LETTER

Clinical Syndromes

In Cardiogenic Shock, Age is Not Just a Number

Aniket S Rali ,1 Lena Tran ,1 Malcolm Dix ,1 Rochelle Prokupets ,1 JoAnn Lindenfeld 1
and Siva Taduru 2

1. Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, US;
2. Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, US

Received: 13 October 2023 Accepted: 26 January 2024 Citation: Cardiac Failure Review 2024;10:e04. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15420/cfr.2023.22
Disclosure: ASR has received consulting fees from Analog Devices and is on the Cardiac Failure Review editorial board; this did not influence acceptance. MD received
expenses for attending American College of Cardiology Conference 2022. JL has received grants from AstraZeneca and Volumetrix, and consulting fees from Abbott,
Alleviant, AstraZeneca, Axon, Bayer, Boston Scientific, Cordio, CVRx, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Merck, Vascular Dynamics, VWave and Whiteswell. All other
authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Correspondence: Aniket S Rali, 1215 21st Avenue South, Suite 5209, Nashville, TN 37232, USA. E: [email protected]

Copyright: © The Author(s) 2024. This work is open access and is licensed under CC BY-NC 4.0. Users may copy, redistribute and make derivative works for non-
commercial purposes, provided the original work is cited correctly.

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a heterogenous disease process with varied and percentages, while continuous variables are presented as means
clinical presentation, aetiology and severity. Owing to such heterogeneity, with standard deviations or medians with interquartile ranges, as
it is difficult to prognosticate patients in CS at their initial clinical encounter. appropriate.
While the Society of Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI)
stages of CS have been validated as a prognostic tool, they rely on several In-hospital mortality was reported for the total cardiogenic shock group,
biomarkers and invasive haemodynamic variables that may delay their as well as separately for the AMI and no-AMI subgroups. Mortality rates
assessment.1 The aim of our analysis was to assess the relationship were also reported for each age decile within the total group, and the AMI
between a universal risk factor, patient’s age and mortality in CS. Patient’s and no-AMI subgroups. Graphical trends of mortality rates across age
age is readily available at the initial encounter and remains a non- deciles were created.
modifiable risk factor.
Results
We queried a large national database to assess this relationship between A total of 490,370 admissions for cardiogenic shock were identified
patient’s age and mortality in CS. Multiple baseline comorbidities and during the study period. Baseline characteristics of the cohort are
severity of illness were intentionally not adjusted in the hopes of providing summarised in Table 1. Overall mortality during index hospitalisation in our
more of a rapid, early, ‘first look’ and global prognostication for CS cohort of CS patients was 34.5%. Mortality was higher in the AMI-CS
patients. cohort compared with the non-AMI cohort (36 versus 33.5%, p<0.001).
In-hospital mortality occurred in 29.9% of patients aged 20–29 years, and
Methods rose to 52.4% among the oldest cohort (age 90–99 years). The rate of
We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the National Inpatient increase in mortality during index hospitalisation with age was statistically
Sample dataset from 2016 to 2018. The National Inpatient Sample, significant (R2=0.6848, p<0.0001). (Figure 1) These trends were similar in
sponsored by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, is the the AMI-CS cohort (R2=0.786, p<0.0001) and the non-AMI-CS cohort
largest publicly available all-payer inpatient healthcare database (R2=0.6895, p<0.0001).
designed to produce US regional and national estimates of inpatient
usage, access, cost, quality and outcomes. The study population included Discussion
adult patients (age ≥18 years) hospitalised with a diagnosis of CS, as The key finding of our analysis is that mortality during index hospitalisation
identified by the ICD-10-CM code R57.0. We excluded patients with among patients presenting in CS consistently rises with each decade of
missing age or outcome data on mortality. life. Age provides a universally available ‘first look’ assessment, and this
relationship exists in both the AMI and non-AMI-CS cohorts.
The primary outcome of interest was in-hospital mortality, defined as
death occurring during the index hospitalisation. Patients were grouped Our findings are in line with the previously published Cardiogenic Shock
into age deciles. We further stratified the study population based on the Working Group cohort, where higher age was associated with increased
presence or absence of acute MI (AMI), identified by ICD-10-CM code I21, mortality in patients with CS across all SCAI stages, regardless of the
to study if age remained a relevant association in patients with AMI and aetiology of shock.2 The most likely contributor to increased mortality with
CS. each decade of life is a higher burden of comorbidities. Outcomes in older
adults may also be confounded by the types of therapy/interventions
The complex samples module in IBM SPSS Statistics version 25 (IBM) was offered to patients at advanced age. Studies have shown that the older
used to account for the stratified sampling design of the National Inpatient adult population is less likely to receive mechanical support during index
Sample datasets. Categorical variables are summarised as frequencies hospitalisation for CS.3 Meta-analysis of patients receiving Impella support

Published by Radcliffe Group Ltd.

www.CFRjournal.com
 Age in Cardiogenic Shock

Table 1: Baseline Characteristics of the Study Cohort Figure 1: All Cardiogenic Shock and Mortality

Characteristic Overall AMI-CS Non-AMI-CS

60%
Age (years), mean 68 (58–77) 69 (60–78) 67 (57–77)
(median) 50%

Male 62% 64% 62% R2 = 0.6848

40%
HTN 74% 74% 74%
DM 39% 42% 37% 30%

DLD 42% 48% 37% 20%

CAD 71% 100% 52%
10%
AF 25% 18% 29%
PVD 21% 16% 24% 0%
18−19 20−29 30−39 40−49 50−59 60−69 70−79 80−89 90−99
Chronic pulmonary 27% 24% 29% Age (years)
disease
Obesity 17% 15% 17%
30-day mortality post-CS.6,7 The CardShock study found seven
ESRD 8% 7% 8%
independent variables associated with CS mortality: AMI aetiology, age,
IABP 1% 1% <1% previous MI, confusion, low left ventricular ejection fraction and
pVAD 5% 9% 2% increased blood lactate levels.8 Similarly, complete lactate clearance
VA-ECMO 2% 2% 2% and percentage lactate clearance have been associated with in-hospital
Any t-MCS 8% 12% 5% survival.9 The SCAI stages of CS provide a comprehensive severity of
illness assessment for patients presenting in shock, and increasing SCAI
AMI-CS = acute MI and cardiogenic shock; CAD = coronary artery disease; DLD = dyslipidaemia;
DM = diabetes; ESRD = end-stage renal disease; HTN = hypertension; IABP = intra-aortic balloon stage is associated with worse in-hospital outcomes.1,10 While it is well
pump; pVAD = percutaneous ventricular assist device; PVD = peripheral vascular disease; validated, it relies on physical examination, laboratory data and
t-MCS = temporary mechanical circulatory support; VA-ECMO = venous-arterial extracorporeal
haemodynamic variables and, hence, may not be readily applicable as
membrane oxygenation.
a ‘first look’ assessment.
showed higher rate of vascular complication and major bleeding with
advanced age.4 Similar findings have been seen in patients requiring The strength of our analysis is its large sample size, as well as broad
venous-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, with an applicability given inclusion of all patients with CS. Its true value is in
association between increasing age and mortality in this population.5 providing patients, their caregivers and bedside clinicians with a rapid
method for prognostication at the initial encounter. A lack of multivariable
Various demographic and severity of illness predictors of mortality in modelling is a limitation of our analysis, but it also makes our findings
patients with CS have previously been reported. Female sex and black more generalisable. In due course, the precise risk of mortality for any
or Hispanic race have both been shown to be associated with higher given patient can be estimated by other, more comprehensive scores.

1. Jentzer JC, van Diepen S, Barsness GW, et al. Cardiogenic 2021;324:44–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2020.09.044; 8. Harjola VP, Lassus J, Sionis A, et al. Clinical picture and risk
shock classification to predict mortality in the cardiac PMID: 32971148. prediction of short-term mortality in cardiogenic shock. Eur J
intensive care unit. J Am Coll Cardiol 2019;74:2117–28. https:// 5. Chung M, Zhao Y, Strom JB, et al. Extracorporeal membrane Heart Fail 2015;17:501–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejhf.260;
doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2019.07.077; PMID: 31548097. oxygenation use in cardiogenic shock: impact of age on PMID: 25820680.
2. Kanwar M, Thayer KL, Garan AR, et al. Impact of age on in-hospital mortality, length of stay, and costs. Crit Care Med 9. Marbach JA, Di Santo P, Kapur NK, et al. Lactate clearance
outcomes in patients with cardiogenic shock. Front 2019;47:e214–21. https://doi.org/10.1097/ as a surrogate for mortality in cardiogenic shock: insights
Cardiovasc Med 2021;8:688098. https://doi.org/10.3389/ CCM.0000000000003631; PMID: 30585830. from the DOREMI trial. J Am Heart Assoc 2022;11:e023322.
fcvm.2021.688098; PMID: 34368248. 6. Bloom JE, Andrew E, Nehme Z, et al. Gender disparities in https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.121.023322; PMID: 35261289.
3. Ratcovich HL, Josiassen J, Helgestad OKL, et al. Outcome in cardiogenic shock treatment and outcomes. Am J Cardiol 10. Lawler PR, Berg DD, Park JG, et al. The Range of
elderly patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute 2022;177:14–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. cardiogenic shock survival by clinical stage: data from the
myocardial infarction. Shock 2022;57:327–35. https://doi. amjcard.2022.04.047; PMID: 35773044. critical care cardiology trials network registry. Crit Care Med
org/10.1097/SHK.0000000000001837; PMID: 34265831. 7. Ya’qoub L, Lemor A, Dabbagh M, et al. Racial, ethnic, and 2021;49:1293–302. https://doi.org/10.1097/
4. Iannaccone M, Albani S, Giannini F, et al. Short term sex disparities in patients with STEMI and cardiogenic CCM.0000000000004948; PMID: 33861557.
outcomes of Impella in cardiogenic shock: a review and shock. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2021;14:653–60. https://doi.
meta-analysis of observational studies. Int J Cardiol org/10.1016/j.jcin.2021.01.003; PMID: 33736772.

CARDIAC FAILURE REVIEW

www.CFRjournal.com