Advances in the Staging and Phenotyping of Cardiogenic Shock: Part 1 of 2

Hemodynamic monitoring and echocardiographic evaluation in cardiogenic shock

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is characterized by the presence of a state of tissue hypoperfusion secondary to ventricular dysfunction. Hemodynamic monitoring allows us to obtain information about cardiovascular pathophysiology that will help us make the diagnosis and guide therapy in CS situations. The most used monitoring system in CS is the pulmonary artery catheter since it provides key hemodynamic variables in CS, such as cardiac output, pulmonary artery pressure, and pulmonary artery occlusion pressure. On the other hand, echocardiography makes it possible to obtain, at the bedside, anatomical and hemodynamic data that complement the information obtained through continuous monitoring devices. CS monitoring can be considered multimodal and integrative by including hemodynamic, metabolic, and echocardiographic parameters that allow describing the characteristics of CS and guiding therapeutic interventions during hemodynamic resuscitation.

ICU management of cardiogenic shock before mechanical support

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Treatment of cardiogenic shock remains largely driven by expert consensus due to limited evidence from randomized controlled trials. In this review, we aim to summarize the approach to the management of patients with cardiogenic shock in the ICU prior to mechanical circulatory support (MCS).

RECENT FINDINGS

Main topics covered in this article include diagnosis, monitoring, initial management and key aspects of pharmacological therapy in the ICU for patients with cardiogenic shock.

SUMMARY

Despite efforts to improve therapy, short-term mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock is still reaching 40-50%. Early recognition and treatment of cardiogenic shock are crucial, including early revascularization of the culprit lesion with possible staged revascularization in acute myocardial infarction (AMI)-CS. Optimal volume management and vasoactive drugs titrated to restore arterial pressure and perfusion are the cornerstone of cardiogenic shock therapy. The choice of vasoactive drugs depends on the underlying cause and phenotype of cardiogenic shock. Their use should be limited to the shortest duration and lowest possible dose. According to recent observational evidence, assessment of the complete hemodynamic profile with a pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) was associated with improved outcomes and should be considered early in patients not responding to initial therapy or with unclear shock. A multidisciplinary shock team should be involved early in order to identify potential candidates for temporary and/or durable MCS.

Cardiogenic shock diagnosis and management in general intensive care: a nationwide survey

BACKGROUND

the epidemiology of cardiogenic shock has evolved over the years: in the last decades an increasing prevalence of cardiogenic shock related to acute decompensated heart failure was observed. Therefore, treatment bundles should be updated according to the underlying pathophysiology. No data exist regarding the diagnostic/therapeutic strategies in general intensive care units.

METHODS

A 27-questions survey was spread through the GiViTi (Italian Group for the Evaluation of Interventions in Intensive Care Medicine). The results were then divided according to level of hospitals (1st-2nd versus 3rd).

RESULTS

Sixty-nine general intensive care units replied to the survey. The shock team is present in 13% of institutions; Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions shock classification is applied only in 18.8%. Among the ICUs, 94.2% routinely use a cardiac output monitoring device (pulmonary artery catheter more frequently in 3rd level centers). The first-line adrenergic drug are vasopressors in 27.5%, inotrope in 21.7% or their combination in 50.7%; 79.7% applies fluid challenge. The first vasopressor of choice is norepinephrine (95.7%) (maximum dosage tolerated higher than 0.5 mcg/kg/min in 29%); the first line inotrope is dobutamine (52.2%), followed by epinephrine in 36.2%. The most frequently used mechanical circulatory supports are intra-aortic balloon pump (71%), Impella (34.8%) and VA-ECMO (33.3%); VA-ECMO is the first line strategy in refractory cardiogenic shock (60.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

According to this survey, there is no standardized approach to cardiogenic shock amongst Italian general intensive care units. The application of shock severity stratification and the treatment bundles may play a key role in improving the outcome.

Cardiogenic shock as a health issue. Physiology, classification, and detection

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a heterogeneous syndrome with high mortality and a growing incidence. It is characterized by an imbalance between the tissue oxygen demands and the capacity of the cardiovascular system to meet these demands, due to acute cardiac dysfunction. Historically, acute coronary syndromes have been the primary cause of CS. However, non-ischemic cases have seen a rise in incidence. The pathophysiology involves ischemic damage of the myocardium and a sympathetic, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system and inflammatory response, perpetuating the situation of tissue hypoperfusion and ultimately leading to multiorgan dysfunction. The characterization of CS patients through a triaxial assessment and the widespread use of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) scale has allowed standardization of the severity stratification of CS; this, coupled with early detection and the "hub and spoke" approach, could contribute to improving the prognosis of these patients.

Shock Severity Classification and Mortality in Adults With Cardiac, Medical, Surgical, and Neurological Critical Illness

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) Shock Classification could perform risk stratification in a mixed cohort of intensive care unit (ICU) patients, similar to its validation in patients with acute cardiac disease.

METHODS

We included 21,461 adult Mayo Clinic ICU patient admissions from December 1, 2014, to February 28, 2018, including cardiac ICU (16.7%), medical ICU (37.4%), neurosciences ICU (27.7%), and surgical ICU (18.2%). The SCAI Shock Classification (a 5-stage classification from no shock [A] to refractory shock [E]) was assigned in each 4-hour period during the first 24 hours of ICU admission.

RESULTS

The median age was 65 years, and 43.2% were female. In-hospital mortality occurred in 1611 (7.5%) patients, with a stepwise increase in in-hospital mortality in each higher maximum SCAI Shock stage overall: A, 4.0%; B, 4.6%; C, 7.0%; D, 13.9%; and E, 40.2%. The SCAI Shock Classification provided incremental mortality risk stratification in each ICU, with the best performance in the cardiac ICU and the worse performance in the neurosciences ICU. The SCAI Shock Classification was associated with higher adjusted in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 1.32 per each stage; 95% CI, 1.24 to 1.41; P<.001); this association was not observed in the neurosciences ICU when considered separately.

CONCLUSION

The SCAI Shock Classification provided incremental mortality risk stratification beyond established prognostic markers across the spectrum of medical and surgical critical illness, proving utility outside its original intent.

The management of heart failure cardiogenic shock: an international RAND appropriateness panel

BACKGROUND

Observational data suggest that the subset of patients with heart failure related CS (HF-CS) now predominate critical care admissions for CS. There are no dedicated HF-CS randomised control trials completed to date which reliably inform clinical practice or clinical guidelines. We sought to identify aspects of HF-CS care where both consensus and uncertainty may exist to guide clinical practice and future clinical trial design, with a specific focus on HF-CS due to acute decompensated chronic HF.

METHODS

A 16-person multi-disciplinary panel comprising of international experts was assembled. A modified RAND/University of California, Los Angeles, appropriateness methodology was used. A survey comprising of 34 statements was completed. Participants anonymously rated the appropriateness of each statement on a scale of 1 to 9 (1-3 as inappropriate, 4-6 as uncertain and as 7-9 appropriate).

RESULTS

Of the 34 statements, 20 were rated as appropriate and 14 were rated as inappropriate. Uncertainty existed across all three domains: the initial assessment and management of HF-CS; escalation to temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support (tMCS); and weaning from tMCS in HF-CS. Significant disagreement between experts (deemed present when the disagreement index exceeded 1) was only identified when deliberating the utility of thoracic ultrasound in the immediate management of HF-CS.

CONCLUSION

This study has highlighted several areas of practice where large-scale prospective registries and clinical trials in the HF-CS population are urgently needed to reliably inform clinical practice and the synthesis of future societal HF-CS guidelines.

Clinical phenotypes of cardiogenic shock survivors: insights into late host responses and long-term outcomes

AIMS

An elevated risk of adverse events persists for years in cardiogenic shock (CS) survivors with high mortality rate and physical/mental disability. This study aims to link clinical CS-survivor phenotypes with distinct late host-response patterns at intensive care unit (ICU) discharge and long-term outcomes using model-based clustering.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In the original prospective, observational, international French and European Outcome Registry in Intensive Care Units (FROG-ICU) study, ICU patients with CS on admission were identified (N = 228). Among them, 173 were discharged alive from the ICU and included in the current study. Latent class analysis was applied to identify distinct CS-survivor phenotypes at ICU discharge using 15 readily available clinical and laboratory variables. The primary endpoint was 1 year of mortality after ICU discharge. Secondary endpoints were readmission and physical/mental disability [short form-36 questionnaire (SF-36) score] within 1 year after ICU discharge. Two distinct phenotypes at ICU discharge were identified (A and B). Patients in Phenotype B (38%) were more anaemic and had higher circulating levels of lactate, sustained kidney injury, and persistent elevation in plasma markers of inflammation, myocardial fibrosis, and endothelial dysfunction compared with Phenotype A. They had also a higher rate of non-ischaemic origin of CS and right ventricular dysfunction on admission. CS survivors in Phenotype B had higher 1 year of mortality compared with Phenotype A (P = 0.045, Kaplan-Meier analysis). When adjusted for traditional risk factors (i.e. age, severity of illness, and duration of ICU stay), Phenotype B was independently associated with 1 year of mortality [adjusted hazard ratio = 2.83 (95% confidence interval 1.21-6.60); P = 0.016]. There was a significantly lower physical quality of life in Phenotype B patients at 3 months (i.e. SF-36 physical component score).

CONCLUSIONS

A phenotype with sustained inflammation, myocardial fibrosis, and endothelial dysfunction at ICU discharge was identified from readily available data and was independently associated with poor long-term outcomes in CS survivors.

Circulating Proteome Analysis Identifies Reduced Inflammation After Initiation of Hemodynamic Support with Either Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation or Impella in Patients with Cardiogenic Shock

In-hospital mortality associated with cardiogenic shock (CS) remains high despite the use of percutaneous assist devices. We sought to determine whether support with VA-ECMO or Impella in patients with CS alters specific components of the plasma proteome. Plasma samples were collected before device implantation and 72 h after initiation of support in 11 CS patients receiving ECMO or Impella. SOMAscan was used to detect 1305 circulating proteins. Sixty-seven proteins were changed after ECMO (18 upregulated and 49 downregulated, p < 0.05), 38 after Impella (10 upregulated and 28 downregulated, p < 0.05), and only eight proteins were commonly affected. Despite minimal protein overlap, both devices were associated with markers of reduced inflammation and increased apoptosis of inflammatory cells. In summary, ECMO and Impella are associated with reduced expression of inflammatory markers and increased markers of inflammatory cell death. These circulating proteins may serve as novel targets of therapy or biomarkers to tailor AMCS use.

Admission Total Leukocyte Count as a Predictor of Mortality in Cardiac Intensive Care Unit Patients

Background

Inflammation is a sequela of cardiovascular critical illness and a risk factor for mortality.

Objectives

This study aimed to evaluate the association between white blood cell count (WBC) and mortality in a broad population of patients admitted to the cardiac intensive care unit (CICU).

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included patients admitted to the Mayo Clinic CICU between 2007 and 2018. We analyzed WBC as a continuous variable and then categorized WBC as low (<4.0 × 103/mL), normal (≥4.0 to <11.0 × 103/mL), high (≥11.0 to <22.0 × 103/mL), or very high (≥22.0 × 103/mL). The association between WBC and in-hospital mortality was evaluated using multivariable logistic regression and random forest models.

Results

We included 11,699 patients with a median age of 69.3 years (37.6% females). Median WBC was 9.6 (IQR: 7.4-12.7). Mortality was higher in the low (10.5%), high (12.0%), and very high (33.3%) WBC groups relative to the normal WBC group (5.3%). A rising WBC was incrementally associated with higher in-hospital mortality after adjustment (AICc adjusted OR: 1.03 [95% CI: 1.02-1.04] per 1 × 103 increase in WBC). After adjustment, only the high (AICc adjusted OR: 1.37 [95% CI: 1.15-1.64]) and very high (AICc adjusted OR: 1.99 [1.47-2.71]) WBC groups remained associated with increased risk of in-hospital mortality.

Conclusions

Leukocytosis is associated with an increased mortality risk in a diverse cohort of CICU patients. This readily available marker of systemic inflammation may be useful for risk stratification within the increasingly complex CICU patient population.

Serial Assessment of Shock Severity in Cardiac Intensive Care Unit Patients

BACKGROUND

One-time assessment of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) shock classification robustly predicts mortality in the cardiac intensive care unit (CICU). We sought to determine whether serial SCAI shock classification could improve risk stratification.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Unique admissions to a single academic level 1 CICU from 2015 to 2018 were included in this retrospective cohort study. Electronic health record data were used to assign the SCAI shock stage during 4-hour blocks of the first 24 hours of CICU admission. Shock was defined as hypoperfusion (SCAI shock stage C, D, or E). In-hospital death was evaluated using logistic regression. Among 2918 unique CICU patients, 1537 (52.7%) met criteria for shock during ≥1 block, and 266 (9.1%) died in the hospital. The SCAI shock stage on admission was: A, 37.6%; B, 31.5%; C, 25.9%; D, 1.8%; and E, 3.3%. Patients who met SCAI criteria for shock on admission (first 4 hours) and those with worsening SCAI shock stage after admission were at higher risk for in-hospital death. Each higher admission (adjusted odds ratio, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.18-1.56]; area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.70), maximum (adjusted odds ratio, 1.59 [95% CI, 1.37-1.85]; area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.73) and mean (adjusted odds ratio, 2.42 [95% CI, 1.99-2.95]; area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.78) SCAI shock stage was incrementally associated with a higher in-hospital mortality rate. Discrimination was highest for the mean SCAI shock stage (P<0.05). Each additional 4-hour block meeting SCAI criteria for shock predicted a higher mortality rate (adjusted odds ratio, 1.15 [95% CI, 1.07-1.24]).

CONCLUSIONS

Dynamic assessment of shock using serial SCAI shock classification assignment can improve mortality risk stratification in CICU patients by quantifying the magnitude and duration of shock.

Extending the 'host response' paradigm from sepsis to cardiogenic shock: evidence, limitations and opportunities

Recent clinical and research efforts in cardiogenic shock (CS) have largely focussed on the restoration of the low cardiac output state that is the conditio sine qua non of the clinical syndrome. This approach has failed to translate into improved outcomes, and mortality has remained static at 30-50%. There is an unmet need to better delineate the pathobiology of CS to understand the observed heterogeneity of presentation and treatment effect and to identify novel therapeutic targets. Despite data in other critical illness syndromes, specifically sepsis, the role of dysregulated inflammation and immunity is hitherto poorly described in CS. High-dimensional molecular profiling, particularly through leukocyte transcriptomics, may afford opportunity to better characterise subgroups of patients with shared mechanisms of immune dysregulation. In this state-of-the-art review, we outline the rationale for considering molecular subtypes of CS. We describe how high-dimensional molecular technologies can be used to identify these subtypes, and whether they share biological features with sepsis and other critical illness states. Finally, we propose how the identification of molecular subtypes of patients may enrich future clinical trial design and identification of novel therapies for CS.

Indications for Cardiac Catheterization and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with Resuscitated Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The role of emergent cardiac catheterization after resuscitated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) has evolved based on recent randomized evidence. This review aims to discuss the latest evidence and current indications for emergent coronary angiography (CAG) and mechanical circulatory support (MCS) use following OHCA.

RECENT FINDINGS

In contrast to previous observational data, recent RCTs evaluating early CAG in resuscitated OHCA patients without ST elevation have uniformly demonstrated a lack of benefit in terms of survival or neurological outcome. There is currently no randomized evidence supporting MCS use specifically in patients with resuscitated OHCA and cardiogenic shock. Urgent CAG should be considered in all patients with ST elevation, recurrent electrical or hemodynamic instability, those who are awake following resuscitated OHCA, and those receiving extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR). Recent evidence suggests that CAG may be safely delayed in hemodynamically stable patients without ST-segment elevation following resuscitated OHCA.

Dipeptidyl peptidase 3 plasma levels predict cardiogenic shock and mortality in acute coronary syndromes

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Dipeptidyl peptidase 3 (DPP3) is a protease involved in the degradation of angiotensin II which disturbs peripheral blood pressure regulation and compromises left ventricular function. This study examined the relationship of circulating DPP3 (cDPP3) with cardiogenic shock (CS) and mortality in patients presenting with acute coronary syndromes (ACS).

METHODS

Plasma cDPP3 levels were assessed at baseline and 12-24 h after presentation in patients with ACS prospectively enrolled into the multi-centre SPUM-ACS study (n = 4787).

RESULTS

Circulating DPP3 levels were associated with in-hospital CS when accounting for established risk factors including the ORBI risk score [per log-2 increase, hazard ratio (HR) 1.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05-1.82, P = .021]. High cDPP3 was an independent predictor of mortality at 30 days (HR 1.87, 95% CI 1.36-2.58, P < .001) and at one year (HR 1.61, 95% CI 1.28-2.02, P < .001) after adjustment for established risk factors and the GRACE 2.0 score. Compared to values within the normal range, persistently elevated cDPP3 levels at 12-24 h were associated with 13.4-fold increased 30-day mortality risk (HR 13.42, 95% CI 4.86-37.09, P < .001) and 5.8-fold increased 1-year mortality risk (HR 5.79, 95% CI 2.70-12.42, P < .001). Results were consistent across various patient subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identifies cDPP3 as a novel marker of CS and increased mortality in patients with ACS. Circulating DPP3 offers prognostic information beyond established risk factors and improves early risk assessment.

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.

Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices in Acute Myocardial Infarction-Cardiogenic Shock: Current Studies and Future Directions

Cardiogenic shock (CS) caused by acute myocardial infarction (AMI) accounts for most deaths in the population with AMI and continues to be associated with high short-term mortality. Several temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices have been developed to treat CS and studied in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of patients with AMI-CS. Unfortunately, none of these RCTs has demonstrated an improvement in survival with temporary MCS in AMI-CS. Potential reasons for these negative results in RCTs are numerous and reflect the challenges of enrolling critically ill patients with CS. Researchers have used observational study designs to provide insights about outcomes associated with the use of temporary MCS in AMI-CS. These observational studies have yielded conflicting results, in some cases contrary to the results of RCTs. Several limitations pertinent to both RCTs and observational analyses, mostly relating to selection bias and failure to consider unmeasured confounding variables and population heterogeneity, preclude drawing strong inferences regarding the effects of temporary MCS on survival in populations with AMI-CS. Understanding these limitations is essential to correctly interpreting the literature regarding temporary MCS to treat AMI-CS and is necessary to inform the design of future studies that will potentially provide stronger evidence. Optimally matching temporary MCS devices to the needs of individual patients with AMI-CS will presumably be more successful than indiscriminate application in unselected patients. In this review, we discuss the existing literature on temporary MCS to treat AMI-CS and describe the specific challenges that must be overcome to develop an improved evidence base for guiding clinical practice.

Keep the Right in Mind-A Focused Approach to Right Ventricle-Predominant Cardiogenic Shock

Cardiogenic shock (CS) remains a highly lethal condition despite many efforts and new interventions. Patients presenting with a rapid onset of hemodynamic instability and subsequent collapse require prompt and appropriate multimodality treatment. Multiple etiologies can lead to heart failure and subsequent shock. As the case prevalence of heart failure increases worldwide, it is of great importance to explore all manners and protocols of presentation and treatment present. With research primarily focusing on CS due to cardiac left-sided pathology, few assessments of right-sided pathology and the subsequent clinical state and treatment have been conducted. This review aims to present an in-depth assessment of the currently available literature, assessing the pathophysiology, presentation and management of CS patients due to right heart failure.