ArticleJACC. Advances2025
Pregnancy-Related Differences in Cardiogenic Shock: A National Analysis of Etiology, Risk Factors, and Outcomes.
Article in JACC. Advances, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCardiogenic shock is associated with high rates of mortality in pregnancy but remains understudied.
objectivesWe aim to understand the etiologies, risk factors, and outcomes of cardiogenic shock in women of childbearing age and identify whether there are pregnancy-related differences in procedural utilization.
methodsWe analyzed all delivery, pregnancy, and cardiogenic shock-related hospitalizations in reproductive-aged women (aged 18-45) using the National Inpatient Sample database (years 2016-2021).
resultsPregnant women with vs without cardiogenic shock had higher rates of cardiovascular comorbidities and were more likely to have preeclampsia (21.3% vs 6.5%), placental hemorrhage (26.6% vs 4.3%), fetal death (10.0% vs 0.51%), and maternal death (17.8% vs 0.01%). Comparing pregnant vs nonpregnant women with cardiogenic shock, pregnant women had lower comorbidity burden and rates of multiorgan failure but higher rates of pulmonary edema (8.9% vs 4.7%). Pregnant women with cardiogenic shock were more likely to undergo extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (adjusted OR: 1.67 [95% CI: 1.07-2.65]) and less likely to die during admission (adjusted OR: 0.43 [95% CI: 0.28-0.66]). Nonpregnant women had higher frequencies of cardiogenic shock from ischemic cardiomyopathy (CM) (25.4% vs 12.4%) and congenital heart disease (5.6% vs 1.8%), while most pregnant women had cardiogenic shock related to nonischemic CM, specifically peripartum CM (30.8%).
conclusionsThere are differences in cardiogenic shock etiology, comorbidities, and clinical complications among pregnant vs nonpregnant women. Findings suggest that unique pregnancy-specific factors may contribute to cardiogenic shock in pregnancy.
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.