock through protocols directed toward early identification and initiation of mechanical circulatory support. However, objective therapeutic targets-based on clinical and/or laboratory data-to guide real-time clinical decision making are lacking. Lactate clearance has been suggested as a potential treatment target because of its independent association with mortality. Methods and Results In a post hoc analysis of the DOREMI (Dobutamine Compared to Milrinone in the Treatment of Cardiogenic Shock) trial-a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial comparing milrinone to dobutamine in the treatment of cardiogenic shock-we used prospectively collected lactate data to evaluate lactate clearance as a surrogate marker for in-hospital mortality. In total, 82 (57.7%) patients survived to hospital discharge (survivors). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, complete lactate clearance, percentage lactate clearance, and percentage lactate clearance per hour were independently associated with survival beginning as early as 8 hours after enrollment. Complete lactate clearance was the strongest predictor of survival at all time points, with odds ratios ranging between 2.46 (95% CI, 1.09-5.55; P=0.03) at 8 hours to 5.44 (95% CI, 2.14-13.8; P<0.01) at 24 hours. Conclusions Complete lactate clearance is a strong and independent predictor of in-hospital survival in patients with cardiogenic shock. Together with previously published data, these results further support the validity of lactate clearance as an appropriate surrogate for mortality and as a potential therapeutic target in future cardiogenic shock trials. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03207165.

Modifiable Risk Factors and Residual Risk Following Coronary Revascularization: Insights From a Regionalized Dedicated Follow-Up Clinic.

OBJECTIVE: To ensure compliance with optimal secondary prevention strategies and document the residual risk of patients following revascularization, we established a postrevascularization clinic for risk-factor optimization at 1 year, with outcomes recorded in a web-based registry. Although coronary revascularization can reduce ischemia, medical treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD) remains the cornerstone of ongoing risk reduction. While standardized referral pathways and protocols for revascularization are prevalent and well studied, post-revascularization care is often less formalized. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The University of Ottawa Heart Institute is a tertiary-care center providing coronary revascularization services. From 2015 to 2019, data were prospectively recorded in the CAPITAL revascularization registry, and patient-level procedural, clinical, and outcome data are collected in the year following revascularization. Major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) was defined as death, myocardial infarction, unplanned revascularization, or cerebrovascular accident. Kaplan-Meier curves were generated to evaluate time-to-event data for clinical outcomes by risk-factor management, and comparisons were performed using log-rank tests and reported by hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: A cohort of 4147 patients completed 1-year follow-up after revascularization procedure that included 3462 undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), 589 undergoing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), and 96 undergoing both PCI and CABG. In the year following revascularization (median follow-up 13.3 months-interquartile range [IQR]: 11.9-16.5) 11% of patients experienced MACE, with female patients being disproportionately at risk. Moreover, 47.7% of patients had ≥2 risk factors (diabetes, dyslipidemia, overweight, active smoker) at the time of follow-up, with 45.0% of patients with diabetes failing to achieve target hemoglobin (Hb) A1c, 54.8% of smokers continuing to smoke, and 27.1% of patients failing to achieve guideline-directed lipid targets. CONCLUSION: Patients who have undergone revascularization procedures remain at elevated risk for MACE, and inadequately controlled risk factors are prevalent in follow-up. This highlights the need for aggressive secondary prevention strategies and implementation of programs to optimize postrevascularization care.

Implications of Myocardial Infarction on Management and Outcome in Cardiogenic Shock.

Background The randomized DOREMI (Dobutamine Compared to Milrinone) clinical trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of milrinone and dobutamine in patients with cardiogenic shock. Whether the results remain consistent when stratified by acute myocardial infarction remains unknown. In this substudy, we sought to evaluate differences in clinical management and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (AMICS) versus non-AMICS. Methods and Results Patients in cardiogenic shock (n=192) were randomized 1:1 to dobutamine or milrinone. The primary composite end point in this subgroup analysis was all-cause in-hospital mortality, cardiac arrest, non-fatal myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accident, the need for mechanical circulatory support, or initiation of renal replacement therapy (RRT) at 30-days. Outcomes were evaluated in patients with (n=65) and without (n=127) AMICS. The primary composite end point was significantly higher in AMICS versus non-AMICS (hazard ratio [HR], 2.21; 95% CI, 1.47-3.30; P=0.0001). The primary end point was driven by increased rates of all-cause mortality, mechanical circulatory support, and RRT. No differences in other secondary outcomes including cardiac arrest or cerebrovascular accident were observed. AMICS remained associated with the primary composite outcome, 30-day mortality, and RRT after adjustment for age, sex, procedural contrast use, multivessel disease, and inotrope type. Conclusions AMI was associated with increased rates of adverse clinical outcomes in cardiogenic shock along with increased rates of mortality and initiation of mechanical circulatory support and RRT. Contrast administration during revascularization likely contributes to increased rates of RRT. Heterogeneity of outcomes in AMICS versus non-AMICS highlights the need to study interventions in specific subgroups of cardiogenic shock. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03207165.

Milrinone as Compared with Dobutamine in the Treatment of Cardiogenic Shock.

BACKGROUND: Cardiogenic shock is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Although inotropic support is a mainstay of medical therapy for cardiogenic shock, little evidence exists to guide the selection of inotropic agents in clinical practice. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with cardiogenic shock to receive milrinone or dobutamine in a double-blind fashion. The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital death from any cause, resuscitated cardiac arrest, receipt of a cardiac transplant or mechanical circulatory support, nonfatal myocardial infarction, transient ischemic attack or stroke diagnosed by a neurologist, or initiation of renal replacement therapy. Secondary outcomes included the individual components of the primary composite outcome. RESULTS: A total of 192 participants (96 in each group) were enrolled. The treatment groups did not differ significantly with respect to the primary outcome; a primary outcome event occurred in 47 participants (49%) in the milrinone group and in 52 participants (54%) in the dobutamine group (relative risk, 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69 to 1.19; P = 0.47). There were also no significant differences between the groups with respect to secondary outcomes, including in-hospital death (37% and 43% of the participants, respectively; relative risk, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.21), resuscitated cardiac arrest (7% and 9%; hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.29 to 2.07), receipt of mechanical circulatory support (12% and 15%; hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.36 to 1.71), or initiation of renal replacement therapy (22% and 17%; hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 0.73 to 2.67). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with cardiogenic shock, no significant difference between milrinone and dobutamine was found with respect to the primary composite outcome or important secondary outcomes. (Funded by the Innovation Fund of the Alternative Funding Plan for the Academic Health Sciences Centres of Ontario; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03207165.).

Impact of baseline beta-blocker use on inotrope response and clinical outcomes in cardiogenic shock: a subgroup analysis of the DOREMI trial.

BACKGROUND: Cardiogenic shock (CS) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The impact of beta-blocker (BB) use on patients who develop CS remains unknown. We sought to evaluate the clinical outcomes and hemodynamic response profiles in patients treated with BB in the 24 h prior to the development of CS. METHODS: Patients with CS enrolled in the DObutamine compaREd to MIlrinone trial were analyzed. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, resuscitated cardiac arrest, need for cardiac transplant or mechanical circulatory support, non-fatal myocardial infarction, transient ischemic attack or stroke, or initiation of renal replacement therapy. Secondary outcomes included the individual components of the primary composite and hemodynamic response profiles derived from pulmonary artery catheters. RESULTS: Among 192 participants, 93 patients (48%) had received BB therapy. The primary outcome occurred in 47 patients (51%) in the BB group and in 52 (53%) in the no BB group (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.73-1.27; P = 0.78) throughout the in-hospital period. There were fewer early deaths in the BB group (RR 0.41; 95% CI 0.18-0.95; P = 0.03). There were no differences in other individual components of the primary outcome or in hemodynamic response between the two groups throughout the remainder of the hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: BB therapy in the 24 h preceding the development of CS did not negatively influence clinical outcomes or hemodynamic parameters. On the contrary, BB use was associated with fewer deaths in the early resuscitation period, suggesting a paradoxically protective effect in patients with CS. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03207165.