» Articles » PMID: 17964038

Long-term Outcome and Its Predictors Among Patients with ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Shock: Insights from the GUSTO-I Trial

Overview
Date 2007 Oct 30
PMID 17964038
Citations 24
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: This study sought to assess long-term outcome and determine its predictors among 30-day survivors of cardiogenic shock.

Background: Patients with cardiogenic shock have high in-hospital and 30-day mortality, but there are little data about those who survive beyond 30 days.

Methods: We analyzed baseline, in-hospital, and survival data from patients in the U.S. with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and cardiogenic shock enrolled in the GUSTO (Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue-Type Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries)-I trial and compared them with patients in the same trial who did not have shock.

Results: Of 22,883 patients enrolled in the U.S., shock occurred in 1,891 (8.3%); 953 (50.4%) survived 30 days and 527 (27.8%) survived 11 years. Of 20,992 U.S. patients without shock, 20,360 (96.9%) survived 30 days and 14,131 (67.3%) survived 11 years. After the first year, 2% to 4% of patients died each year regardless of whether they had cardiogenic shock. Using Cox proportional hazards models, we were able to predict long-term mortality in all U.S. GUSTO-I 30-day survivors from their baseline demographics and in-hospital complications. The strongest predictors were diabetes mellitus, cardiogenic shock, hypertension, previous myocardial infarction, current smoking, anterior infarct, higher Killip class, higher heart rate, and older age; patients >75 years were at highest risk. Percutaneous revascularization during the index hospitalization was associated with a reduced risk of death.

Conclusions: Among patients with cardiogenic shock who survive 30 days after STEMI, annual mortality rates of 2% to 4% approximate those of patients without shock.

Citing Articles

A Review of Prognosis Model Associated With Cardiogenic Shock After Acute Myocardial Infarction.

Wang J, Shen B, Feng X, Zhang Z, Liu J, Wang Y Front Cardiovasc Med. 2021; 8:754303.

PMID: 34957245 PMC: 8702644. DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2021.754303.


Fibrinolysis vs. primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock.

Vallabhajosyula S, Verghese D, Bell M, Murphree D, Cheungpasitporn W, Miller P ESC Heart Fail. 2021; 8(3):2025-2035.

PMID: 33704924 PMC: 8120407. DOI: 10.1002/ehf2.13281.


Inotropic agents and vasodilator strategies for the treatment of cardiogenic shock or low cardiac output syndrome.

Uhlig K, Efremov L, Tongers J, Frantz S, Mikolajczyk R, Sedding D Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020; 11:CD009669.

PMID: 33152122 PMC: 8094388. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009669.pub4.


Etiology and Prognosis of Cardiogenic Shock in a Secondary Center without Surgical Back-Up.

Bonello L, Laine M, Puymirat E, Ceccaldi V, Gaubert M, Paganelli F Cardiol Res Pract. 2019; 2019:3869603.

PMID: 31885900 PMC: 6925788. DOI: 10.1155/2019/3869603.


Management of cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: A review.

Shah A, Puri R, Kalra A Clin Cardiol. 2019; 42(4):484-493.

PMID: 30815887 PMC: 6712338. DOI: 10.1002/clc.23168.