Cardiogenic Shock Complicating ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: An 18-Year Analysis of Temporal Trends, Epidemiology, Management, and Outcomes

Frequency of Comfort Care and Palliative Care Consultation after ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction

INTRODUCTION

ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remains a leading cause of death despite advances in revascularization and post-STEMI care. Especially for patients with a poor prognosis, there is increasing emphasis on comfort-focused care.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study of patients with STEMI at a large tertiary care academic medical center, abstracting patient-level data, causes of death, and use of palliative care consultation from the medical records. We sought to investigate the frequency of comfort-focused approaches and palliative care consultation after STEMI.

RESULTS

A total of 536 patients presented with or were transferred with STEMI from January 2010 to July 2018, of whom 61/536 (11.4%) died during index hospitalization. Among those who underwent percutaneous intervention (PCI), the in-hospital mortality rate was 6.8%. Median (IQR) and time to death was two (0-6) days. Among those who died, 25/61 (41%) were treated with mechanical circulatory support (MCS). A total of 25/61 (41%) patients died following transition to a comfort-focused approach. Rate of MCS utilization during hospitalization was higher in the group that was ultimately transitioned to comfort-focused measures than the group who received full treatment measures. Palliative care was consulted in the case of 6/61 (9.8%) patients. Median time to consultation was 5 (1-7) days and time to death was 6.5 (2-28) days.

DISCUSSION

Transition to comfort-focused care before death after STEMI is common, particularly in those with cardiogenic shock and/or treated with MCS, highlighting the critical status of such patients. Although increasingly employed in recent years, palliative care consults remain rare and are often employed late in the hospitalization.

The Price We Pay for Progression in Shock Care: Economic Burden, Accessibility, and Adoption of Shock-Teams and Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is associated with high in-hospital and long-term mortality and morbidity that results in significant socio-economic impact. Due to the high costs associated with CS care, it is important to define the short- and long-term burden of this disease state on resources and review strategies to mitigate these.

RECENT FINDINGS

In recent times, the focus on CS continues to be on improving short-term outcomes, but there has been increasing emphasis on the long-term morbidity. In this review we discuss the long-term outcomes of CS and the role of hospital-level and system-level disparities in perpetuating this. We discuss mitigation strategies including developing evidence-based protocols and systems of care, improvement in risk stratification and evaluation of futility of care, all of which address the economic burden of CS. CS continues to remain the pre-eminent challenge in acute cardiovascular care, and a combination of multi-pronged strategies are needed to improve outcomes in this population.

Impact of Inpatient Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Volume on 30-Day Readmissions After Acute Myocardial Infarction-Cardiogenic Shock

BACKGROUND

There are limited data on volume-outcome relationships in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) with cardiogenic shock (CS).

OBJECTIVES

In this study, the authors sought to evaluate the association between hospital percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) volume and readmission after AMI-CS.

METHODS

Adult AMI-CS patients were identified from the Nationwide Readmissions Database for 2016-2019 and were categorized into hospital quartiles (Q1 lowest volume to Q4 highest) based on annual inpatient PCI volume. Outcomes of interest included 30-day all-cause, cardiac, noncardiac, and heart-failure (HF) readmissions.

RESULTS

There were 49,558 AMI-CS admissions at 3,954 PCI-performing hospitals. Median annual PCI volume was 174 (Q1-Q3: 70-316). Patients treated at Q1 hospitals were on average older, female, and with higher comorbidity burden. Patients at Q4 hospitals had higher rates of noncardiac organ dysfunction, complications, and use of cardiac support therapies. Overall, 30-day readmission rate was 18.5% (n = 9,179), of which cardiac, noncardiac, and HF readmissions constituted 56.2%, 43.8%, and 25.8%, respectively. From Q1 to Q4, there were no differences in 30-day all-cause (17.6%, 18.4%, 18.2%, 18.7%; P = 0.55), cardiac (10.9%, 11.0%, 10.6%, 10.2%; P = 0.29), and HF (5.0%, 4.8%, 4.8%, 4.8%; P = 0.99) readmissions. Noncardiac readmissions were noted more commonly in higher quartiles (6.7%, 7.4%, 7.7%, 8.5%; P = 0.001) but was not significant after multivariable adjustment. No relationship was noted between hospital PCI volume as a continuous variable and readmissions.

CONCLUSIONS

In AMI-CS, there was no association between hospital annual PCI volume and 30-day readmissions despite higher acuity in the higher volume PCI centers suggestive of better care pathways for CS at higher volume centers.

Effectiveness and safety of non-invasive ventilation in the management of cardiogenic shock

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Cardiogenic shock (CS) has long been considered a contraindication for the use of non-invasive ventilation (NIV). The main objective of this study was to analyze the effectiveness, measured as NIV success, in patients with respiratory failure due to CS. As secondary objective, we studied risk factors for NIV failure and compared the outcome of patients treated with NIV versus invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV).

METHODS

Retrospective study on a prospective database, over a period of 25 years, of all consecutively patients admitted to an intensive care unit, with a diagnosis of CS and treated with NIV. A comparison was made between patients on NIV and patients on IMV using propensity score matching analysis.

RESULTS

Three hundred patients were included, mean age 73.8 years, mean SAPS II 49. The main cause of CS was acute myocardial infarction (AMI): 164 (54.7%). NIV failure occurred in 153 (51%) cases. Independent factors for NIV failure included D/E stages of CS, AMI, NIV related complications, and being transferred from the ward. In the propensity analysis, hospital mortality (OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.09-2.63) and 1 year mortality (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.04-2.51) was higher in IMV. Mortality was lower with NIV (vs. EIT-IMV) in C stage (10.1% vs. 32.9%; p<0.001) but did not differ in D stage or E stage.

CONCLUSIONS

NIV seems to be relatively effective and safe in the treatment of early-stage CS.

Need for a Cardiogenic Shock Team Collaborative-Promoting a Team-Based Model of Care to Improve Outcomes and Identify Best Practices

Cardiogenic shock continues to carry a high mortality rate despite contemporary care, with no breakthrough therapies shown to improve survival over the past few decades. It is a time-sensitive condition that commonly results in cardiovascular complications and multisystem organ failure, necessitating multidisciplinary expertise. Managing patients with cardiogenic shock remains challenging even in well-resourced settings, and an important subgroup of patients may require cardiac replacement therapy. As a result, the idea of leveraging the collective cognitive and procedural proficiencies of multiple providers in a collaborative, team-based approach to care (the "shock team") has been advocated by professional societies and implemented at select high-volume clinical centers. A slowly maturing evidence base has suggested that cardiogenic shock teams may improve patient outcomes. Although several registries exist that are beginning to inform care, particularly around therapeutic strategies of pharmacologic and mechanical circulatory support, none of these are currently focused on the shock team approach, multispecialty partnership, education, or process improvement. We propose the creation of a Cardiogenic Shock Team Collaborative-akin to the successful Pulmonary Embolism Response Team Consortium-with a goal to promote sharing of care protocols, education of stakeholders, and discovery of how process and performance may influence patient outcomes, quality, resource consumption, and costs of care.

Left Ventricular Unloading With Impella Versus IABP in Patients With VA-ECMO: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) use for circulatory support in cardiogenic shock results in increased left ventricular (LV) afterload. The use of concomitant Impella or intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) have been proposed as adjunct devices for LV unloading. The authors sought to compare head-to-head efficacy and safety outcomes between the 2 LV unloading strategies. We conducted a search of Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases to identify studies comparing the use of Impella to IABP in patients on VA-ECMO. The primary outcome of interest was in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes included transition to durable LV assist devices/cardiac transplantation, stroke, limb ischemia, need for continuous renal replacement therapy, major bleeding, and hemolysis. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence interval and heterogeneity statistic I2 were calculated using a random-effects model. A total of 7 observational studies with 698 patients were included. Patients on VA-ECMO unloaded with Impella vs IABP had similar risk of short-term all-cause mortality, defined as either 30-day or in-hospital mortality- 60.8% vs 64.9% (RR 0.93 [0.71 to 1.21], I2 = 71%). No significant difference was observed in transition to durable LV assist devices/cardiac transplantation, continuous renal replacement therapy initiation, stroke, or limb ischemia between the 2 strategies. However, the use of VA-ECMO with Impella was associated with increased risk of major bleeding (57.2% vs 39.7%) (RR 1.66 [1.12 to 2.44], I2 = 82%) and hemolysis (31% vs 7%) (RR 4.61 [1.24 to 17.17], I2 = 66%) compared with VA-ECMO, along with IABP. In conclusion, in patients requiring VA-ECMO for circulatory support, the concomitant use of Impella or IABP had comparable short-term mortality. However, Impella use was associated with increased risk of major bleeding and hemolysis.

Timing and Degree of Acute Kidney Injury in Patients Requiring Non-Surgical Intensive Care

BACKGROUND

The degree and timing of acute kidney injury (AKI) on admission and during hospitalization in patients requiring non-surgical intensive care remain unclear.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this study, 3,758 patients requiring intensive care were analyzed retrospectively. AKI was defined based on the ratio of serum creatinine concentrations recorded at each time point (i.e., on admission and during the first 5 days in the intensive care unit and during hospitalization) to those measured at baseline. Patients were grouped by combining AKI severity (RIFLE class) and timing (i.e., from admission to 5 days [A-5D]; from 5 days to hospital discharge [5D-HD]) as follows: No-AKI; New-AKI (no AKI to Class R [risk; ≥1.5-fold increase in serum creatinine], I [injury; ≥2.0-fold increase in serum creatinine], and F [failure; ≥3.0-fold increase in serum creatinine or receiving dialysis during hospitalization]); Stable-AKI (Class R to R; Class I to I); and Worsening-AKI (Class R to I or F; Class I to F). Multivariate logistic regression analysis indicated that 730-day mortality was independently associated with Class R, I, and F on admission; Class I and F during the 5D-H period; and New-AKI and Worsening-AKI during A-5D and 5D-HD.

CONCLUSIONS

AKI on admission, even Class R, was associated with a poor prognosis. An increase in RIFLE class during hospitalization was identified as an important factor for poor prognosis in patients requiring intensive care.

Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices in the Elderly

As the field of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) continues to advance and resuscitation protocols are being refined, elderly patients previously not considered for MCS are now being supported. MCS devices can broadly be classified based on the duration of support into temporary or durable devices. Although mortality is higher in the elderly, carefully selected patients, MCS support can be valuable and lead to excellent recovery. Age itself should not preclude patients from being candidates for MCS because we must not restrict the progress of science in medicine for any age.

Escalation strategies, management, and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction-cardiogenic shock patients receiving percutaneous left ventricular support

BACKGROUND

There are limited national-level data on the contemporary practices of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) use in acute myocardial infarction-cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS).

METHODS

We utilized the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project-National/Nationwide Inpatient Sample data (2005-2017) to identify adult admissions (>18 years) with AMI-CS. MCS devices were classified as intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), percutaneous left ventricular assist devices (pLVAD), or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). We evaluated trends in the initial device used (IABP alone, pLVAD alone or ≥2 MCS devices), device escalation, bridging to durable LVAD/heart transplantation, and predictors of in-hospital mortality and device escalation.

RESULTS

Among 327,283 AMI-CS admissions, 131,435 (40.2%) had an MCS device placed with available information on timing of placement. IABP, pLVAD, and ≥2 MCS devices were used as initial device in 120,928 (92.0%), 8202 (6.2%), and 2305 (1.7%) admissions, respectively. Most admissions were maintained on the initial MCS device with 1%-1.5% being escalated (IABP to pLVAD/ECMO, pLVAD to ECMO). Urban, medium, and large-sized hospitals and acute multiorgan failure were significant independent predictors of MCS escalation. In admissions receiving MCS, escalation of MCS device was associated with higher in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio: 1.56, 95% confidence interval:  1.38-1.75; p < 0.001). Admissions receiving durable LVAD/heart transplantation increased over time in those initiated on pLVAD and ≥2 MCS devices, resulting in lower in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In this 13-year study, escalation of MCS in AMI-CS was associated with higher in-hospital mortality suggestive of higher acuity of illness. The increase in number of durable LVAD/heart transplantations alludes to the role of MCS as successful bridge strategies.

Effect of Cardiovascular Risk Factors on 30-Day All-Cause Mortality in Cardiogenic Shock

Although previous studies investigated the influence of cardiovascular risk (CVR) factors in patients with acute coronary syndrome, data concerning the effect of CVR factors on the prognosis of patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) is scarce. Consecutive patients with CS were prospectively included from 2019 to 2021. The prognosis of patients with "low CVR" (i.e., 0-1 CVR factors) was compared to patients with "high CVR" (i.e., 2-4 CVR factors) according to presence or absence of arterial hypertension, diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidaemia or smoking. The primary endpoint was 30-day all-cause mortality. Statistical analyses included Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional regression analyses. 273 consecutive patients with CS were included. 28% presented with low CVR and 72% with high CVR. Within the entire study cohort, the risk of 30-day all-cause mortality did not differ between patients with high and low CVR (55% vs. 57%; log rank p = 0.727; HR = 0.942; 95% CI 0.663-1.338; p = 0.738). Even after multivariable adjustment, high CVR was not associated with an elevated risk of 30-day all-cause mortality (HR = 1.039; 95% CI 0.648-1.667; p = 0.873). The presence of arterial hypertension (55% vs. 58%; log rank p = 0.564; HR = 0.906; 95% CI 0.638-1.287; p = 0.582), diabetes mellitus (60% vs. 52%; log rank p = 0.215; HR = 1.213; 95% CI 0.881-1.671; p = 0.237) and a history of smoking (56% vs. 56%; log rank p = 0.725; HR = 0.945; 95% CI 0.679-1.315; p = 0.737) did not significantly influence short-term prognosis.. Only the absence of hyperlipidaemia significantly decreased the risk of all-cause mortality (65% vs. 51%; log rank p = 0.038; HR = 0.718; 95% CI 0.516-0.998; p = 0.049), which was no longer observed after multivariable adjustment (HR = 0.801; 95% CI 0.536-1.195; p = 0.277). In conclusion, neither the overall CVR nor individual CVR factors were associated with the risk of 30-day all-cause mortality in patients with CS.

Organ dysfunction, injury, and failure in cardiogenic shock

BACKGROUND

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is caused by primary cardiac dysfunction and induced by various and heterogeneous diseases (e.g., acute impairment of cardiac performance, or acute or chronic impairment of cardiac performance).

MAIN BODY

Although a low cardiac index is a common finding in patients with CS, the ventricular preload, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, central venous pressure, and systemic vascular resistance might vary between patients. Organ dysfunction has traditionally been attributed to the hypoperfusion of the organ due to either progressive impairment of the cardiac output or intravascular volume depletion secondary to CS. However, research attention has recently shifted from this cardiac output ("forward failure") to venous congestion ("backward failure") as the most important hemodynamic determinant. Both hypoperfusion and/or venous congestion by CS could lead to injury, impairment, and failure of target organs (i.e., heart, lungs, kidney, liver, intestines, brain); these effects are associated with an increased mortality rate. Treatment strategies for the prevention, reduction, and reversal of organ injury are warranted to improve morbidity in these patients. The present review summarizes recent data regarding organ dysfunction, injury, and failure.

CONCLUSIONS

Early identification and treatment of organ dysfunction, along with hemodynamic stabilization, are key components of the management of patients with CS.

Outcomes among ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) patients with cardiogenic shock and COVID-19: A nationwide analysis

Background

There is paucity of data regarding the characteristics and outcomes of patients admitted for ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS) with concomitant Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection.

Methods

Using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) Database for the year 2020, we conducted a retrospective cohort study to investigate the outcomes of patients who sustained STEMI-associated cardiogenic shock (STEMI-CS) with concomitant COVID-19 infection looking at its impact on in-hospital mortality and secondarily at the in-hospital procedure and intervention utilization rates as well as hospital length of stay.

Results

We identified a total of 22,775 patients with STEMI-CS, of which 1.71 % (n = 390/22,775) had COVID-19 infection. Using a stepwise survey multivariable logistic regression model that adjusted for patient and hospital level confounders, concomitant COVID-19 infection among STEMI-CS patients was found to be an independent predictor of overall in-hospital mortality compared to those without COVID-19 (adjusted OR 2.10; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 1.30-3.40). STEMI-CS patients with concomitant COVID-19 infection had similar in-hospital utilization rates for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), percutaneous and durable left ventricular device, intra-arterial aortic balloon pump (IABP), renal replacement therapy (RRT), mechanical ventilation, as well as similar hospital lengths of stay.

Conclusion

Concomitant COVID-19 infection was associated with higher in-hospital mortality rates among patients with cardiogenic shock related to STEMI but had similar in-hospital procedure and intervention utilization rates as well as hospital length of stay.

Pathophysiology and Management of Heart Failure in the Elderly

The population of elderly adults is increasing globally. It has been projected that the population of adults aged 65 years will increase by approximately 80% by 2050 in the United States. Similarly, the elderly population is rising in other countries; a notable example being Japan where approximately 30% of the population are aged above 65 years. The pathophysiology and management of heart failure (HF) in this age group tend to have more intricacies than in younger age groups owing to the presence of multiple comorbidities. The normal aging biology includes progressive disruption at cellular and genetic levels and changes in molecular signaling and mechanical activities that contribute to myocardial abnormalities. Older adults with HF secondary to ischemic or valvular heart disease may benefit from surgical therapy, valve replacement or repair for valvular heart disease and coronary artery bypass grafting for coronary artery disease. While referring these patients for surgery, patient and family expectations and life expectations should be taken into account. In this review, we will cover the pathophysiology and the management of HF in the elderly, specifically discussing important geriatric domains such as frailty, cognitive impairment, delirium, polypharmacy, and multimorbidity.

Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network (CCCTN): a cohort profile

AIMS

The aims of the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network (CCCTN) are to develop a registry to investigate the epidemiology of cardiac critical illness and to establish a multicentre research network to conduct randomised clinical trials (RCTs) in patients with cardiac critical illness.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The CCCTN was founded in 2017 with 16 centres and has grown to a research network of over 40 academic and clinical centres in the United States and Canada. Each centre enters data for consecutive cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) admissions for at least 2 months of each calendar year. More than 20 000 unique CICU admissions are now included in the CCCTN Registry. To date, scientific observations from the CCCTN Registry include description of variations in care, the epidemiology and outcomes of all CICU patients, as well as subsets of patients with specific disease states, such as shock, heart failure, renal dysfunction, and respiratory failure. The CCCTN has also characterised utilization patterns, including use of mechanical circulatory support in response to changes in the heart transplantation allocation system, and the use and impact of multidisciplinary shock teams. Over years of multicentre collaboration, the CCCTN has established a robust research network to facilitate multicentre registry-based randomised trials in patients with cardiac critical illness.

CONCLUSION

The CCCTN is a large, prospective registry dedicated to describing processes-of-care and expanding clinical knowledge in cardiac critical illness. The CCCTN will serve as an investigational platform from which to conduct randomised controlled trials in this important patient population.