Observational studyESC heart failure2024
Clinical phenotypes of cardiogenic shock survivors: insights into late host responses and long-term outcomes.
Observational study in ESC heart failure, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Invasive ventilation and association with outcomes in heart failure-related cardiogenic shock.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026Article
- A fast integrative clustering and feature selection approach for high-dimensional multiview data.Statistical methods in medical research · 2026Article
- Special topics: heart failure-related cardiogenic shock, valvular heart disease and end-stage renal disease. Part 4 of the International Expert Opinion Series on Acute Heart Failure Management.Heart failure reviews · 2025Review
- Identifying distinct clusters of ICU survivors by integrating demographic, pre-admission quality of life, and clinical data: a large prospective cohort study.Intensive care medicine · 2025Article
- In a quest for better outcome prediction in cardiogenic shock.ESC heart failure · 2025Article
- Profiling of Cardiogenic Shock: Incorporating Machine Learning Into Bedside Management.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2025Review
- Why Molecular Subphenotyping Is Needed in Cardiogenic Shock and How to Accomplish This.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2025Article
- 2024 update in heart failure.ESC heart failure · 2025Review
- Mixed Cardiogenic-Vasodilatory Shock: Current Insights and Future Directions.JACC. Advances · 2025Review
- Value of APACHE II, SOFA and CardShock scoring as predictive tools for cardiogenic shock: A single-centre pilot study.ESC heart failure · 2024Observational
- Management of cardiogenic shock: state-of-the-art.Intensive care medicine · 2024Review
- Biomarkers in cardiogenic shock: old pals, new friends.Annals of intensive care · 2024Review
- Clinical phenotypes of cardiogenic shock survivors: insights into late host responses and long-term outcomes.ESC heart failure · 2024Observational
- Predictors of acute kidney injury among octogenarians undergoing open mitral valve repair.Archives of medical sciences. Atherosclerotic diseases · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
aimsAn elevated risk of adverse events persists for years in cardiogenic shock (CS) survivors with high mortality rate and physical/mental disability. This study aims to link clinical CS-survivor phenotypes with distinct late host-response patterns at intensive care unit (ICU) discharge and long-term outcomes using model-based clustering. METHODS AND
resultsIn the original prospective, observational, international French and European Outcome Registry in Intensive Care Units (FROG-ICU) study, ICU patients with CS on admission were identified (N = 228). Among them, 173 were discharged alive from the ICU and included in the current study. Latent class analysis was applied to identify distinct CS-survivor phenotypes at ICU discharge using 15 readily available clinical and laboratory variables. The primary endpoint was 1 year of mortality after ICU discharge. Secondary endpoints were readmission and physical/mental disability [short form-36 questionnaire (SF-36) score] within 1 year after ICU discharge. Two distinct phenotypes at ICU discharge were identified (A and B). Patients in Phenotype B (38%) were more anaemic and had higher circulating levels of lactate, sustained kidney injury, and persistent elevation in plasma markers of inflammation, myocardial fibrosis, and endothelial dysfunction compared with Phenotype A. They had also a higher rate of non-ischaemic origin of CS and right ventricular dysfunction on admission. CS survivors in Phenotype B had higher 1 year of mortality compared with Phenotype A (P = 0.045, Kaplan-Meier analysis). When adjusted for traditional risk factors (i.e. age, severity of illness, and duration of ICU stay), Phenotype B was independently associated with 1 year of mortality [adjusted hazard ratio = 2.83 (95% confidence interval 1.21-6.60); P = 0.016]. There was a significantly lower physical quality of life in Phenotype B patients at 3 months (i.e. SF-36 physical component score).
conclusionsA phenotype with sustained inflammation, myocardial fibrosis, and endothelial dysfunction at ICU discharge was identified from readily available data and was independently associated with poor long-term outcomes in CS survivors.
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.