BACKGROUND: Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is increasingly used in cardiogenic shock, but outcomes may differ between patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) or end-stage heart failure (ESHF). This study aimed to describe the characteristics of patients with cardiogenic shock due to AMI and ESHF. METHODS: Single-center study of consecutive patients with cardiogenic shock due to AMI (n = 26) and ESHF (n = 42) who underwent MCS (extracorporeal life support, Impella or temporary ventricular assist devices). Arterial and venous O2 content and CO2 tension (PCO2), O2-hemoglobin affinity (P50) were measured. Veno-arterial difference in PCO2/arterio-venous difference in O2 content ratio was derived. Acid-base balance was characterized by the Gilfix method. MCS-related complications that required intervention or surgery were collected. RESULTS: Patients with ESHF had lower ejection fraction, higher right and left-sided filling pressures, pulmonary artery pressure and vascular resistance, lower oxygen delivery (DO2) compared with AMI, which was not fully compensated by the increased hemoglobin P50. As a result, patients with ESHF had higher veno-arterial difference in PCO2 relative to arterio-venous difference in O2 content. Despite greater anerobic metabolism, patients with ESHF had less severe metabolic acidosis and base deficit compared with AMI, predominantly due to differences in strong ions. CONCLUSION: The cardiogenic shock phenotype in ESHF was distinct from AMI, characterized by higher filling and pulmonary artery pressures, lower DO2, greater anaerobic metabolism but less severe metabolic acidosis.
BACKGROUND: Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is increasingly used in cardiogenic shock, but outcomes may differ between patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) or end-stage heart failure (ESHF). This study aimed to describe the characteristics of patients with cardiogenic shock due to AMI and ESHF. METHODS: Single-center study of consecutive patients with cardiogenic shock due to AMI (n = 26) and ESHF (n = 42) who underwent MCS (extracorporeal life support, Impella or temporary ventricular assist devices). Arterial and venous O2 content and CO2 tension (PCO2), O2-hemoglobin affinity (P50) were measured. Veno-arterial difference in PCO2/arterio-venous difference in O2 content ratio was derived. Acid-base balance was characterized by the Gilfix method. MCS-related complications that required intervention or surgery were collected. RESULTS:Patients with ESHF had lower ejection fraction, higher right and left-sided filling pressures, pulmonary artery pressure and vascular resistance, lower oxygen delivery (DO2) compared with AMI, which was not fully compensated by the increased hemoglobin P50. As a result, patients with ESHF had higher veno-arterial difference in PCO2 relative to arterio-venous difference in O2 content. Despite greater anerobic metabolism, patients with ESHF had less severe metabolic acidosis and base deficit compared with AMI, predominantly due to differences in strong ions. CONCLUSION: The cardiogenic shock phenotype in ESHF was distinct from AMI, characterized by higher filling and pulmonary artery pressures, lower DO2, greater anaerobic metabolism but less severe metabolic acidosis.
Authors: Ankeet S Bhatt; David D Berg; Erin A Bohula; Carlos L Alviar; Vivian M Baird-Zars; Christopher F Barnett; James A Burke; Anthony P Carnicelli; Sunit-Preet Chaudhry; Lori B Daniels; James C Fang; Christopher B Fordyce; Daniel A Gerber; Jianping Guo; Jacob C Jentzer; Jason N Katz; Norma Keller; Michael C Kontos; Patrick R Lawler; Venu Menon; Thomas S Metkus; Jose Nativi-Nicolau; Nicholas Phreaner; Robert O Roswell; Shashank S Sinha; R Jeffrey Snell; Michael A Solomon; Sean Van Diepen; David A Morrow Journal: J Card Fail Date: 2021-10 Impact factor: 6.592
Authors: Behnam N Tehrani; Alexander G Truesdell; Mitchell A Psotka; Carolyn Rosner; Ramesh Singh; Shashank S Sinha; Abdulla A Damluji; Wayne B Batchelor Journal: JACC Heart Fail Date: 2020-11 Impact factor: 12.035
Authors: Tara L Jones; Michael C Tan; Vidang Nguyen; Kathleen E Kearney; Charles C Maynard; Emily Anderson; Claudius Mahr; James M McCabe Journal: ESC Heart Fail Date: 2020-03-11
Authors: Saraschandra Vallabhajosyula; Shannon M Dunlay; Gregory W Barsness; Saarwaani Vallabhajosyula; Shashaank Vallabhajosyula; Pranathi R Sundaragiri; Bernard J Gersh; Allan S Jaffe; Kianoush Kashani Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-09-18 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Joseph I Wang; Daniel Y Lu; Dmitriy N Feldman; Stephen A McCullough; Parag Goyal; Maria G Karas; Irina Sobol; Evelyn M Horn; Luke K Kim; Udhay Krishnan Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2020-11-23 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Shiva P Ponamgi; Muhammad Haisum Maqsood; Pranathi R Sundaragiri; Michael G DelCore; Arun Kanmanthareddy; Wissam A Jaber; William J Nicholson; Saraschandra Vallabhajosyula Journal: World J Cardiol Date: 2021-12-26
Authors: Saraschandra Vallabhajosyula; Aditi Shankar; Sri Harsha Patlolla; Abhiram Prasad; Malcolm R Bell; Jacob C Jentzer; Shilpkumar Arora; Saarwaani Vallabhajosyula; Bernard J Gersh; Allan S Jaffe; David R Holmes; Shannon M Dunlay; Gregory W Barsness Journal: ESC Heart Fail Date: 2020-04-02