Early Serial Assessment of Aggregate Vasoactive Support and Mortality in Cardiogenic Shock: Insights From the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network Registry.

BACKGROUND: Associations of early changes in vasoactive support with cardiogenic shock (CS) mortality remain incompletely defined. METHODS: The Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network is a multicenter registry of cardiac intensive care units. Patients admitted with CS (2018-2023) had vasoactive dosing assessed at 4 and 24 hours from cardiac intensive care unit admission and quantified by the vasoactive-inotropic score (VIS). Prognostic associations of VIS at both time points, as well as change in VIS from 4 to 24 hours, were examined. Interaction testing was performed based on mechanical circulatory support status. RESULTS: Among 3665 patients, 82% had a change in VIS <10, with 7% and 11% having a ≥10-point increase and decrease from 4 to 24 hours, respectively. The 4 and 24-hour VIS were each associated with cardiac intensive care unit mortality (13%-45% and 11%-73% for VIS <10 to ≥40, respectively; Ptrend <0.0001 for each). Stratifying by the 4-hour VIS, changes in VIS from 4 to 24 hours had a graded association with mortality, ranging from a 2- to >4-fold difference in mortality comparing those with a ≥10-point increase to ≥10-point decrease in VIS (Ptrend <0.0001). The change in VIS alone provided good discrimination of cardiac intensive care unit mortality (C-statistic, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.70-0.75]) and improved discrimination of the 24-hour Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (0.72 [95% CI, 0.69-0.74] to 0.76 [95% CI, 0.74-0.78]) and the clinician-assessed Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions shock stage (0.72 [95% CI, 0.70-0.74] to 0.77 [95% CI, 0.75-0.79]). Although present in both groups, the mortality risk associated with VIS was attenuated in patients managed with versus without mechanical circulatory support (odds ratio per 10-point higher 24-hour VIS, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.23-1.49] versus 1.84 [95% CI, 1.69-2.01]; Pinteraction <0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Early changes in the magnitude of vasoactive support in CS are associated with a gradient of risk for mortality. These data suggest that early VIS trajectory may improve CS prognostication, with the potential to be leveraged for clinical decision-making and research applications in CS.

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.

Echocardiographic left ventricular systolic dysfunction early after resuscitation from cardiac arrest does not predict mortality or vasopressor requirements.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Echocardiographic abnormalities are common after resuscitation from cardiac arrest. The association between echocardiographic findings with vasopressor requirements and mortality are not well described. We sought to determine the associations between echocardiographic abnormalities and mortality, vasopressor requirements and organ failure after cardiac arrest. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated 55 adult subjects undergoing transthoracic echocardiography within 24h after resuscitation from cardiac arrest. We evaluated the association between 2D echocardiographic and Doppler measurements and mortality, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores and vasopressor requirements. RESULTS: Inpatient mortality was 60%. Mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was 43.6%; LVEF was <40% in 36% of subjects. None of the measured echocardiographic parameters (including LVEF) was significantly associated with inpatient mortality (all p>0.1). Subjects with LVEF <40% more often had shockable arrest rhythms and patients resuscitated from shockable rhythms had lower mean LVEF (36.2% vs. 52.3%, p=0.001). There was no correlation between markers of right and left ventricular systolic or diastolic function (including LVEF and Doppler parameters) with vasopressor requirements, lactate levels or SOFA scores. CONCLUSION: Echocardiographic parameters (including LVEF) were not associated with inpatient mortality after cardiac arrest. Vasopressor requirements and organ failure severity were not associated with multiple echocardiographic markers of systolic function.

Myocardial Dysfunction and Shock after Cardiac Arrest.

Postarrest myocardial dysfunction includes the development of low cardiac output or ventricular systolic or diastolic dysfunction after cardiac arrest. Impaired left ventricular systolic function is reported in nearly two-thirds of patients resuscitated after cardiac arrest. Hypotension and shock requiring vasopressor support are similarly common after cardiac arrest. Whereas shock requiring vasopressor support is consistently associated with an adverse outcome after cardiac arrest, the association between myocardial dysfunction and outcomes is less clear. Myocardial dysfunction and shock after cardiac arrest develop as the result of preexisting cardiac pathology with multiple superimposed insults from resuscitation. The pathophysiology involves cardiovascular ischemia/reperfusion injury and cardiovascular toxicity from excessive levels of inflammatory cytokine activation and catecholamines, among other contributing factors. Similar mechanisms occur in myocardial dysfunction after cardiopulmonary bypass, in sepsis, and in stress-induced cardiomyopathy. Hemodynamic stabilization after resuscitation from cardiac arrest involves restoration of preload, vasopressors to support arterial pressure, and inotropic support if needed to reverse the effects of myocardial dysfunction and improve systemic perfusion. Further research is needed to define the role of postarrest myocardial dysfunction on cardiac arrest outcomes and identify therapeutic strategies.