Sex difference in outcomes and management of cardiogenic shock: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Sex differences in the outcomes and management of cardiogenic shock are not well established. The primary objective of this study is to investigate the differences inik cardiogenic shock outcomes between males and females.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology. Studies were searched via the MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases from inception to December 2022.

RESULTS

The analysis included 24 studies comprising 1,567,660 patients. Compared to females, males with CS had a significantly lower risk of in-hospital all-cause mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0.88, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.85-0.90, p < 0.001) and 1-year mortality (RR 0.90, 95 % CI 0.89-0.92, p < 0.001). Males were more likely to undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (RR 1.21, 95 % CI 1.13-1.31, p < 0.0001) and intra-aortic balloon pump placement (RR 1.21, 95 % CI 1.11-1.32, p < 0.0001), with no significant sex differences in the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or Impella. During the index hospitalization, males were at higher risk of arrhythmias (RR 1.18, 95 % CI 1.05-1.34, p = 0.003) and less likely to develop acute kidney injury (RR 0.86, 95 % CI 0.79-0.94, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Men have a lower all-cause mortality risk in cardiogenic shock. Addressing disparities in management is crucial for improving CS outcomes, especially for women.