Prognostic Implications of Quantifying Vasoactive Medications in Cardiogenic Shock.

None.

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.

Factors associated with Acute Limb Ischemia in Cardiogenic Shock and downstream Clinical Outcomes: Insights from the Cardiogenic Shock Working Group.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data depicting the prevalence and ramifications of acute limb ischemia (ALI) among cardiogenic shock (CS) patients. METHODS: We employed data from the Cardiogenic Shock Working Group (CSWG), a consortium including 33 sites. We constructed a multi-variable logistic regression to examine the association between clinical factors and ALI, we generated another logistic regression model to ascertain the association of ALI with mortality. RESULTS: There were 7,070 patients with CS and 399 (5.6%) developed ALI. Patients with ALI were more likely to be female (40.4% versus 29.4%) and have peripheral arterial disease (13.8% versus 8.3%). Stratified by maximum SCAI shock stage, the rates of ALI were stage B 0.0%, stage C 1.8%, stage D 4.1%, and stage E 10.3%. Factors associated with higher risk for ALI included: peripheral vascular disease OR 2.24 (95% CI: 1.53 - 3.23; p < 0.01) and ≥ 2 mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices OR 1.66 (95% CI: 1.24 - 2.21, p < 0.01). ALI was highest for VA-ECMO patients (11.6%) or VA-ECMO + IABP/Impella CP (16.6%) yet use of distal perfusion catheters was less than 50%. Mortality was 38.0% for CS patients without ALI but 57.4% for CS patients with ALI. ALI was significantly associated with mortality, adjusted OR 1.40 (95% CI 1.01 - 1.95, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of ALI was 6% among CS patients. Factors most associated with ALI include peripheral vascular disease and multiple MCS devices. The downstream ramifications of ALI were dire with a considerably higher risk of mortality.

Angiographic Coronary Slow Flow Is Not a Valid Surrogate for Invasively Diagnosed Coronary Microvascular Dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: Ischemia with no obstructive coronary arteries is frequently caused by coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD). Consensus diagnostic criteria for CMD include baseline angiographic slow flow by corrected TIMI (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction) frame count (cTFC), but correlations between slow flow and CMD measured by invasive coronary function testing (CFT) are uncertain. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate relationships between cTFC and invasive CFT for CMD. METHODS: Adults with ischemia with no obstructive coronary arteries underwent invasive CFT with thermodilution-derived baseline coronary blood flow, coronary flow reserve (CFR), and index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR). CMD was defined as abnormal CFR (<2.5) and/or abnormal IMR (≥25). cTFC was measured from baseline angiography; slow flow was defined as cTFC >25. Correlations between cTFC and baseline coronary flow and between CFR and IMR and associations between slow flow and invasive measures of CMD were evaluated, adjusted for covariates. All patients provided consent. RESULTS: Among 508 adults, 49% had coronary slow flow. Patients with slow flow were more likely to have abnormal IMR (36% vs 26%; P = 0.019) but less likely to have abnormal CFR (28% vs 42%; P = 0.001), with no difference in CMD (46% vs 51%). cTFC was weakly correlated with baseline coronary blood flow (r = -0.35; 95% CI: -0.42 to -0.27), CFR (r = 0.20; 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.28), and IMR (r = 0.16; 95% CI: 0.07-0.24). In multivariable models, slow flow was associated with lower odds of abnormal CFR (adjusted OR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.35 to 0.80). CONCLUSIONS: Coronary slow flow was weakly associated with results of invasive CFT and should not be used as a surrogate for the invasive diagnosis of CMD.

Cardiogenic Shock Intravascular Cooling Trial (CHILL-SHOCK).

BACKGROUND: Cardiogenic shock (CS) is complicated by high mortality rates. Targeted temperature control (TTC) has been proposed as an adjunct therapy in CS. This study aims to examine the safety of TTC in patients presenting with CS. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this open-label, randomized controlled pilot trial, 20 patients with hemodynamic criteria for CS were assigned to standard of care plus TTC vs standard of care alone. The primary outcome was a composite safety outcome, including well-described complications of TTC. Secondary outcomes included mortality at 90 days, invasive hemodynamic and echocardiographic parameters, electrocardiographic measurements, and inotrope dosing. There were no significant differences in the composite analysis of prespecified safety outcomes (3 events in the TTC group vs 0 events in the control group; P = 0.24). Patients randomized to TTC demonstrated a statistically significant increase in cardiac index and cardiac power index compared to the control group at 48-96 hours after randomization (3.6 [3.1, 3.9] L/min/m2 vs 2.6 [2.5, 3.15] L/min/m2; P = 0.029 and 0.61 [0.55, 0.7] W/m2 vs 0.53 [0.435, 0.565] W/m2; P = 0.029, respectively). CONCLUSION: TTC may be a safe adjunct therapy for patients presenting with CS and may yield improvement in specific hemodynamic parameters.

The use of PK Papyrus covered coronary stent for carotid reconstruction: an initial institutional experience.

BACKGROUND: The use of covered stent grafts for the treatment of carotid rupture is increasingly being used given their ability to preserve the parent artery while simultaneously occluding the fistula or rupture point. METHODS: This case series describes the technical feasibility of using, and the performance of, the PK Papyrus covered coronary stent (Biotronik, Inc., Lake Oswego, Oregon, USA) in six patients with carotid rupture, including carotid cavernous fistulas, between July 2021 and October 2023 in a single-center institution in the USA. RESULTS: The median decade of life was 5 (IQR 3) with a 1:1 male-to-female ratio. The majority were black patients (n=5/6, 83.3%). The most common disease pathology was carotid cavernous fistula (n=4/6, 66.7%), followed by traumatic carotid rupture (n=2/6, 33.3%). All the stent embolization procedures were successfully treated with the PK Papyrus covered coronary stent. None of the patients had any recurrence or re-treatment. The number of stents required ranged from 1 to 3. A balloon guide catheter was used in 66.7% of cases (n=4/6). In-hospital mortality was 0.0% (n=0/6). No in-stent thrombosis was observed, but there was one case of cangrelor-associated hemorrhagic stroke conversion. Transfemoral access was used in all cases with one access site complication. Median follow-up time was 1.8 months (IQR 3.5). CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the largest case series in the USA demonstrating the feasibility and safety of using the PK Papyrus covered coronary stent for the treatment of carotid rupture, including carotid cavernous fistulas.

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.

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.

Use of Intravascular Ultrasound and Coronary Angiography to Measure the Prevalence of Myocardial Bridge in Heart Transplant Patients.

Myocardial bridge (MB) detection rates vary across methods and most studies that have assessed MB include symptomatic patients. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) is a sensitive tool for MB detection and donor hearts may serve as a surrogate measure of asymptomatic patients. We used IVUS and coronary angiography to measure MB prevalence in heart transplant patients during routine follow-up invasive coronary assessments. This was a retrospective, single-center study of heart transplant patients who received follow-up coronary assessments at the University of Chicago Heart and Vascular Center between December 2014 and December 2021. A single experienced interventional cardiologist assessed incidental findings of MB in IVUS and coronary angiography. Detection rates were compared with meta-analysis-reported prevalence. Of 129 patients, IVUS-detected MB in 87 patients (67.4%), whereas coronary angiography detected 41 (31.8%). All MB found by coronary angiography were detected by IVUS. Some level of cardiac allograft vasculopathy was found in 92 patients (71.3%). Our IVUS-detected MB prevalence was greater than meta-analysis-reported pooled prevalence across all methods: autopsy, computed tomography angiography, and coronary angiography (67.4% [95% confidence interval [CI] 59.4 to 75.5] vs 42% [95% CI 30 to 55]; 22% [95% CI 18 to 25]; 6% [95% CI 5 to 8], p ≤0.005). The difference between our observed IVUS-detected MB prevalence and meta-analysis autopsy reported MB prevalence was 1.25 (95% CI 1.11 to 1.40). In conclusion, the high prevalence of MB recorded in donor hearts emphasizes the need to further investigate the causes of chest pain in patients who are found to have MB.

Sternal-Sparing Surgical Options in Combined Aortic Valve and Coronary Artery Disease: Proof of Concept.

OBJECTIVE: The standard management of concomitant aortic valve (AV) and coronary artery disease has been coronary artery bypass and AV replacement (AVR). With the advent of minimally invasive options, many isolated lesions have been successfully managed using a sternal-sparing approach. In our institution, patients with isolated AV disease are offered minimally invasive surgical or transcatheter AVR, and those with isolated coronary artery disease are routinely managed with robotic totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass or percutaneous coronary intervention. Various combinations of these techniques can be used when a sternal-sparing posture is desired because of patient risk or preference. The aim of this study was to review the outcomes in patients with combined AV and coronary disease who were managed using sternal-sparing approaches. METHODS: We reviewed the records of 10 patients in our minimally invasive surgical database who presented with concomitant AV and coronary artery disease and underwent combined sternal-sparing management of these 2 lesions using various combinations of minimally invasive approaches. RESULTS: Four patients had totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass and minimally invasive AVR at the same time, 2 patients underwent transcatheter AVR followed by totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass, and 4 patients underwent minimally invasive AVR with percutaneous coronary intervention. There was no 30-day mortality. The duration of postoperative surgical hospital stay was 3.1 ± 0.9 days. CONCLUSIONS: Sternal-sparing approaches in combined AV and coronary artery disease are feasible with patient-specific treatment selection of minimally invasive techniques.

Robotic Totally Endoscopic Coronary Bypass to the Left Anterior Descending Artery: Left Versus Right Internal Thoracic Artery Grafts.

INTRODUCTION: The left internal thoracic artery (LITA) is most commonly used to bypass the left anterior descending artery (LAD) given its well-established mortality benefit. In some cases, the grafting strategy necessitates placing the right internal thoracic artery (RITA) on the LAD. We compared outcomes in our robotic beating-heart totally endoscopic coronary bypass surgery (TECAB) population between patients receiving LITA versus RITA-LAD grafts. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients undergoing robotic TECAB with skeletonized ITA conduits over 9 y. Outcomes were compared between those receiving LITA (Group-1) versus RITA (Group-2) grafts to the LAD (with/without other grafts). End points were early angiographic patency (in patients undergoing hybrid revascularization) and mid-term mortality/major adverse cardiac/cerebrovascular events. A propensity matched subanalysis was performed comparing only patients who received bilateral ITA grafting in each group. RESULTS: Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted mortality risk score was higher in Group-2. Group-1 patients had lower incidence of multivessel disease (75% versus 96%, P ≤ 0.001). Early overall graft patency (97% versus 96%, P = 0.718) and LAD graft patency (98% versus 95%, P = 0.372) were equivalent. At mean 42-mo follow-up (longest 8.5 y), Group-1 had lower all-cause mortality but no difference in cardiac mortality or repeat revascularization. In the propensity matched subanalysis, mid-term outcomes were equivalent. CONCLUSIONS: Grafting the LAD with the LITA or RITA during robotic beating-heart TECAB resulted in similar early outcomes and angiographic patency. RITA-LAD patients were more likely to have multivessel disease and higher Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk and had higher all-cause mortality at mid-term analysis but no difference in major adverse cardiac/cerebrovascular events, including cardiac mortality.

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.

Pulmonary Artery Catheter Use and Risk of In-hospital Death in Heart Failure Cardiogenic Shock.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary artery catheters (PACs) are increasingly used to guide management decisions in cardiogenic shock (CS). The goal of this study was to determine if PAC use was associated with a lower risk of in-hospital mortality in CS owing to acute heart failure (HF-CS). METHODS AND RESULTS: This multicenter, retrospective, observational study included patients with CS hospitalized between 2019 and 2021 at 15 US hospitals participating in the Cardiogenic Shock Working Group registry. The primary end point was in-hospital mortality. Inverse probability of treatment-weighted logistic regression models were used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI), accounting for multiple variables at admission. The association between the timing of PAC placement and in-hospital death was also analyzed. A total of 1055 patients with HF-CS were included, of whom 834 (79%) received a PAC during their hospitalization. In-hospital mortality risk for the cohort was 24.7% (n = 261). PAC use was associated with lower adjusted in-hospital mortality risk (22.2% vs 29.8%, OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.50-0.94). Similar associations were found across SCAI stages of shock, both at admission and at maximum SCAI stage during hospitalization. Early PAC use (≤6 hours of admission) was observed in 220 PAC recipients (26%) and associated with a lower adjusted risk of in-hospital mortality compared with delayed (≥48 hours) or no PAC use (17.3% vs 27.7%, OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.37-0.81). CONCLUSIONS: This observational study supports PAC use, because it was associated with decreased in-hospital mortality in HF-CS, especially if performed within 6 hours of hospital admission. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: An observational study from the Cardiogenic Shock Working Group registry of 1055 patients with HF-CS showed that pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) use was associated with a lower adjusted in-hospital mortality risk (22.2% vs 29.8%, odds ratio 0.68, 95% confidence interval 0.50-0.94) compared with outcomes in patients managed without PAC. Early PAC use (≤6 hours of admission) was associated with a lower adjusted risk of in-hospital mortality compared with delayed (≥48 hours) or no PAC use (17.3% vs 27.7%, odds ratio 0.54, 95% confidence interval 0.37-0.81).

Selection of percutaneous mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock: patient-specific considerations and insights from contemporary clinical data.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cardiogenic shock remains a complex and variable disease process requiring early recognition and prompt, multidisciplinary treatment. Available data link usage of high-dose and/or multiple vasopressors in cardiogenic shock to increased mortality. This review proposes a structured approach to escalation of percutaneous mechanical circulatory support (pMCS) in cardiogenic shock, based on the hemodynamic and metabolic parameters highlighted in the revised SCAI Shock Classification, and supported by the available clinical data. RECENT FINDINGS: Intra-aortic balloon pumps (IABP) may improve hemodynamics in early cardiogenic shock (stage B) but offer little benefit in stage C-E shock where percutaneous ventricular assist devices (pVAD) improve cardiac power/index and may improve survival in certain subsets. In stage D-E shock, escalation from standalone pVADs to devices in combination is often appropriate. Left ventricular venting, with IABP or Impella, in conjunction with VA ECMO, appears to be beneficial. SUMMARY: Graded escalation of pMCS support should be considered in SCAI stage B shock patients onwards, with the choice of support allowable by local expertise, matched to the degree and anticipated trajectory of hemodynamic and metabolic compromise. Additional clinical data are required before timing, and escalation of pMCS initiation may be integrated into a single treatment algorithm.

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).

Treatment Intensity for the Management of Cardiogenic Shock: Comparison Between STEMI and Non-STEMI.

Background: Cardiogenic shock is a leading cause of mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Objectives: The authors sought to compare clinical characteristics, hospital trajectory, and drug and device use between patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock (STEMI-CS) and those without (non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock [NSTEMI-CS]). Methods: We analyzed data from 1,110 adult admissions with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMI-CS) across 17 centers within Cardiogenic Shock Working Group. The primary end point was in-hospital mortality. Results: Our study included 1,110 patients with AMI-CS, of which 731 (65.8%) had STEMI-CS and 379 (34.2%) had NSTEMI-CS. Most patients were male (STEMI-CS: 71.6%, NSTEMI-CS: 66.5%) and White (STEMI-CS: 53.8%, NSTEMI-CS: 64.1%). In-hospital mortality was 41% and was similar among patients with STEMI-CS and NSTEMI-CS (43% vs 39%, P = 0.23). Patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest had higher in-hospital mortality in patients with NSTEMI-CS (63% vs 36%, P = 0.006) as compared to patients with STEMI-CS (52% vs 41%, P = 0.16). Similar results were observed for in-hospital cardiac arrest in patients with STEMI-CS (63% vs 33%, P < 0.001) and NSTEMI-CS (60% vs 32%, P < 0.001). Only 27% of patients with STEMI-CS and 12% of NSTEMI-CS received both a drug and temporary mechanical circulatory support device during the first 24 hours, which increased to 78% and 61%, respectively, throughout the course of the hospitalization (P < 0.001 for both). Conclusions: Despite increasing use of inotropic and vasoactive support and mechanical circulatory support throughout the hospitalization, both patients with STEMI-CS and NSTEMI-CS remain at increased risk for in-hospital mortality. Randomized controls trials are needed to elucidate whether timing and sequence of escalation of support improves outcomes in patients with AMI-CS.

Hybrid Coronary Revascularization: Early Outcomes and Midterm Follow-Up in Patients Undergoing Single or Multivessel Robotic TECAB and PCI.

OBJECTIVE: Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) is the integration of sternal-sparing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD). It is traditionally performed with single-vessel bypass (left internal mammary artery [LIMA] to left anterior descending artery [LAD]) and PCI but can also be accomplished with multiple arterial grafts using bilateral IMA conduits. We sought to review our HCR experience over an 8-year period with robotic totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass (TECAB) and PCI. METHODS: Of 694 patients undergoing beating-heart TECAB from August 2013 to June 2022, 306 patients were designated as intention-to-treat HCR candidates. Patients underwent PCI prior to, the same day as, or following TECAB, performed using single or bilateral IMA grafts. We retrospectively reviewed early and midterm outcomes up to 8 years in this cohort of patients. RESULTS: The mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality was 1.5% ± 2.5%. There were 44 patients (14%) who had ≥70% left main disease and 218 patients (71%) who had triple-vessel disease. A total of 193 patients (63%) underwent multivessel grafting (advanced HCR), with 83% bilateral IMA use. Mean operative time was 263 ± 80 min, and mean length of stay was 2.6 days. The mean number of vessels bypassed per patient was 1.7 ± 0.6. The mean number of vessels stented was 1.2 ± 0.5. Of the patients, 84% underwent TECAB first, 14% PCI first, and 2% same-day TECAB/PCI. Mortality was 0.6% (observed to expected ratio: 0.42). Early graft patency was 97% (328 of 339 grafts); LIMA-LAD patency was 98%. At 8-year follow-up (mean 37 ± 26 months), all-cause and cardiac-related mortality were 13% and 2.6%, respectively. Freedom from major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events was 92%. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with multivessel CAD, integrating robotic single and multivessel TECAB with PCI resulted in excellent early and midterm outcomes. In experienced hands, the robotic endoscopic approach allows the routine use of multiple arterial grafting during HCR.

Robotic advanced hybrid coronary revascularization: Outcomes with two internal thoracic artery grafts and stents.

Objective: Advanced hybrid coronary revascularization is the integration of sternal-sparing multivessel coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. We sought to review our advanced hybrid coronary revascularization experience over an 8.5-year period using robotic totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass with bilateral internal thoracic artery grafts and percutaneous coronary intervention. Methods: From August 2013 to February 2022, 664 patients underwent robotic totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass at our institution. Of the 293 patients who underwent totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass assigned to a hybrid revascularization strategy, 156 patients received bilateral internal thoracic artery grafts and are the subject of this review. Patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents before or after totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass. We reviewed early and midterm outcomes (up to 8 years) in this cohort of patients with intent-to-treat advanced hybrid coronary revascularization. Results: The mean age of patients was 65 ± 10 years. The mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality was 1.26 ± 1.56. Triple-vessel disease occurred in 94% of patients, and 17% of patients had 70% or more left-main disease. The mean operative time was 311 ± 54 minutes, and the mean hospital length of stay was 2.7 ± 1.1 days. All patients had bilateral internal thoracic artery grafts; the total number of grafts was 334. Eight seven percentage of patients had totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass ×2, and 13% of patients had totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass ×3. One patient received totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass ×4. The mean number of grafts per patient was 2.14 ± 0.4, and the mean number of vessels stented was 1.23 ± 0.5. There were no conversions, perioperative stroke, or myocardial infarction. Early mortality occurred in 2 patients. Early graft patency was 98% (209/214 grafts); left internal thoracic artery to left anterior descending patency was 100% (66/66 grafts). At 8-year follow-up in 155 patients (mean 39 ± 26 months), all-cause and cardiac-related mortality were 11.6% and 3.9%, respectively. Freedom from major adverse cardiac/cerebrovascular events including repeat revascularization was 94%. Conclusions: In patients with multivessel coronary artery disease, integrating robotic totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass with bilateral internal thoracic artery and percutaneous coronary intervention resulted in excellent early and midterm outcomes. Further studies are warranted.

Creating patient-specific vein models to characterize wall shear stress in hemodialysis population.

End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) patients require arteriovenous fistulas (AVF) that allow a mature vein to withstand hemodialysis. Unfortunately, venous thrombosis and stenosis in the cephalic vein arch after AVF placement is common and heavily influenced by hemodynamics. To better assess forces and flow behavior in the cephalic arch, we have built patient-specific millifluidic models that allow us to explore the complex interplay between patient-specific vein geometry and fluctuating hemodynamics. These 3D models were created from patient-specific intravascular ultrasound and venogram images obtained three- and twelve-months post AVF creation and fabricated into soft elastomer-based millifluidic devices. Geometric validation of fabricated phantom millifluidic device shows successful replication of original computational 3D model. Millifluidic devices were perfused with a blood-mimicking fluid containing fluorescent tracer beads under steady-state physiologic cephalic vein flow conditions (20 mL/min). Particle image velocimetry was employed to calculate wall shear stress (WSS) across the cephalic arches. Experimental WSS profile evaluation reveals that the physiologic cephalic arch model yields WSS values within physiologic range [76-760 mPa]. Moreover, upon comparing WSS profiles across all models, it is noticeable that WSS values increase as vein diameter decreases, which further supports employed experimental and analysis strategy. The presented millifluidic devices show promise for experimental WSS characterization under pathologic flow conditions to contrast from calculated physiologic hemodynamics and better understand WSS influence on thrombosis and stenosis in hemodialysis patients.

Criteria for Defining Stages of Cardiogenic Shock Severity.

BACKGROUND: Risk-stratifying patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) is a major unmet need. The recently proposed Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) staging system for CS severity lacks uniform criteria defining each stage. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to test parameters that define SCAI stages and explore their utility as predictors of in-hospital mortality in CS. METHODS: The CS Working Group registry includes patients from 17 hospitals enrolled between 2016 and 2021 and was used to define clinical profiles for CS. We selected parameters of hypotension and hypoperfusion and treatment intensity, confirmed their association with mortality, then defined formal criteria for each stage and tested the association between both baseline and maximum Stage and mortality. RESULTS: Of 3,455 patients, CS was caused by heart failure (52%) or myocardial infarction (32%). Mortality was 35% for the total cohort and higher among patients with myocardial infarction, out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, and treatment with increasing numbers of drugs and devices. Systolic blood pressure, lactate level, alanine transaminase level, and systemic pH were significantly associated with mortality and used to define each stage. Using these criteria, baseline and maximum stages were significantly associated with mortality (n = 1,890). Lower baseline stage was associated with a higher incidence of stage escalation and a shorter duration of time to reach maximum stage. CONCLUSIONS: We report a novel approach to define SCAI stages and identify a significant association between baseline and maximum stage and mortality. This approach may improve clinical application of the staging system and provides new insight into the trajectory of hospitalized CS patients. (Cardiogenic Shock Working Group Registry [CSWG]; NCT04682483).