ArticleThe American journal of cardiology2025
Patient Characteristics, Management and Long-Term Outcomes of Patients With Cardiogenic Shock at a Large Safety Net Hospital.
Article in The American journal of cardiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Management Patterns and Outcomes of Invasive Mechanical Ventilation in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock.JACC. Advances · 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
21 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Data regarding cardiogenic shock (CS) from safety-net hospitals serving socioeconomically-disadvantaged patients are limited. In addition, little is known regarding long-term outcomes and management of heart failure-related CS (HF-CS), a population potentially especially vulnerable to adverse social determinants of health (SDOH). A single-center retrospective cohort study of patients with Stage C, D, or E CS at a public safety-net hospital between 2017 and 2023 was performed. Management and outcomes were compared between patients with HF-CS and myocardial infarction-CS (AMI-CS). The primary outcome was survival through 2 years. The cohort included 378 patients (median age 57y, 44% Black race, 35% Hispanic ethnicity, 81% HF-CS, 19% AMI-CS); 23% received mechanical circulatory support. Thirty-day mortality was lower among patients with HF-CS than AMI-CS (16% vs 28%; HR 0.50 [95% CI 0.30 to 0.84], p = 0.01]). In contrast, mortality from 31 days through 2 years was higher after HF-CS (45% vs 22%, HR 1.94 [1.11 to 3.38], p = 0.02). At long-term follow-up, 53% of survivors were on beta blockers and 32% on no guideline-directed medical therapies. Eighteen patients (5%) received transplant or left ventricular assist device, all of whom had HF-CS and survived through available follow up (median 2.3y [0.9 to 4.0]). In conclusion, in a large safety-net hospital serving a diverse population with adverse SDOH, HF-CS was much more common than AMI-CS, with lower short-term but higher long-term mortality in HF-CS. Use of advanced therapies was low, with favorable survival among patients who received these. These results highlight the importance of expanding access to specialized heart failure care for socially vulnerable patients with CS.
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.