Does sex affect the risk of 30-day all-cause mortality in cardiogenic shock?

Sex differences in treatments and outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock: a systematic review and epidemiological meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Women are at higher risk of mortality from many acute cardiovascular conditions, but studies have demonstrated differing findings regarding the mortality of cardiogenic shock in women and men. To examine differences in 30-day mortality and mechanical circulatory support use by sex in patients with cardiogenic shock.

MAIN BODY

Cochrane Central, PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched in April 2024. Studies were included if they were randomised controlled trials or observational studies, included adult patients with cardiogenic shock, and reported at least one of the following outcomes by sex: raw mortality, adjusted mortality (odds ratio) or use of mechanical circulatory support. Out of 4448 studies identified, 81 met inclusion criteria, pooling a total of 656,754 women and 1,018,036 men. In the unadjusted analysis for female sex and combined in-hospital and 30-day mortality, women had higher odds of mortality (Odds Ratio (OR) 1.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.26-1.44, p < 0.001). Pooled unadjusted mortality was 35.9% in men and 40.8% in women (p < 0.001). When only studies reporting adjusted ORs were included, combined in-hospital/30-day mortality remained higher in women (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.06-1.15, p < 0.001). These effects remained consistent across subgroups of acute myocardial infarction- and heart failure- related cardiogenic shock. Overall, women were less likely to receive mechanical support than men (OR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.57-0.79, p < 0.001); specifically, they were less likely to be treated with intra-aortic balloon pump (OR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.71-0.89, p < 0.001) or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (OR = 0.84, 95% 0.71-0.99, p = 0.045). No significant difference was seen with use of percutaneous ventricular assist devices (OR = 0.82, 95% CI 0.51-1.33, p = 0.42).

CONCLUSION

Even when adjusted for confounders, mortality for cardiogenic shock in women is approximately 10% higher than men. This effect is seen in both acute myocardial infarction and heart failure cardiogenic shock. Women with cardiogenic shock are less likely to be treated with mechanical circulatory support than men. Clinicians should make immediate efforts to ensure the prompt diagnosis and aggressive treatment of cardiogenic shock in women.

Sex differences in the presentation and outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: a critical review of contemporary data and a look towards future directions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a devasting complicating of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), associated with significant mortality. Prior studies have reported sex differences in the presentation, management and outcomes of patients with AMI and CS. These differences are likely due to a variety of factors influencing therapeutic decision-making and impacting survival. This review highlights the more contemporary studies exploring differences in women and men with AMI-CS, providing a critical perspective towards understanding the factors that might lead to these differences and outlining potential opportunities to reduce disparities in treatment and improve survival for women with AMI-CS.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent reports demonstrate that women with AMI-CS are older than men and have more cardiovascular comorbidities. When examining an unselected population of patients with AMI-CS, women receive less aggressive treatment compared to men and have poorer outcomes. However, when examining a selected population of patients with AMI-CS treated with mechanical circulatory support (MCS) and/or admitted to centers that implement CS protocols to manage AMI-CS, these sex-based differences in outcomes are largely mitigated.

SUMMARY

Standardizing protocols for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with AMI-CS, with an emphasis on early revascularization and appropriate invasive therapies, can improve outcomes in women and narrow the gender gap.

Prognostic effect of sex according to shock severity in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock

BACKGROUND

Sex disparities in cardiogenic shock (CS) treatment are controversial, and the prognostic implications of sex remain unclear in CS caused by acute myocardial infarction (AMI).

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic effect of sex according to the severity of CS in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for AMI complicated by CS.

METHODS

We assessed 695 patients from 12 tertiary centers in South Korea who underwent PCI for AMI complicated by CS, and analyzed outcomes by sex (female [n = 184] vs. male [n = 511]). We compared a 12-month patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE, defined as a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, re-hospitalization due to heart failure, and repeat revascularization) between the sexes, respective of SCAI shock stage C&D or E. Propensity score-matched analysis was performed to reduce bias.

RESULTS

We found that the female group was older and had higher vasoactive-inotropic and IABP-SHOCK II scores than the male group, with findings consistent across SCAI shock stages. During the 12-month follow-up period, multivariate analysis revealed no significant differences in POCE (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.67-1.53, p = 0.963 for SCAI stage C&D, HR 1.24, 95% CI 0.84-1.84, p = 0.286 for SCAI stage E) between females and males. After propensity score matching, the incidence of POCE (HR 1.47, 95% CI 0.79-2.72, p = 0.220 for SCAI stage C&D, HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.49-1.57, p = 0.665 for SCAI stage E) was similar between sexes.

CONCLUSIONS

Sex does not appear to influence the risk of 12-month POCE in patients treated with PCI for CS caused by AMI, irrespective of shock severity.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02985008. RESCUE (REtrospective and prospective observational Study to investigate Clinical oUtcomes and Efficacy of left ventricular assist device for Korean patients with cardiogenic shock), NCT02985008, Registered December 5, 2016 - retrospectively and prospectively.

IRB INFORMATION

This study was approved by the institutional review board of Samsung Medical Center (Reference number: 2016-03-130).