Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVES: We sought to delineate the angiographic findings, clinical correlates and in-hospital outcomes in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) complicating acute myocardial infarction. BACKGROUND: Patients with CS complicating acute myocardial infarction carry a grave prognosis. Detailed angiographic findings in a large, prospectively identified cohort of patients with CS are currently lacking. METHODS: We compared the clinical characteristics, angiographic findings, and in-hospital outcomes of 717 patients selected to undergo angiography and 442 not selected, overall and by shock etiology: left or right ventricular failure versus mechanical complications. RESULTS: Patients who underwent angiography had lower baseline risk and a better hemodynamic profile than those who did not. Overall, 15.5% of the patients had significant left main lesions on angiography, and 53.4% had three-vessel disease, with higher rates of both for those with ventricular failure, compared with patients who had mechanical complications. Among patients who underwent angiography, those with ventricular failure had significantly lower in-hospital mortality than patients with mechanical complications (45.2% vs. 57.0%; p = 0.021). Importantly, for patients with ventricular failure, in-hospital mortality also correlated with disease severity: 35.0% for no or single-vessel disease versus 50.8% for three-vessel disease. Furthermore, mortality was associated with the culprit lesion location (78.6% in left main lesion, 69.7% in saphenous vein graft lesions, 42.4% in circumflex lesions, 42.3% in left anterior descending lesions, and 37.4% in right coronary artery lesions), and Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) flow grade (46.5% in TIMI 0/1, 49.4% in TIMI 2 and 26% in TIMI 3). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent angiographic study in the SHOCK Trial Registry had a more benign cardiac risk profile, more favorable hemodynamic findings and lower in-hospital mortality than those for whom angiograms were not obtained. Patients with CS caused by ventricular failure had more severe atherosclerosis, and a different distribution of culprit vessel involvement but lower in-hospital mortality, than those with mechanical complications. Overall in-hospital survival correlates with the extent of coronary artery obstructions, location of culprit lesion and baseline coronary TIMI flow grade

OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the frequency of pulmonary congestion and associated clinical and hemodynamic findings in patients with suspected cardiogenic shock (CS). BACKGROUND: The prevalence of pulmonary congestion in the setting of CS is uncertain. METHODS: The 571 SHOCK Trial Registry patients with predominant left ventricular failure (LVF) were divided into four groups: Group A = no pulmonary congestion/no hypoperfusion = 14 (3%), Group B = isolated pulmonary congestion = 32 (6%), Group C = isolated hypoperfusion = 158 (28%) and Group D = congestion with hypoperfusion = 367 (64%). Statistical comparisons between Group C and D only, with regard to patient demographics, hemodynamics, treatment and outcome, were made. RESULTS: A significant proportion of patients with shock had no pulmonary congestion (Group C = 28%, 95% CI, 24% to 31%). Age and gender in this group were similar to Group D. Group C patients were less likely to have a prior MI (p = 0.028), congestive heart failure (p = 0.005) and renal insufficiency (p = 0.032), and the index MI was less likely to be anterior (p = 0.044). Cardiac output, cardiac index and ejection fraction were similar for the two groups but pulmonary capillary wedge pressure was slightly lower for Group C (22 vs. 24 mm Hg, p = 0.012). Treatment with thrombolysis, angioplasty and bypass surgery was similar in the two groups. In-hospital mortality rates for Groups C and D were 70% and 60%, respectively (p = 0.036). After adjustment, this difference was no longer statistically significant (p = 0.153). CONCLUSIONS: Absence of pulmonary congestion at initial clinical evaluation does not exclude a diagnosis of CS due to predominant LVF and is not associated with a better prognosis

OBJECTIVES: This SHOCK Study report seeks to provide an overview of patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) complicating acute myocardial infarction (MI) and the outcome with various treatments. The outcome of patients undergoing revascularization in the SHOCK Trial Registry and SHOCK Trial are compared. BACKGROUND: Cardiogenic shock is the leading cause of death in patients hospitalized for acute MI. The randomized SHOCK Trial reported improved six-month survival with early revascularization. METHODS: Patients with CS complicating acute MI who were not enrolled in the concurrent randomized trial were registered. Patient characteristics were recorded as were procedures and vital status at hospital discharge. RESULTS: Between April 1993 and August 1997, 1,190 patients with CS were registered and 232 were randomized in the SHOCK Trial. Predominant left ventricular failure (78.5%) was most common, with isolated right ventricular shock in 2.8%, severe mitral regurgitation in 6.9%, ventricular septal rupture in 3.9% and tamponade in 1.4%. In-hospital Registry mortality was 60%, with ventricular septal rupture associated with a significantly higher mortality (87.3%) than all other categories (p < 0.01). The risk profile and mortality were lower for Registry patients who were managed with thrombolytic therapy and/or intra-aortic balloon counter-pulsation, coronary angiography, angioplasty and/or coronary artery bypass surgery. After adjusting for these differences, the extent to which survival was improved with early revascularization was similar to that observed in the randomized SHOCK Trial. CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective Registry the etiology of CS was a mechanical complication in 12%. The similarity of the beneficial treatment effect in patients undergoing early revascularization in the SHOCK Trial Registry and SHOCK Trial provides strong support for the generalizability of the SHOCK Trial results

Randomized clinical trials have clearly shown the beneficial effects of early reperfusion within 12 hours, and possibly up to 24 hours, after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The data on late reperfusion beyond 24 hours are less convincing. Many studies show that an open infarct-related artery after MI, irrespective of the initial reperfusion strategy, is independently associated with improved long-term clinical outcome. However, similar analysis of the large Global Utilization of Streptokinase and tPA for Occluded Arteries (GUSTO) 1 study did not confirm this finding. It is unclear whether mechanical reperfusion of an occluded infarct-related artery late after MI (>24 hours) in asymptomatic patients will confer long-term benefits. The late open artery hypothesis, which proposes several mechanisms by which late reperfusion may offer benefit, remains to be tested in a large clinical trial. This overview focuses on the definitions of early reperfusion, late reperfusion, the relationship between timing of reperfusion and prognosis after AMI, and the late open artery hypothesis

BACKGROUND: Cardiogenic shock is usually characterized by inadequate cardiac output and sustained hypotension. However, following a large myocardial infarction, peripheral hypoperfusion can occur with relatively well maintained systolic blood pressure, a condition known as nonhypotensive cardiogenic shock. The aim of this study was to determine the characteristics of patients with this condition. METHODS: The SHOCK trial registry prospectively enrolled patients with suspected cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. We identified a group of 49 patients who presented with nonhypotensive shock, defined as clinical evidence of peripheral hypoperfusion with a systolic blood pressure >90 mm Hg without vasopressor circulatory support. Clinical characteristics, hemodynamic data, and outcomes in these patients were compared with a group of 943 patients with classic cardiogenic shock with hypotension. The age, gender, and distributions of coronary risk factors were similar in both groups. RESULTS: Patients with nonhypotensive shock were more likely to have an anterior wall myocardial infarction (71% versus 53%, P = 0.03). Both groups of patients had similar rates of treatment with thrombolytic therapy, angioplasty, and bypass surgery. Patients with nonhypotensive shock had an in-hospital mortality rate of 43% as compared with a rate of 66% among patients who had classic cardiogenic shock with hypotension (P = 0.001). Mortality among 76 patients who presented with a systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg but no hypoperfusion was 26%. CONCLUSIONS: Even in the presence of normal blood pressure, clinical signs of peripheral hypoperfusion, which may be subtle, are associated with a substantial risk of in-hospital death following acute myocardial infarction

OBJECTIVES: This study characterized clinical factors predictive of cardiogenic shock developing after thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). BACKGROUND: Cardiogenic shock remains a common and ominous complication of AMI. By identifying patients at risk of developing shock, preventive measures may be implemented to avert its development. METHODS: We analyzed baseline variables associated with the development of shock after thrombolytic therapy in the Global Utilization of Streptikonase and Tissue-Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO-I) trial. Using a Cox proportional hazards model, we devised a scoring system predicting the risk of shock. This model was then validated in the Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO-III) cohort. RESULTS: Shock developed in 1,889 patients a median of 11.6 h after enrollment. The major factors associated with increased adjusted risk of shock were age (chi2 = 285, hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.47 [1.40, 1.53]), systolic blood pressure (chi2 = 280), heart rate (chi2 = 225) and Killip class (chi2 = 161, hazard ratio 1.70 [1.52, 1.90] and 2.95 [2.39, 3.63] for Killip II versus I and Killip III versus I, respectively) upon presentation. Together, these four variables accounted for >85% of the predictive information. These findings were transformed into an algorithm with a validated concordance index of 0.758. Applied to the GUSTO-III cohort, the four variables accounted for > 95% of the predictive information, and the validated concordance index was 0.796. CONCLUSIONS: A scoring system accurately predicts the risk of shock after thrombolytic therapy for AMI based primarily on the patient's age and physical examination on presentation

BACKGROUND: Cardiogenic shock is usually considered a sequela of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. There are limited prospective data on the incidence and significance of shock in non-ST-segment elevation patients. This study assessed the incidence and outcomes of cardiogenic shock developing after enrollment among patients with and without ST-segment elevation in the Global Use of Strategies To Open Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO)-IIb trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: Among 12,084 patients in GUSTO-IIb who did not present with cardiogenic shock, 4092 (34%) had and 7991 (66%) did not have ST-segment elevation on the enrollment ECG. Cardiogenic shock developed in 4.2% of ST-segment elevation patients compared with 2.5% of patients without ST-segment elevation (odds ratio, 0. 581; 95% CI, 0.472 to 0.715; P<0.001). Shock developed significantly later among patients without ST-segment elevation. There were significant differences in baseline characteristics between shock patients with and without ST-segment elevation: Patients without ST-segment elevation were older, more frequently had diabetes mellitus and 3-vessel disease, but had less TIMI grade 0 flow at angiography. Regardless of the initial ECG, mortality was high: 63% among patients with ST-segment elevation and 73% in those without ST-segment elevation. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiogenic shock occurs in the setting of acute ischemic syndromes regardless of whether ST-segment elevation is present. The incidence, patient characteristics, timing, clinical course, and angiographic findings differ between the 2 groups. Mortality from cardiogenic shock is similarly high among patients with and without ST-segment elevation