External validation and comparison of the CardShock and IABP-SHOCK II risk scores in real-world cardiogenic shock patients

Author:

Rivas-Lasarte Mercedes1,Sans-Roselló Jordi1,Collado-Lledó Elena2,González-Fernández Víctor3,Noriega Francisco J4,Hernández-Pérez Francisco J5,Fernández-Martínez Juan1,Ariza Albert2,Lidón Rosa-Maria3,Viana-Tejedor Ana4,Segovia-Cubero Javier5,Harjola Veli-Pekka6,Lassus Johan7,Thiele Holger8,Sionis Alessandro1

Affiliation:

1. Intensive Cardiac Care Unit, Cardiology Department, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, CIBERCV, Spain

2. Cardiology Service, Universitari Bellvitge Hospital-IDIBELL, Spain

3. Cardiovascular Critical Care Unit, CIBER-CV Vall d’Hebron Hospital, Spain

4. Acute Cardiac Care Unit, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Spain

5. Advanced Heart Failure and Transplant Unit, Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro, Spain

6. Emergency Medicine, Helsinki University Hospital, Finland

7. Heart and Lung Centre, Helsinki University Hospital, Finland

8. Department of Internal Medicine/Cardiology, Heart Center Leipzig at University of Leipzig, Germany

Abstract

Abstract Background Mortality from cardiogenic shock remains high and early recognition and risk stratification are mandatory for optimal patient allocation and to guide treatment strategy. The CardShock and the Intra-Aortic Balloon Counterpulsation in Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock (IABP-SHOCK II) risk scores have shown good results in predicting short-term mortality in cardiogenic shock. However, to date, they have not been compared in a large cohort of ischaemic and non-ischaemic real-world cardiogenic shock patients. Methods The Red-Shock is a multicentre cohort of non-selected cardiogenic shock patients. We calculated the CardShock and IABP-SHOCK II risk scores in each patient and assessed discrimination and calibration. Results We included 696 patients. The main cause of cardiogenic shock was acute coronary syndrome, occurring in 62% of the patients. Compared with acute coronary syndrome patients, non-acute coronary syndrome patients were younger and had a lower proportion of risk factors but higher rates of renal insufficiency; intra-aortic balloon pump was also less frequently used (31% vs 56%). In contrast, non-acute coronary syndrome patients were more often treated with mechanical circulatory support devices (11% vs 3%, p<0.001 for both). Both risk scores were good predictors of in-hospital mortality in acute coronary syndrome patients and had similar areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (area under the curve: 0.742 for the CardShock vs 0.752 for IABP-SHOCK II, p=0.65). Their discrimination performance was only modest when applied to non-acute coronary syndrome patients (0.648 vs 0.619, respectively, p=0.31). Calibration was acceptable for both scores (Hosmer-Lemeshow p=0.22 for the CardShock and 0.68 for IABP-SHOCK II). Conclusions In our cohort, both the CardShock and the IABP-SHOCK II risk scores were good predictors of in-hospital mortality in acute coronary syndrome-related cardiogenic shock.

Funder

Río Hortega

Instituto de Salud Carlos III

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine,Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine,General Medicine

Reference16 articles.

1. for the SHOCK investigators. Trends in cardiogenic shock: Report from the SHOCK study;Carnendran;Eur Heart J,2001

2. for the GUSTO investigators. Lack of progress in cardiogenic shock: Lessons from the GUSTO trials;Menon;Eur Heart J,2000

3. for the IABP-SHOCK II Trial Investigators. Intraaortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock;Thiele;N Engl J Med,2012

4. for the SHOCK investigators. Early revascularization in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock;Hochman;N Engl J Med,1999

5. on behalf of the IABP-SHOCK II trial investigators. Intra-aortic Balloon Counterpulsation in Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock (IABP-SHOCK II): Final 12 month results of a randomised, open-label trial;Thiele;Lancet,2013

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