ArticleESC heart failure2021
Sex differences in patients with cardiogenic shock.
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 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Sex differences in treatments and outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock: a systematic review and epidemiological meta-analysis.Critical care (London, England) · 2024Pooled it
- Sex disparities in revascularization strategies and mortality in infarct-related cardiogenic shock.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026Article
- Sex differences in patients with advanced heart failure: an analysis of the HELP-HF registry.ESC heart failure · 2026Article
- Sex differences in mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention: a contemporary nationwide registry and prospective cohort analysis.Annals of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Sex-Specific Differences in Management and Outcomes of Cardiogenic Shock Patients With and Without Ischemic Cardiomyopathy.Korean circulation journal · 2025Article
- Comparing the Outcomes of Cardiogenic Shock After Myocardial Infarction in Women Across Different Age Groups.Cureus · 2025Article
- Temporary Mechanical Support in Cardiogenic Shock Secondary to Heart Failure: An Evolving Paradigm.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- Sex Disparities in Cardiogenic Shock: Risk Factors, Treatment Intensity, and Mortality in a Single Latin American Country.Global heart · 2025Article
- Sex Differences in Management, Time to Intervention, and In-Hospital Mortality of Acute Myocardial Infarction and Non-Myocardial Infarction Related Cardiogenic Shock.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Sex Differences in Management, Time to Intervention, and In-Hospital Mortality of Acute Myocardial Infarction and Non-Myocardial Infarction Related Cardiogenic Shock.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024Article
- Italian Association of Hospital Cardiologists Position Paper 'Gender discrepancy: time to implement gender-based clinical management'.European heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology · 2024Article
- Review
- Recognizing patients as candidates for temporary mechanical circulatory support along the spectrum of cardiogenic shock.European heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology · 2023Article
- The Impact of Sex on Cardiogenic Shock Outcomes Following ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Sex-Related Differences in Short-Term Prognosis in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction-Related Cardiogenic Shock Receiving Impella Support in Japan: From the J-PVAD Registry.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
- Sex Differences in Acute Heart Failure Management: Is There a Gap in Treatment Quality?Current heart failure reports · 2023Review
- Gender Differences in Cardiogenic Shock Patients: Clinical Features, Risk Prediction, and Outcomes in a Hub Center.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Sex differences in patients with cardiogenic shock.ESC heart failure · 2021Article
- SCAI Expert Consensus Statement on Sex-Specific Considerations in Myocardial Revascularization.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & InterventionsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsDifferences between female and male patients in clinical presentation, causes and treatment of cardiogenic shock (CS) are poorly understood. We aimed to investigate sex differences in presentation with and treatment of CS. METHODS AND
resultsWe analysed data of 978 patients presenting with CS to a tertiary care hospital between October 2009 and October 2017. Multivariable adjusted logistic/Cox regression models were fitted to investigate the association between sex and clinical presentation, use of treatments and 30 day mortality. Median age was 70 years (interquartile range 58-79 years), and 295 (30.2%) patients were female. After adjustment for multiple relevant confounders, female patients were more likely to be older [odds ratio (OR) 1.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-1.42, P = 0.027], but other relevant presentation characteristics did not differ between both sexes. Despite the similar presentation, female patients were less likely to be treated with percutaneous left ventricular assist devices (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.64-0.94, P = 0.010), but more likely to be treated with catecholamines (OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.02-1.44, P = 0.033) or vasopressors (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.05-1.50, P = 0.012). A 30 day mortality risk in female patients was as high as in male patients (hazard ratio 1.08, 95% CI 1.00-1.18, P = 0.091).
conclusionsIn this large, contemporary cohort, clinical presentation was comparable in female and male patients, and both sexes were associated with a comparably high mortality risk. Nevertheless, female patients received different treatment for CS and were most importantly less likely to be treated with percutaneous left ventricular assist devices.
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.