Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31339509›Full record

Trial reportJAMA cardiology2019

Demographics, Care Patterns, and Outcomes of Patients Admitted to Cardiac Intensive Care Units: The Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network Prospective North American Multicenter Registry of Cardiac Critical Illness.

Erin A Bohula, Jason N Katz, Sean van Diepen, Carlos L Alviar, Vivian M Baird-Zars, Jeong-Gun Park, Christopher F Barnett, Gurjaspreet Bhattal, Gregory W Barsness, James A Burke and 25 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readClinical TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA cardiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 122 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
122citing papers in PubMed
27.0field-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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

122 citing papers in PubMed, 236 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Cardiogenic Shock and the Role of Critical Care Cardiology: Evidence, Models of Care, and Future Directions.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2026
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

35 authors at 19 institutions in 2 countries.

Erin A BohulaLevine Cardiac Intensive Care Unit, TIMI Study Group, Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Jason N KatzUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill.
Sean van DiepenDivision of Cardiology, Department of Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Carlos L AlviarUniversity of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
Vivian M Baird-ZarsLevine Cardiac Intensive Care Unit, TIMI Study Group, Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Jeong-Gun ParkLevine Cardiac Intensive Care Unit, TIMI Study Group, Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Christopher F BarnettDepartment of Cardiology, Medstar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC.
Gurjaspreet BhattalUniversity of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
Gregory W BarsnessMayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
James A BurkeLehigh Valley Health Network, Allentown, Pennsylvania.
Paul C CremerCleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio.
Jennifer CruzCooper University Hospital, Camden, New Jersey.
Lori B DanielsSulpizio Cardiovascular Center, University of California San Diego, La Jolla.
Andrew DeFilippisUniversity of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky.
Christopher B GrangerDuke University, Durham, North Carolina.
Steven HollenbergCooper University Hospital, Camden, New Jersey.
James M HorowitzNew York University Langone Health, New York.
Norma KellerNew York University Langone Health, New York.
Michael C KontosVirginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia.
Patrick R LawlerPeter Munk Cardiac Centre, Toronto General Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Venu MenonCleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio.
Thomas S MetkusJohns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland.
Jason NgNew York University Langone Health, New York.
Ryan OrgelUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill.
Christopher B OvergaardPeter Munk Cardiac Centre, Toronto General Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Nicholas PhreanerSulpizio Cardiovascular Center, University of California San Diego, La Jolla.
Robert O RoswellNew York University Langone Health, New York.
Steven P SchulmanJohns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland.
R Jeffrey SnellRush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois.
Michael A SolomonClinical Center and Cardiology Branch, Critical Care Medicine Department, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Bradley TernusMayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Wayne TymchakDivision of Cardiology, Department of Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Fnu VikramLehigh Valley Health Network, Allentown, Pennsylvania.
David A MorrowLevine Cardiac Intensive Care Unit, TIMI Study Group, Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network
NYU Langone Health · USHarvard University · USCleveland Clinic · USCooper University Hospital · USJohns Hopkins Hospital · USLehigh Valley Health Network · USMayo Clinic · USToronto General Hospital · CAUniversity of Alberta · CAUniversity of California, San Diego · USUniversity of Florida · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USDuke University · USMedStar Washington Hospital Center · USNational Institutes of Health · USRush University Medical Center · USThrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction Study Group · USUniversity of Louisville · USVirginia Commonwealth University · US

Funding

An Observational Study of Cardiac Critical Care Management in Multidisciplinary and Cardiac Intensive Care UnitsZIACL009027 · CLC · CLINICAL CENTER · PI SOLOMON, MICHAEL · 2018 to 2025
$0k
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Single-center and claims-based studies have described substantial changes in the landscape of care in the cardiac intensive care unit (CICU). Professional societies have recommended research to guide evidence-based CICU redesigns. Objective: To characterize patients admitted to contemporary, advanced CICUs. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study established the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network (CCCTN), an investigator-initiated multicenter network of 16 advanced, tertiary CICUs in the United States and Canada. For 2 months in each CICU, data for consecutive admissions were submitted to the central data coordinating center (TIMI Study Group). The data were collected and analyzed between September 2017 and 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Demographics, diagnoses, management, and outcomes. Results: Of 3049 participants, 1132 (37.1%) were women, 797 (31.4%) were individuals of color, and the median age was 65 years (25th and 75th percentiles, 55-75 years). Between September 2017 and September 2018, 3310 admissions were included, among which 2557 (77.3%) were for primary cardiac problems, 337 (10.2%) for postprocedural care, 253 (7.7%) for mixed general and cardiac problems, and 163 (4.9%) for overflow from general medical ICUs. When restricted to the initial 2 months of medical CICU admissions for each site, the primary analysis population included 3049 admissions with a high burden of noncardiovascular comorbidities. The top 2 CICU admission diagnoses were acute coronary syndrome (969 [31.8%]) and heart failure (567 [18.6%]); however, the proportion of acute coronary syndrome was highly variable across centers (15%-57%). The primary indications for CICU care included respiratory insufficiency (814 [26.7%]), shock (643 [21.1%]), unstable arrhythmia (521 [17.1%]), and cardiac arrest (265 [8.7%]). Advanced CICU therapies or monitoring were required for 1776 patients (58.2%), including intravenous vasoactive medications (1105 [36.2%]), invasive hemodynamic monitoring (938 [30.8%]), and mechanical ventilation (652 [21.4%]). The overall CICU mortality rate was 8.3% (95% CI, 7.3%-9.3%). The CICU indications that were associated with the highest mortality rates were cardiac arrest (101 [38.1%]), cardiogenic shock (140 [30.6%]), and the need for renal replacement therapy (51 [34.5%]). Notably, patients admitted solely for postprocedural observation or frequent monitoring had a mortality rate of 0.2% to 0.4%. Conclusions and Relevance: In a contemporary network of tertiary care CICUs, respiratory failure and shock predominated indications for admission and carried a poor prognosis. While patterns of practice varied considerably between centers, a substantial, low-risk population was identified. Multicenter collaborative networks, such as the CCCTN, could be used to help redesign cardiac critical care and to test new therapeutic strategies.

Indexed as

Disease ManagementRegistriesAgedCanadaCoronary Care UnitsCritical IllnessFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHeart DiseasesHospitalizationHospital MortalityHumansIncidenceMaleMiddle AgedProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID31339509
PMCPMC6659157
OpenAlexW2963718678

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.