Outcomes of elderly patients with cardiogenic shock treated with early percutaneous revascularization

Cardiogenic Shock in Older Adults: A Focus on Age-Associated Risks and Approach to Management: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Cardiogenic shock continues to portend poor outcomes, conferring short-term mortality rates of 30% to 50% despite recent scientific advances. Age is a nonmodifiable risk factor for mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock and is often considered in the decision-making process for eligibility for various therapies. Older adults have been largely excluded from analyses of therapeutic options in patients with cardiogenic shock. As a result, despite the association of advanced age with worse outcomes, focused strategies in the assessment and management of cardiogenic shock in this high-risk and growing population are lacking. Individual programs oftentimes develop upper age limits for various interventional strategies for their patients, including heart transplantation and durable left ventricular assist devices. However, age as a lone parameter should not be used to guide individual patient management decisions in cardiogenic shock. In the assessment of risk in older adults with cardiogenic shock, a comprehensive, interdisciplinary approach is central to developing best practices. In this American Heart Association scientific statement, we aim to summarize our contemporary understanding of the epidemiology, risk assessment, and in-hospital approach to management of cardiogenic shock, with a unique focus on older adults.

Impact of Age on Outcomes in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock

Background: Advanced age is associated with poor outcomes in cardiovascular emergencies. We sought to determine the association of age, use of support devices and shock severity on mortality in cardiogenic shock (CS).

Methods: Characteristics and outcomes in CS patients included in the Cardiogenic Shock Work Group (CSWG) registry from 8 US sites between 2016 and 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were subdivided by age into quintiles and Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions (SCAI) shock severity.

Results: We reviewed 1,412 CS patients with a mean age of 59.9 ± 14.8 years, including 273 patients > 73 years of age. Older patients had significantly higher comorbidity burden including diabetes, hypertension and coronary artery disease. Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was used in 332 (23%) patients, Impella in 410 (29%) and intra-aortic balloon pump in 770 (54%) patients. Overall in-hospital survival was 69%, which incrementally decreased with advancing age (p < 0.001). Higher age was associated with higher mortality across all SCAI stages (p = 0.003 for SCAI stage C; p < 0.001 for SCAI stage D; p = 0.005 for SCAI stage E), regardless of etiology (p < 0.001).

Conclusion: Increasing age is associated with higher in-hospital mortality in CS across all stages of shock severity. Hence, in addition to other comorbidities, increasing age should be prioritized during patient selection for device support in CS.

Sex and Gender Disparities in the Management and Outcomes of Acute Myocardial Infarction-Cardiogenic Shock in Older Adults

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate outcomes by sex in older adults with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMI-CS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort of older (≥75 years) AMI-CS admissions during January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2014, was identified using the National Inpatient Sample. Interhospital transfers were excluded. Use of angiography, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), mechanical circulatory support (MCS), and noncardiac interventions was identified. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality stratified by sex, and secondary outcomes included temporal trends of prevalence, in-hospital mortality, use of cardiac and noncardiac interventions, hospitalization costs, and length of stay.

RESULTS

In this 15-year period, there were 134,501 AMI-CS admissions 75 years or older, of whom 51.5% (n=69,220) were women. Women were on average older, were more often Hispanic or nonwhite race, and had lower comorbidity, acute organ failure, and concomitant cardiac arrest. Compared with older men (n=65,281), older women (n=69,220) had lower use of coronary angiography (55.4% [n=35,905] vs 49.2% [n=33,918]), PCI (36.3% [n=23,501] vs 34.4% [n=23,535]), MCS (34.3% [n=22,391] vs 27.2% [n=18,689]), mechanical ventilation, and hemodialysis (all P<.001). Female sex was an independent predictor of higher in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02-1.08; P<.001) and more frequent discharges to a skilled nursing facility. In subgroup analyses of ethnicity, presence of cardiac arrest, and those receiving PCI and MCS, female sex remained an independent predictor of increased mortality.

CONCLUSION

Female sex is an independent predictor of worse in-hospital outcomes in older adults with AMI-CS in the United States.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Older Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock

BACKGROUND

Older adults ≥75 years of age carry an increased risk of mortality after ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to examine the use of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in older adults with STEMI and shock and its influence on in-hospital mortality.

METHODS

We used a large publicly available all-payer inpatient health care database sponsored by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality between 1999 and 2013. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. The influence of PCI on in-hospital mortality was assessed by quintiles of propensity score (PS).

RESULTS

Of the 317,728 encounters with STEMI and shock in the United States, 111,901 (35%) were adults age ≥75 years. Of these, 53% were women and 83% were Caucasians. The median number of chronic conditions was 8 (interquartile range: 6 to 10). The diagnosis of STEMI and cardiogenic shock in older patients decreased significantly over time (proportion of older adults with STEMI and shock: 1999: 42% vs. 2013: 29%). Concomitantly, the rate of PCI utilization in older adults increased (1999: 27% vs. 2013: 56%, p < 0.001), with declining in-hospital mortality rates (1999: 64% vs. 2013: 46%; p < 0.001). Utilizing PS matching methods, PCI was associated with a lower risk of in-hospital mortality across quintiles of propensity score (Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio: 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.45 to 0.51). This reduction in hospital mortality risk was seen across the 4 different U.S. census bureau regions (adjusted odds ratio: Northeast: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.47; Midwest: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.57; South: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.46 to 0.56; West: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.41 to 0.53).

CONCLUSIONS

This large and contemporary analysis shows that utilization of PCI in older adults with STEMI and cardiogenic shock is increasing and paralleled by a substantial reduction in mortality. Although clinical judgment is critical, older adults should not be excluded from early revascularization based on age in the absence of absolute contraindications.

Prognostic Analysis for Cardiogenic Shock in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction Receiving Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is uncommon in patients suffering from acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Long-term outcome and adverse predictors for outcomes in AMI patients with CS receiving percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) are unclear. A total of 482 AMI patients who received PCI were collected, including 53 CS and 429 non-CS. Predictors for AMI patients with CS including recurrent MI, cardiovascular (CV) mortality, all-cause mortality, and repeated-PCI were analyzed. The CS group had a lower central systolic pressure and central diastolic pressure (both P < 0.001). AMI patients with hypertension history were less prone to develop CS (P < 0.001). Calcium channel blockers and statins were less frequently used by the CS group than the non-CS group (both P < 0.05) after discharge. Synergy between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) score, CV mortality, and all-cause mortality were higher in the CS group than the non-CS group (all P < 0.005). For patients with CS, stroke history was a predictor of recurrent MI (P = 0.036). CS, age, SYNTAX score, and diabetes were predictors of CV mortality (all P < 0.05). CS, age, SYNTAX score, and stroke history were predictors for all-cause mortality (all P < 0.05). CS, age, and current smoking were predictors for repeated-PCI (all P < 0.05).

One-year clinical outcomes in invasive treatment strategies for acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock in elderly patients

Objective

To investigate the clinical outcomes of an invasive strategy for elderly (aged ≥ 75 years) patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS).

Methods

Data on 366 of 409 elderly CS patients from a total of 6,132 acute STEMI cases enrolled in the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry between January 2008 and June 2011, were collected and analyzed. In-hospital deaths and the 1-month and 1-year survival rates free from major adverse cardiac events (MACE; defined as all cause death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization) were reported for the patients who had undergone invasive (n = 310) and conservative (n = 56) treatment strategies.

Results

The baseline clinical characteristics were not significantly different between the two groups. There were fewer in-hospital deaths in the invasive treatment strategy group (23.5% vs. 46.4%, P < 0.001). In addition, the 1-year MACE-free survival rate after invasive treatment was significantly lower compared with the conservative treatment (51% vs. 66%, P = 0.001).

Conclusions

In elderly patients with acute STEMI complicated by CS, the outcomes of invasive strategy are similar to those in younger patients at the 1-year follow-up.

Cardiogenic Shock: Background, Shock Trial/Registry, Evolving Data, Changing Survival, Best Medical Therapy

Cardiogenic shock remains associated with unacceptably high mortality, but recent improvements with early revascularization, continued support with pharmacologic agents, and use of an intra-aortic balloon pump have led to improvements in the rate of mortality. Timely intervention with cardiac surgery in patients with mechanical complications, 3-vessel disease, and left main disease is beneficial. Continued research and ever-improving understanding of this once deadly condition have helped further in improving prognosis. Cutting-edge technologies, such as myocyte cell implantation and the use of a cooling system, will help in pushing the boundaries farther.

The evaluation and management of cardiogenic shock

Cardiogenic shock (CS) continues to be the leading cause of death in patients who present to the hospital with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Mortality in patients with AMI complicated by CS remains extremely high, with 1-month mortality rates ranging from 40% to 60%. Although pump failure is the dominant etiologic feature of CS after AMI, the inflammatory system has been implicated in its pathogenesis. The dominant therapy for treatment of CS is early mechanical revascularization with either percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Supportive measures such as intravenous vasopressors or intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation can complement the benefit of definitive revascularization. Newer therapies are directed at mitigating the inflammatory response or supporting cardiovascular function until either patient recovery or until other destination therapy is available. The strategies in this critical pathway outline the general approach in treating CS after AMI at our institution.

Optimal revascularization strategies for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction in the elderly patient

Patients older than 75 years account for >60% of all deaths from acute myocardial infarction. Although there are accepted guidelines for treatment of acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, elderly patients tend to have a variety of conditions that can complicate decisions about the best therapy. Many elderly patients do not receive potentially lifesaving treatments, such as percutaneous coronary intervention or thrombolytic therapy, for fear of an adverse event. Those who do receive appropriate revascularization therapy often receive it later in the course of the infarct, when irreversible damage has occurred. Yet studies show that patients older than 75 years will benefit substantially from these therapies. Early treatment improves outcomes in this population, as in younger patients, despite a higher risk of complications. In this review, the evidence regarding medical and revascularization therapies in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction is critically examined.

Routine percutaneous coronary intervention in elderly patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

Age is a strong predictor of cardiogenic shock (CS) and death in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Few data on the impact of a routine early percutaneous revascularization strategy in elderly patients with CS complicating AMI exist.

METHODS

We performed an analysis of age-related differences in outcome in 280 consecutive patients with AMI complicated by CS who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between January 1995 and September 2004 and who were included in a single-center prospective registry of primary PCI for AMI.

RESULTS

Of the 280 patients with CS, 104 (37%) were > or = 75 years. The mean age of the elderly group was 81 +/- 5 years, and half of the patients were > or = 80 years. Most patients in both groups underwent PCI within 6 hours of their symptom onset. The PCI success rates were 92% in the elderly group and 97% in the younger patient group (P = .062). The 6-month mortality rates were 56% in the elderly group and 26% in the younger patient group (P < .001). At multivariate analysis, the variables independently related to the risk of 1-year mortality in the elderly group were age (hazard ratio 1.07, 95% CI 1.02-1.12, P = .005) and PCI failure (hazard ratio 4.01, 95% CI 1.53-10.51, P = .005).

CONCLUSION

A strategy of routine emergency PCI in elderly patients with CS complicating AMI is highly feasible. Among elderly patients, age remains to be a strong predictor of mortality. However, outcome after successful PCI is better than previously reported.

Combined therapy with percutaneous coronary intervention and percutaneous aortic valvuloplasty under mechanical support for an elderly patient with cardiogenic shock

Percutaneous aortic valvuloplasty is reportedly a useful tool for the management of critical and severe aortic stenosis with cardiogenic shock. However, early percutaneous coronary intervention for cardiogenic shock is beneficial for elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction. We describe a patient with critical aortic stenosis who presented with severe coronary stenosis of the left main trunk and the ostium of the right coronary artery. We performed percutaneous coronary intervention and percutaneous aortic valvuloplasty under intra-aortic balloon pump and percutaneous cardiopulmonary support. After these procedures, the cardiogenic shock was reversed, and the patient could be weaned from both intra-aortic balloon pump support and percutaneous cardiopulmonary support.

Outcome of Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Octogenarians with Acute Myocardial Infarction

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) results in more complications and increased mortality in octogenarians compared to patients in younger age groups. This study investigated the short- and long-term outcomes in octogenarians after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

During the study period from May 1997 to August 2004, 54 patients > or = 80 years old with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) were eligible for primary PCI. Data collected included baseline clinical characteristics and usage of cardiovascular medications. Diagnostic coronary angiography and revascularization procedures were performed using standard practices. During hospitalization, the clinical course including serial changes in cardiac enzymes, adverse events associated with myocardial infarction or treatment, and inhospital or long-term mortality of patients were recorded.

RESULTS

The mean age of the 54 patients (35 men, 19 women) was 82.8 +/- 2.5 years (range, 80-89 years). Among them, 27 (50%) had anterior infarction, six (11%) had anterolateral infarction, and 21 (39%) had inferior infarction, inclusive of three patients with accompanying right ventricular infarction. Among them, 20 (37%) patients were in Killip class I, nine (17%) were in class II, two (4%) in class III, and 23 (43%) in class IV. The mean delay from onset of symptoms to arrival in hospital was 220 +/- 167 minutes, and 189 +/- 169 minutes from hospital arrival to reperfusion. Diagnostic coronary angiography revealed that 48 (89%) patients had multivessel disease. Inhospital death occurred in 23 (43%) patients, with the leading causes of death being profound cardiogenic shock (61%), and free wall rupture (26%).

CONCLUSION

Octogenarian patients who developed STEMI tended to have multivessel disease. These patients had a high inhospital mortality rate that was most likely to be due to cardiogenic shock.

Guidelines for percutaneous coronary interventions. The Task Force for Percutaneous Coronary Interventions of the European Society of Cardiology

In patients with stable CAD, PCI can be considered a valuable initial mode of revascularization in all patients with objective large ischaemia in the presence of almost every lesion subset, with only one exception: chronic total occlusions that cannot be crossed. In early studies, there was a small survival advantage with CABG surgery compared with PCI without stenting. The addition of stents and newer adjunctive medications improved the outcome for PCI. The decision to recommend PCI or CABG surgery will be guided by technical improvements in cardiology or surgery, local expertise, and patients' preference. However, until proved otherwise, PCI should be used only with reservation in diabetics with multi-vessel disease and in patients with unprotected left main stenosis. The use of drug-eluting stents might change this situation. Patients presenting with NSTE-ACS (UA or NSTEMI) have to be stratified first for their risk of acute thrombotic complications. A clear benefit from early angiography (<48 h) and, when needed, PCI or CABG surgery has been reported only in the high-risk groups. Deferral of intervention does not improve outcome. Routine stenting is recommended on the basis of the predictability of the result and its immediate safety. In patients with STEMI, primary PCI should be the treatment of choice in patients presenting in a hospital with PCI facility and an experienced team. Patients with contra-indications to thrombolysis should be immediately transferred for primary PCI, because this might be their only chance for quickly opening the coronary artery. In cardiogenic shock, emergency PCI for complete revascularization may be life-saving and should be considered at an early stage. Compared with thrombolysis, randomized trials that transferred the patients for primary PCI to a 'heart attack centre' observed a better clinical outcome, despite transport times leading to a significantly longer delay between randomization and start of the treatment. The superiority of primary PCI over thrombolysis seems to be especially clinically relevant for the time interval between 3 and 12 h after onset of chest pain or other symptoms on the basis of its superior preservation of myocardium. Furthermore, with increasing time to presentation, major-adverse-cardiac-event rates increase after thrombolysis, but appear to remain relatively stable after primary PCI. Within the first 3 h after onset of chest pain or other symptoms, both reperfusion strategies seem equally effective in reducing infarct size and mortality. Therefore, thrombolysis is still a viable alternative to primary PCI, if it can be delivered within 3 h after onset of chest pain or other symptoms. Primary PCI compared with thrombolysis significantly reduced stroke. Overall, we prefer primary PCI over thrombolysis in the first 3 h of chest pain to prevent stroke, and in patients presenting 3-12 h after the onset of chest pain, to salvage myocardium and also to prevent stroke. At the moment, there is no evidence to recommend facilitated PCI. Rescue PCI is recommended, if thrombolysis failed within 45-60 min after starting the administration. After successful thrombolysis, the use of routine coronary angiography within 24 h and PCI, if applicable, is recommended even in asymptomatic patients without demonstrable ischaemia to improve patients' outcome. If a PCI centre is not available within 24 h, patients who have received successful thrombolysis with evidence of spontaneous or inducible ischaemia before discharge should be referred to coronary angiography and revascularized accordingly--independent of 'maximal' medical therapy.

Management strategies for cardiogenic shock

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cardiogenic shock remains the most serious complication of acute MI, with an incidence of 6 to 8% and a 30-day mortality rate that remains close to 50%. While cardiogenic shock is due primarily to left ventricular failure, other causes such as acute mitral regurgitation and ventricular septal rupture must always be considered as emergency surgery may be life saving. The purpose of this review is to summarize recent advances in the care of these critically ill patients including the consideration of etiology and pathophysiology as well as the influence of age and adjunctive therapies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Early revascularization is now an American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guideline class 1 indication for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) particularly for younger patients in cardiogenic shock. Recent studies suggest there may also be a benefit in elderly patients with cardiogenic shock.

SUMMARY

Prompt triage of all patients in cardiogenic shock for early angiography, intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation, and early revascularization with PCI or bypass surgery is now the preferred management strategy.