Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2025 May 26;20(1):237.
doi: 10.1186/s13019-025-03483-x.

Prognostic value of baseline glucose levels for mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Lisha Wu  1 , Jingjing Cao  2 , Jiuxin Ge  2
Affiliations
Review

Prognostic value of baseline glucose levels for mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Lisha Wu et al. J Cardiothorac Surg. .

Abstract

Background: Baseline glucose levels have been implicated in the prognosis of critically ill patients. However, the prognostic value of glucose in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) has not been systematically evaluated. The current study aimed to provide evidence that baseline glucose levels can predict mortality in patients with CS.

Methods: PubMed, Scopus, Embase and Web of Science were searched from inception to July 31, 2024 for studies assessing mortality after CS based on different baseline glucose levels. Hyperglycemia was defined as a glucose level > 7.8-8 mmol/l. Data were synthesized using "Review Manager" (RevMan; version 5.3; The Cochrane Collaboration).

Results: A total of nine studies were included. Meta-analysis showed that patients with CS who had baseline glucose levels > 7.8-8 mmol/l had a significantly greater risk of early mortality as compared to those with glucose levels < 7.8-8 mmol/l [risk ratio (RR), 1.48; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.24-1.77; I-squared (I2) = 65%]. Similarly, patients with CS who had baseline glucose levels > 10-11 mmol/l (RR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.35-2.90; I2 = 82%) and 11.5-12mmol/l (RR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.19-1.72; I2 = 74%) had significantly greater risk of early mortality as compared to those with lower levels. Severe hyperglycemia (> 16 mmol/l) was also associated with an increased risk of mortality compared with normoglycemia (RR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.36-2.48; I2 = 78%).

Conclusion: In the present meta-analysis, the elevated risk of mortality was persistent with different glucose cut-offs, suggesting that glucose levels at admission can be useful for risk assessment in patients with CS. Further studies considering diabetes status and other important confounding factors are needed to obtain more evidence.

Keywords: Cardiogenic shock; Diabetes; Glucose; Hyperglycemia; Mortality.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: Not applicable. Patient consent for publication: Not applicable. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Search results presented as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow chart
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Meta-analysis comparing early mortality rates of cardiogenic shock between hyperglycemia (> 7.8-8 mmol/l) and normoglycemia groups. CI, confidence interval
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Funnel plot of the primary meta-analysis. SE, standard error; RR, relative risk
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Meta-analysis comparing early mortality rates of cardiogenic shock based on cut-off glucose levels of 10–11 and 11.5–12 mmol/l. CI, confidence interval
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Meta-analysis comparing early mortality rates of cardiogenic shock with glucose levels > 10–11 and > 11.5–12 mmol/l vs. <8 mmol/l. CI, confidence interval
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Meta-analysis comparing early mortality rates of cardiogenic shock with glucose levels > 16 mmol/l vs. <8mmol/l. CI, confidence interval
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. 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:e232–68. - PubMed
    1. Osman M, Syed M, Patibandla S, et al. Fifteen-Year trends in incidence of cardiogenic shock hospitalization and In-Hospital mortality in the united States. J Am Heart Assoc. 2021;10:e021061. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bloom JE, Chan W, Kaye DM, Stub D. State of shock: contemporary vasopressor and Inotrope use in cardiogenic shock. J Am Heart Assoc. 2023;12:e029787. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Berg DD, Bohula EA, Morrow DA. Epidemiology and causes of cardiogenic shock. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2021;27:401–8. - PubMed
    1. Kolte D, Khera S, Dabhadkar KC, et al. Trends in coronary angiography, revascularization, and outcomes of cardiogenic shock complicating Non-ST-Elevation myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 2016;117:1–9. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources