Association between left ventricular ejection fraction, mortality and use of mechanical circulatory support in patients with non-ischaemic cardiogenic shock

Author:

Sundermeyer Jonas,Kellner Caroline,Beer Benedikt N.,Besch Lisa,Dettling Angela,Bertoldi Letizia Fausta,Blankenberg Stefan,Dauw Jeroen,Dindane Zouhir,Eckner Dennis,Eitel Ingo,Graf Tobias,Horn Patrick,Jozwiak-Nozdrzykowska Joanna,Kirchhof Paulus,Kluge Stefan,Linke Axel,Landmesser Ulf,Luedike Peter,Lüsebrink Enzo,Majunke Nicolas,Mangner Norman,Maniuc Octavian,Winkler Sven Möbius,Nordbeck Peter,Orban Martin,Pappalardo Federico,Pauschinger Matthias,Pazdernik Michal,Proudfoot Alastair,Kelham Matthew,Rassaf Tienush,Scherer Clemens,Schulze Paul Christian,Schwinger Robert H. G.,Skurk Carsten,Sramko Marek,Tavazzi Guido,Thiele Holger,Villanova Luca,Morici Nuccia,Westenfeld Ralf,Winzer Ephraim B.,Westermann Dirk,Schrage BenediktORCID

Abstract

Abstract Background Currently, use of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in non-ischaemic cardiogenic shock (CS) is predominantly guided by shock-specific markers, and not by markers of cardiac function. We hypothesise that left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) can identify patients with a higher likelihood to benefit from MCS and thus help to optimise their expected benefit. Methods Patients with non-ischaemic CS and available data on LVEF from 16 tertiary-care centres in five countries were analysed. Cox regression models were fitted to evaluate the association between LVEF and mortality, as well as the interaction between LVEF, MCS use and mortality. Results N = 807 patients were analysed: mean age 63 [interquartile range (IQR) 51.5–72.0] years, 601 (74.5%) male, lactate 4.9 (IQR 2.6–8.5) mmol/l, LVEF 20 (IQR 15–30) %. Lower LVEF was more frequent amongst patients with more severe CS, and MCS was more likely used in patients with lower LVEF. There was no association between LVEF and 30-day mortality risk in the overall study cohort. However, there was a significant interaction between MCS use and LVEF, indicating a lower 30-day mortality risk with MCS use in patients with LVEF ≤ 20% (hazard ratio 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.51–1.02 for LVEF ≤ 20% vs. hazard ratio 1.31, 95% confidence interval 0.85–2.01 for LVEF > 20%, interaction-p = 0.017). Conclusion This retrospective study may indicate a lower mortality risk with MCS use only in patients with severely reduced LVEF. This may propose the inclusion of LVEF as an adjunctive parameter for MCS decision-making in non-ischaemic CS, aiming to optimise the benefit–risk ratio. Graphical abstract Impact of left ventricular ejection fraction on mortality and use of mechanical circulatory support in non-ischaemic cardiogenic shock. Hazard ratio for 30-day mortality across the LVEF continuum, adjusted for age, sex, SCAI shock stage, worst value of lactate and pH within 6 h, prior resuscitation and mechanical ventilation during the index shock event. LVEF: Left ventricular ejection fraction; MCS: Mechanical circulatory support; HR: Hazard ratio; CI: Confidence interval.

Funder

Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE)

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine,General Medicine

Reference41 articles.

1. McDonagh TA, Metra M, Adamo M et al (2021) 2021 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure developed by the Task Force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) With the special contribution of the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J 42(36):3599–3726. https://doi.org/10.1093/EURHEARTJ/EHAB368

2. Baran DA, Grines CL, Bailey S et al (2019) SCAI clinical expert consensus statement on the classification of cardiogenic shock: This document was endorsed by the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM), and the Society. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 94(1):29–37. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.28329

3. Naidu SS, Baran DA, Jentzer JC et al (2022) SCAI SHOCK Stage Classification Expert Consensus Update: a Review and Incorporation of Validation Studies: This statement was endorsed by the American College of Cardiology (ACC), American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP), American Heart Association. J Am Coll Cardiol 79(9):933–946. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2022.01.018

4. Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Webb JG et al (2006) Early revascularization and long-term survival in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. J Am Med Assoc 295(21):2511–2515. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.295.21.2511

5. Thiele H, Akin I, Sandri M et al (2017) PCI strategies in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med 377(25):2419–2432. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa1710261

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3