Influence of cardiac arrest and SCAI shock stage on cardiac intensive care unit mortality
- PMID: 32180344
- DOI: 10.1002/ccd.28854
Influence of cardiac arrest and SCAI shock stage on cardiac intensive care unit mortality
Abstract
Background: Patients with concomitant cardiac arrest (CA) and shock are at increased risk of mortality, even when stratified according to shock severity. We sought to determine whether the presence of ventricular fibrillation (VF) modified the relationship between CA and mortality in cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) patients.
Methods: We retrospectively analyzed unique Mayo Clinic CICU patients admitted between 2007 and 2015. Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention (SCAI) shock stages A through E were classified at admission. Hospital mortality in each SCAI shock stage was stratified by the presence of CA, VF CA, or non-VF CA.
Results: We included 9,898 patients with a mean age of 68 years (38% females). CA was present in 12%, including 53% with VF CA and 47% with non-VF CA. Hospital mortality was higher in patients with CA compared to patients without CA (34% vs. 6%; adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 3.1, 95% CI [2.4, 4.0], p < .001), and patients with non-VF CA had higher hospital mortality than patients with VF CA (44% vs. 25%; adjusted OR = 2.1, 95% CI [1.4, 3.0], p < .001). After adjustment, patients with any CA or non-VF CA had higher hospital mortality at each SCAI stage, except stage E (all other p < .05), whereas patients with VF CA did not (all p > .1).
Conclusions: CA rhythm modifies the relationship between CA and mortality in CICU patients, when accounting for coma, shock, and organ failure. Outcome studies examining CA in patients with cardiogenic shock need to account for important differences such as CA rhythm.
Keywords: cardiac arrest; cardiac intensive care unit; cardiogenic shock; mortality; shock; ventricular fibrillation.
© 2020 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Similar articles
-
Cardiogenic Shock Classification to Predict Mortality in the Cardiac Intensive Care Unit.J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 Oct 29;74(17):2117-2128. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.07.077. Epub 2019 Sep 20. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019. PMID: 31548097
-
Admission Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention shock stage stratifies post-discharge mortality risk in cardiac intensive care unit patients.Am Heart J. 2020 Jan;219:37-46. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2019.10.012. Epub 2019 Oct 27. Am Heart J. 2020. PMID: 31710843
-
Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome Is Associated With Increased Mortality Across the Spectrum of Shock Severity in Cardiac Intensive Care Patients.Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2020 Dec;13(12):e006956. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.120.006956. Epub 2020 Dec 7. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2020. PMID: 33280435
-
Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Cardiogenic Shock and Cardiac Arrest.Circ Heart Fail. 2018 Sep;11(9):e004905. doi: 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.118.004905. Circ Heart Fail. 2018. PMID: 30354364 Review.
-
Management of Cardiogenic Shock in a Cardiac Intensive Care Unit.Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J. 2020 Jan-Mar;16(1):36-42. doi: 10.14797/mdcj-16-1-36. Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J. 2020. PMID: 32280416 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Differences in Outcome of Patients with Cardiogenic Shock Associated with In-Hospital or Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.J Clin Med. 2023 Mar 6;12(5):2064. doi: 10.3390/jcm12052064. J Clin Med. 2023. PMID: 36902851 Free PMC article.
-
Concurrent Use of Kidney Replacement Therapy and Temporary Left Ventricular Assist Device in Cardiogenic Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Blood Purif. 2025 Jun 18:1-16. doi: 10.1159/000546854. Online ahead of print. Blood Purif. 2025. PMID: 40532684 Free PMC article.
-
Shock Severity Assessment in Cardiac Intensive Care Unit Patients With Sepsis and Mixed Septic-Cardiogenic Shock.Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes. 2021 Dec 23;6(1):37-44. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2021.11.008. eCollection 2022 Feb. Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes. 2021. PMID: 35005436 Free PMC article.
-
A Standardized and Comprehensive Approach to the Management of Cardiogenic Shock.JACC Heart Fail. 2020 Nov;8(11):879-891. doi: 10.1016/j.jchf.2020.09.005. JACC Heart Fail. 2020. PMID: 33121700 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Advances in the Staging and Phenotyping of Cardiogenic Shock: Part 1 of 2.JACC Adv. 2022 Oct 28;1(4):100120. doi: 10.1016/j.jacadv.2022.100120. eCollection 2022 Oct. JACC Adv. 2022. PMID: 38939719 Free PMC article. Review.
References
REFERENCES
-
- Jentzer JC, van Diepen S, Barsness GW, et al. Changes in comorbidities, diagnoses, therapies and outcomes in a contemporary cardiac intensive care unit population. Am Heart J. 2019;215:12-19.
-
- Bohula EA, Katz JN, van Diepen S, et al. Demographics, care patterns, and outcomes of patients admitted to cardiac intensive care units: The Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network prospective North American multicenter registry of cardiac critical illness. JAMA Cardiol. 2019;4:928.
-
- Jentzer JC, Anavekar NS, Bennett C, et al. Derivation and validation of a novel cardiac intensive care unit admission risk score for mortality. J Am Heart Assoc. 2019;8:e013675.
-
- van Diepen S, Katz JN, Albert NM, et al. Contemporary management of cardiogenic shock: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2017;136:e232-e268.
-
- Thiele H, Zeymer U, Neumann FJ, et al. Intraaortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:1287-1296.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical