Observational studyEuropean heart journal. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy2025
Inotropes and mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock: an instrumental variable analysis from the SWEDEHEART registry.
Observational study in European heart journal. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hypoperfusion-Shock Continuum in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure.Circulation. Heart failure · 2026Review
- Cardiogenic shock in the course of myocardial infarction: the results of the Shock-POL registry.ESC heart failure · 2026Article
- Myocardial stunning: mechanisms, molecular insights, and gaps in knowledge.Bioscience reports · 2025Review
- Inotropes and mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock: more questions than answers.European heart journal. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe use of inotropic agents in treating cardiogenic shock (CS) remains controversial. This study investigates the effect of inotropes on 30-day mortality in CS patients using data from the SWEDEHEART registry (The Swedish Web-system for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-based care in Heart disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies). METHODS AND
resultsData were sourced from the national SWEDEHEART registry for all CS patients in Sweden from 2000 to 2022. The primary endpoint was 30-day all-cause mortality. We employed multilevel Cox proportional-hazards regression with instrumental variable and inverse probability weighting propensity score to adjust for confounders. The treatment-preference instrument was the quintile of preference for inotrope use at the treating hospital. A total of 16 214 patients (60.5% men, 39.5% women) were included; 23.5% had diabetes, 10.2% had a previous myocardial infarction (MI), and 13.8% had previous heart failure (HF). The median age was 70 years [interquartile range (IQR); 19], with 66.4% over 70. Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) caused CS in 82.9%. Inotropes were administered to 43.8% of patients, while 56.2% did not receive them. There were 7875 (48.1%) deaths. Patients treated with inotropes were, on average, 2 years younger and more likely to have ACS, while those not treated had more previous MI and were less likely to undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The number of CS cases decreased by 12% per year (Ptrend < 0.001), and inotrope use increased by 5% per year (Ptrend < 0.001). Unadjusted mortality in CS rose by 2% per calendar year (Ptrend < 0.001). Inotropes were associated with higher mortality [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.72; 95% CI 1.26-2.35; P = 0.001], with significant interactions between inotrope treatment, age, and diagnosis (Pinteraction < 0.001 and Pinteraction = 0.018).
conclusionIn this observational study, inotropes were linked to higher mortality in CS patients, particularly those younger than 70. While CS cases decreased, inotrope use and mortality increased in Sweden.
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.