Suppr超能文献

地中海队列中心源性休克按病因划分的死亡率:休克-CAT研究结果

Cardiogenic shock mortality according to Aetiology in a Mediterranean cohort: Results from the Shock-CAT study.

作者信息

García-García Cosme, López-Sobrino Teresa, Sanz-Girgas Esther, Cueto Maria R, Aboal Jaime, Pastor Pablo, Buera Irene, Sionis Alessandro, Andrea Rut, Rodríguez-López Judit, Sánchez-Salado Jose Carlos, Tomas Carlos, Bañeras Jordi, Ariza Albert, Lupón Josep, Bayés-Genís Antoni, Rueda Ferran

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.

Cardiology Department, Heart Institute, Hosptial Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol, Badalona, Spain.

出版信息

ESC Heart Fail. 2025 Apr;12(2):1336-1345. doi: 10.1002/ehf2.15148. Epub 2024 Nov 25.

Abstract

AIMS

Mortality in cardiogenic shock (CS) remains elevated, with the potential for CS causes to impact prognosis and risk stratification. The aim was to investigate in-hospital prognosis and mortality in CS patients according to aetiology. We also assessed the prognostic accuracy of CardShock and IABP-SHOCK II scores.

METHODS

Shock-CAT study was a multicentre, prospective, observational study conducted from December 2018 to November 2019 in eight university hospitals in Catalonia, including non-selected consecutive CS patients. Data on clinical presentation, management, including mechanical circulatory support (MCS) were analysed comparing acute myocardial infarction (AMI) related CS and non-AMI-CS. The accuracy of CardShock and IABP-SHOCK II scores to assess 90 day mortality risk were also compared.

RESULTS

A total of 382 CS patients were included, age 65.3 (SD 13.9) years, 75.1% men. Patients were classified as AMI-CS (n = 232, 60.7%) and non-AMI-CS (n = 150, 39.3%). In the AMI-CS group, 77.6% were STEMI. Main aetiologies for non-AMI-CS were heart failure (36.2%), arrhythmias (22.1%) and valve disease (8.0%). AMI-CS patients required more MCS than non-AMI-CS (43.1% vs. 16.7%, P < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was higher in AMI-CS (37.1 vs. 26.7%, P = 0.035), with a two-fold increased risk after multivariate adjustment (odds ratio 2.24, P = 0.019). The IABP-SHOCK II had superior discrimination for predicting 90 day mortality when compared with CardShock in AMI-CS patients [area under the curve (AUC) 0.74 vs. 0.66, P = 0.047] although both scores performed similarly in non-AMI-CS (AUC 0.64 vs. 0.62, P = 0.693).

CONCLUSIONS

In our cohort, AMI-CS mortality was increased by two-fold when compared with non-AMI-CS. IABP-SHOCK II score provides better 90 day mortality risk prediction than CardShock score in AMI-CS, but both scores performed similar in non-AMI-CS patients.

摘要

目的

心源性休克(CS)的死亡率仍然居高不下,CS的病因有可能影响预后和风险分层。本研究旨在根据病因调查CS患者的院内预后和死亡率。我们还评估了CardShock和IABP-SHOCK II评分的预后准确性。

方法

Shock-CAT研究是一项多中心、前瞻性、观察性研究,于2018年12月至2019年11月在加泰罗尼亚的八所大学医院进行,纳入未经过筛选的连续性CS患者。分析了临床表现、治疗管理(包括机械循环支持(MCS))的数据,比较急性心肌梗死(AMI)相关CS和非AMI-CS患者。还比较了CardShock和IABP-SHOCK II评分评估90天死亡风险的准确性。

结果

共纳入382例CS患者,年龄65.3(标准差13.9)岁,男性占75.1%。患者分为AMI-CS组(n = 232,60.7%)和非AMI-CS组(n = 150,39.3%)。在AMI-CS组中,77.6%为ST段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)。非AMI-CS的主要病因是心力衰竭(36.2%)、心律失常(22.1%)和瓣膜病(8.0%)。AMI-CS患者比非AMI-CS患者需要更多的MCS(43.1%对16.7%,P < 0.001)。AMI-CS患者的院内死亡率更高(37.1%对26.7%,P = 0.035),多因素调整后风险增加两倍(比值比2.24,P = 0.019)。与CardShock相比,IABP-SHOCK II在预测AMI-CS患者90天死亡率方面具有更好的辨别力[曲线下面积(AUC)0.74对0.66,P = 0.047],尽管在非AMI-CS患者中两者评分表现相似(AUC 0.64对0.62,P = 0.693)。

结论

在我们的队列中,与非AMI-CS相比,AMI-CS的死亡率增加了两倍。在AMI-CS患者中,IABP-SHOCK II评分比CardShock评分能更好地预测90天死亡风险,但在非AMI-CS患者中两者评分表现相似。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/627a/11911611/b222049d3d49/EHF2-12-1336-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验