ArticleESC heart failure2021
Mortality risk prediction in elderly patients with cardiogenic shock: results from the CardShock study.
Article in ESC heart failure, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Prognostic Value of Pre-Procedural and Post-Procedural Inflammatory-Oxidative Stress Biomarkers in Acute Coronary Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Pooled it
- Stress Hyperglycemia Ratio Predicts 28-Day Mortality in Patients with AMI Cardiogenic Shock: Insights from a Large-Scale Cohort.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Comparing the Outcomes of Cardiogenic Shock After Myocardial Infarction in Women Across Different Age Groups.Cureus · 2025Article
- A CLINICAL PREDICTION MODEL FOR SHORT-TERM PROGNOSIS IN PATIENTS WITH NON-ACUTE MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION-RELATED CARDIOGENIC SHOCK.Shock (Augusta, Ga.) · 2025Article
- Predicting In-Hospital Mortality in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Comparison of Machine Learning Approaches.Clinical cardiology · 2025Article
- Frailty and In-Hospital Outcomes for Management of Cardiogenic Shock without Acute Myocardial Infarction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Age and associated outcomes among patients receiving venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation-analysis of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization registry.Intensive care medicine · 2023Article
- Age as a predictor of clinical outcomes and determinant of therapeutic measures for emergency medical services treated cardiogenic shock.Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2023Article
- Machine Learning for Prediction of Outcomes in Cardiogenic Shock.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Sex differences in patients with cardiogenic shock.ESC heart failure · 2021Article
- Mortality risk prediction in elderly patients with cardiogenic shock: results from the CardShock study.ESC heart failure · 2021Article
- A Review of Prognosis Model Associated With Cardiogenic Shock After Acute Myocardial Infarction.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors at 11 institutions in 8 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThis study aimed to assess the utility of contemporary clinical risk scores and explore the ability of two biomarkers [growth differentiation factor-15 (GDF-15) and soluble ST2 (sST2)] to improve risk prediction in elderly patients with cardiogenic shock. METHODS AND
resultsPatients (n = 219) from the multicentre CardShock study were grouped according to age (elderly ≥75 years and younger). Characteristics, management, and outcome between the groups were compared. The ability of the CardShock risk score and the IABP-SHOCK II score to predict in-hospital mortality and the additional value of GDF-15 and sST2 to improve risk prediction in the elderly was evaluated. The elderly constituted 26% of the patients (n = 56), with a higher proportion of women (41% vs. 21%, P < 0.05) and more co-morbidities compared with the younger. The primary aetiology of shock in the elderly was acute coronary syndrome (84%), with high rates of percutaneous coronary intervention (87%). Compared with the younger, the elderly had higher in-hospital mortality (46% vs. 33%; P = 0.08), but 1 year post-discharge survival was excellent in both age groups (90% in the elderly vs. 88% in the younger). In the elderly, the risk prediction models demonstrated an area under the curve of 0.75 for the CardShock risk score and 0.71 for the IABP-SHOCK II score. Incorporating GDF-15 and sST2 improved discrimination for both risk scores with areas under the curve ranging from 0.78 to 0.84.
conclusionsElderly patients with cardiogenic shock have higher in-hospital mortality compared with the younger, but post-discharge outcomes are similar. Contemporary risk scores proved useful for early mortality risk prediction also in the elderly, and risk stratification could be further improved with biomarkers such as GDF-15 or sST2.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.