A Comprehensive Appraisal of Risk Prediction Models for Cardiogenic Shock

Anusha G. Bhat; Sean Van Diepen; Jason N. Katz; Ashequl Islam; Benham N. Tehrani; Alexander G. Truesdell; Navin K. Kapur; David R. Holmes; Venugopal Menon; Wissam A. Jaber; William J. Nicholson; David X. Zhao; Saraschandra Vallabhajosyula

doi:10.1097/SHK.0000000000001921

A Comprehensive Appraisal of Risk Prediction Models for Cardiogenic Shock

Anusha G. Bhat, Sean Van Diepen, Jason N. Katz, Ashequl Islam, Benham N. Tehrani, Alexander G. Truesdell, Navin K. Kapur, David R. Holmes, Venugopal Menon, Wissam A. Jaber, William J. Nicholson, David X. Zhao, Saraschandra Vallabhajosyula

Cardiovascular Medicine

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › peer-review

Abstract

Despite advances in early revascularization, percutaneous hemodynamic support platforms, and systems of care, cardiogenic shock (CS) remains associated with a mortality rate higher than 50%. Several risk stratification models have been derived since the 1990s to identify patients at high risk of adverse outcomes. Still, limited information is available on the differences between scoring systems and their relative applicability to both acute myocardial infarction and advanced decompensated heart failure CS. Thus, we reviewed the similarities, differences, and limitations of published CS risk prediction models and herein discuss their suitability to the contemporary management of CS care.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	617-629
Number of pages	13
Journal	Shock
Volume	57
Issue number	5
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1097/SHK.0000000000001921
State	Published - May 1 2022

Keywords

Cardiogenic shock
clinical outcomes
invasive hemodynamics
mechanical circulatory support
risk prediction

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
Emergency Medicine

Access to Document

10.1097/SHK.0000000000001921

Cite this

@article{86c1df584a9647e48dcdb831c2cf7668,

title = "A Comprehensive Appraisal of Risk Prediction Models for Cardiogenic Shock",

abstract = "Despite advances in early revascularization, percutaneous hemodynamic support platforms, and systems of care, cardiogenic shock (CS) remains associated with a mortality rate higher than 50%. Several risk stratification models have been derived since the 1990s to identify patients at high risk of adverse outcomes. Still, limited information is available on the differences between scoring systems and their relative applicability to both acute myocardial infarction and advanced decompensated heart failure CS. Thus, we reviewed the similarities, differences, and limitations of published CS risk prediction models and herein discuss their suitability to the contemporary management of CS care.",

keywords = "Cardiogenic shock, clinical outcomes, invasive hemodynamics, mechanical circulatory support, risk prediction",

author = "Bhat, {Anusha G.} and {Van Diepen}, Sean and Katz, {Jason N.} and Ashequl Islam and Tehrani, {Benham N.} and Truesdell, {Alexander G.} and Kapur, {Navin K.} and Holmes, {David R.} and Venugopal Menon and Jaber, {Wissam A.} and Nicholson, {William J.} and Zhao, {David X.} and Saraschandra Vallabhajosyula",

year = "2022",

month = may,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1097/SHK.0000000000001921",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "57",

pages = "617--629",

journal = "Shock",

issn = "1073-2322",

publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",

number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Comprehensive Appraisal of Risk Prediction Models for Cardiogenic Shock

AU - Bhat, Anusha G.

AU - Van Diepen, Sean

AU - Katz, Jason N.

AU - Islam, Ashequl

AU - Tehrani, Benham N.

AU - Truesdell, Alexander G.

AU - Kapur, Navin K.

AU - Holmes, David R.

AU - Menon, Venugopal

AU - Jaber, Wissam A.

AU - Nicholson, William J.

AU - Zhao, David X.

AU - Vallabhajosyula, Saraschandra

PY - 2022/5/1

Y1 - 2022/5/1

N2 - Despite advances in early revascularization, percutaneous hemodynamic support platforms, and systems of care, cardiogenic shock (CS) remains associated with a mortality rate higher than 50%. Several risk stratification models have been derived since the 1990s to identify patients at high risk of adverse outcomes. Still, limited information is available on the differences between scoring systems and their relative applicability to both acute myocardial infarction and advanced decompensated heart failure CS. Thus, we reviewed the similarities, differences, and limitations of published CS risk prediction models and herein discuss their suitability to the contemporary management of CS care.

AB - Despite advances in early revascularization, percutaneous hemodynamic support platforms, and systems of care, cardiogenic shock (CS) remains associated with a mortality rate higher than 50%. Several risk stratification models have been derived since the 1990s to identify patients at high risk of adverse outcomes. Still, limited information is available on the differences between scoring systems and their relative applicability to both acute myocardial infarction and advanced decompensated heart failure CS. Thus, we reviewed the similarities, differences, and limitations of published CS risk prediction models and herein discuss their suitability to the contemporary management of CS care.

KW - Cardiogenic shock

KW - clinical outcomes

KW - invasive hemodynamics

KW - mechanical circulatory support

KW - risk prediction

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85130765561&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85130765561&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/SHK.0000000000001921

DO - 10.1097/SHK.0000000000001921

M3 - Review article

C2 - 35583910

AN - SCOPUS:85130765561

SN - 1073-2322

VL - 57

SP - 617

EP - 629

JO - Shock

JF - Shock

IS - 5

ER -

A Comprehensive Appraisal of Risk Prediction Models for Cardiogenic Shock

Abstract

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this