Patients near to cardiogenic shock (CS) but without hypotension have similar prognosis when compared to patients with classic CS: Is it time for redefine CS? A FRENSHOCK multicenter registry analysis
2019
Background Classical definition of
cardiogenic shock(CS) combine a systolic blood pressure (SBP) Methods FRENSHOCK was a multicenter, prospective, observational survey realized between 04 and 10.2016 in 48 centers in France. Patients were included if they met the criteria below: – a low
cardiac output(SBP 2 on TTE or Swan-Ganz); – clinical, radiological, biological (NTproBNP or BNP), echocardiography, or invasive hemodynamics overload signs; – a clinical and/or biological hypoperfusion (lactates > 2 mmol/L, hepatic or renal failure). Results A total of 772 patients were included (male 72%, median age 66y): 678 with SBP P = 0.001), but less by
dobutamine(71 vs 80%, P = 0.002), norepinephrine (21 vs 58%, P = 0.01), epinephrine (4 vs 13%, P = 0.012), invasive mechanical ventilation (15 vs 41%, P P P = 0.035). At 30 days, no difference in mortality, heart transplantation and/or VAD implantation was observed ( Fig. 1 ). Conclusion Normotensive patients with low
cardiac output, overload and hypoperfusion signs present similar prognosis to classical CS. So, current definitions for CS could be challenged to avoid underestimate these patients.
Keywords:
-
Correction
-
Source
-
Cite
-
Save
0
References
0
Citations
NaN
KQI