Comparison of Contemporary Treatment Strategies in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock Due to Severe Aortic Stenosis

Abstract

Background The aims of this study were to understand the incidence and outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) due to severe aortic stenosis (AS), and the impact of conventional treatment strategies in this population. Methods and Results All patients admitted to the Cleveland Clinic cardiac intensive care unit between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2021 with CS were retrospectively identified and categorized into those with CS in the setting of severe AS versus CS without AS. The impact of various treatment strategies on mortality was further assessed. We identified 2754 patients with CS during the study period, of whom 216 patients (8%) had CS in the setting of severe AS. Medical management was associated with the highest 30‐day mortality when compared with either balloon aortic valve replacement or aortic valve replacement (surgical or transcatheter aortic valve replacement) (hazard ratio, 3.69 [95% CI, 2.04–6.66]; P <0.0001). Among patients who received transcatheter therapy, 30‐day mortality was significantly higher in patients who received balloon aortic valvuloplasty versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement (26% versus 4%, P =0.02). Both surgical and transcatheter aortic valve replacement had considerably lower mortality than medical management and balloon aortic valvuloplasty at 30 days and 1 year ( P <0.05 for both comparisons). Conclusions CS due to severe AS is associated with high in‐hospital and 30‐day mortality, worse compared with those with CS without AS. In suitable patients, urgent surgical aortic valvuloplasty or transcatheter aortic valve replacement is associated with favorable short‐ and long‐term outcomes. Although balloon aortic valvuloplasty may be used to temporize patients with CS in the setting of severe AS, mortality is ≈50% if not followed by definitive aortic valve replacement within 90 days.