Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16757723›Full record

Trial reportJAMA2006

Early revascularization and long-term survival in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction.

Judith S Hochman, Lynn A Sleeper, John G Webb, Vladimir Dzavik, Christopher E Buller, Philip Aylward, Jacques Col, Harvey D White, SHOCK Investigators

3 registry-linked trialsOpen access · greenAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 168 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
168citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
25.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT00000552 phase3completednot on this map

Shock Trial: Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock.

TypeinterventionalSponsorCarelon ResearchRan1994 to 2005ConditionsCardiovascular Diseases, Coronary Disease, Heart Diseases, Myocardial InfarctionArmsangioplasty, transluminal, percutaneous coronary, coronary artery bypass, thrombolytic therapy
NCT00417378 phase4completednot on this map

Left Ventricular Assist Device (Impella LP 2.5) vs. Intraaortic Balloon Counterpulsation (IABP) in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock and Acute Coronary Syndromes

TypeinterventionalSponsorDeutsches Herzzentrum MuenchenRan2004 to 2006Enrolled26ConditionsShock, Cardiogenic, Myocardial InfarctionArmsLeft Ventricular Assist Device Impella LP 2.5, Intraaortic Balloon Pump
NCT03635840 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

The Effects of Intra Aortic Balloon Pump Prior to Revascularization on Mortality of Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome Complicated With Cardiogenic Shock

TypeinterventionalSponsorIndonesia UniversityRan2018 to 2020Enrolled34ConditionsCardiogenic ShockArmsIntra Aortic Balloon Pump
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

168 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 699 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Applying DanGer Shock Eligibility Criteria to a Real-World Cohort of Cardiogenic Shock Patients.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2025
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

108 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Judith S HochmanCardiovascular Clinical Research Center, New York University School of Medicine, New York 10016, USA. judith.hochman@med.nyu.edu
Lynn A Sleeper
John G Webb
Vladimir Dzavik
Christopher E Buller
Philip Aylward
Jacques Col
Harvey D White
SHOCK Investigators
New York University · US

Funding

SHOCK TRIAL: LONG-TERM SURVIVAL AND STATISTICAL SUPPORTR01HL049970 · NHLBI · NEW ENGLAND RESEARCH INSTITUTES, INC. · PI SLEEPER, LYNN A · 1994 to 2004
$1.7M
EARLY REVASCULARIZATION FOR CARDIOGENIC SHOCKR01HL050020 · NHLBI · ST. LUKE'S-ROOSEVELT INST FOR HLTH SCIS · PI HOCHMAN, JUDITH S · 1994 to 1998
–
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL049970NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL050020NHLBI NIH HHS R01-HL49970
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextCardiogenic shock remains the major cause of death for patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction (MI). Although survival in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute MI has been shown to be significantly higher at 1 year in those receiving early revascularization vs initial medical stabilization, data demonstrating long-term survival are lacking.

objectiveTo determine if early revascularization affects long-term survival of patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute MI. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: The Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock (SHOCK) trial, an international randomized clinical trial enrolling 302 patients from April 1993 through November 1998 with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (mean [SD] age at randomization, 66 [11] years); long-term follow-up of vital status, conducted annually until 2005, ranged from 1 to 11 years (median for survivors, 6 years).

main outcome measuresAll-cause mortality during long-term follow-up.

resultsThe group difference in survival of 13 absolute percentage points at 1 year favoring those assigned to early revascularization remained stable at 3 and 6 years (13.1% and 13.2%, respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-0.97; log-rank P = .03). At 6 years, overall survival rates were 32.8% and 19.6% in the early revascularization and initial medical stabilization groups, respectively. Among the 143 hospital survivors, a group difference in survival also was observed (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.36-0.95; P = .03). The 6-year survival rates for the hospital survivors were 62.4% vs 44.4% for the early revascularization and initial medical stabilization groups, respectively, with annualized death rates of 8.3% vs 14.3% and, for the 1-year survivors, 8.0% vs 10.7%. There was no significant interaction between any subgroup and treatment effect.

conclusionsIn this randomized trial, almost two thirds of hospital survivors with cardiogenic shock who were treated with early revascularization were alive 6 years later. A strategy of early revascularization resulted in a 13.2% absolute and a 67% relative improvement in 6-year survival compared with initial medical stabilization. Early revascularization should be used for patients with acute MI complicated by cardiogenic shock due to left ventricular failure.

trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00000552.

Indexed as

Myocardial RevascularizationAgedAngioplasty, Balloon, CoronaryCoronary Artery BypassFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedMyocardial InfarctionShock, CardiogenicSurvival AnalysisSurvivorsThrombolytic Therapy

Identifiers

PMID16757723
PMCPMC1782030
OpenAlexW2129656997

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.