ArticleJournal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions2025
The Utility and Validation of SCAI-CSWG Stages in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction-Related Cardiogenic Shock.
Article in Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- In-Hospital and Long-Term Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Categorized as SCAI Shock Stage B.Circulation reports · 2026Article
- Persistent Shock After Successful PCI Due to CPR-Related Internal Mammary Artery Hemorrhage.JACC. Case reports · 2026Article
- Short-Term Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support in Acute Coronary Syndrome with Cardiogenic Shock: Which Device to Choose?Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Review
- Phenotyping cardiogenic shock: an insight from the gulf cardiogenic shock registry.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- Clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock patients with and without out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a Gulf region registry analysis.Resuscitation plus · 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
37 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock (AMICS) stratified by the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions (SCAI) shock stages in the Gulf region are not well known. Methods: We analyzed data from patients with AMICS presenting to multiple centers across the Gulf region between January 2020 and December 2022. Patients were grouped according to SCAI-Cardiogenic Shock Working Group classification: group 1 (SCAI shock stages B/C) and group 2 (SCAI shock stages D/E). Primary end points were survival at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Both univariate and multivariate statistical methods were employed in the analysis. Results: A total of 1513 patients from the Gulf Cardiogenic Shock registry, were included with 31.1% in group 1 and 68.9% in group 2. The median follow-up was 6 months. Survival rates in group 1 were 87%, 72%, 56%, and 48% at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months, respectively, whereas group 2 exhibited survival rates of 66%, 29%, 14%, and 4%, respectively, over the same periods. Survival progressively declined with advancing SCAI shock stages, with stage B having the highest survival rates and stage E the lowest ( Conclusions: This is the first study to validate SCAI-Cardiogenic Shock Working Group stages in a large cohort of patients with AMICS. The SCAI shock staging classification was significantly associated with higher short- and long-term mortality in this cohort, with patients in more advanced stages (D/E) experiencing markedly worse survival outcomes. These findings underscore the utility of SCAI staging in stratifying long-term risk among AMICS patients in the Gulf region. Identification of cardiogenic shock patients at SCAI stages D and E with early hemodynamic monitoring and treating them aggressively with newer mechanical circulatory support in the early stages may improve patient survival.
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.