ArticleESC heart failure2025
Impact of standardized team-based care on cardiogenic shock outcomes over time.
Article in ESC heart failure, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cardiogenic shock in the course of myocardial infarction: the results of the Shock-POL registry.ESC heart failure · 2026Article
- Multimodal quantitative ultrasound for non-invasive assessment of renal allograft dysfunction: a prospective diagnostic study.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Impact of standardized team-based care on cardiogenic shock outcomes over time.ESC heart failure · 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
25 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsLimited data exist regarding the impact of standardized care on cardiogenic shock (CS) outcomes over time. We aimed to investigate the influence of multidisciplinary management on CS outcomes following implementation of team-based protocols in 2017.
methodsA total of 1453 consecutive patients enrolled into a single-centre CS registry were divided into two time periods, 2017-2019 versus 2020-2022. Baseline characteristics, management and outcomes were compared. The primary endpoint was adjusted in-hospital mortality. Multivariable regression analysis was performed to evaluate change in outcomes over time.
resultsCompared with 2017-2019, more patients with CS were treated in 2020-2022 (930 vs. 523; P < 0.01). They more often presented to the Level 1 centre (52% vs. 45%; P = 0.01), with a higher proportion of heart failure-related CS (72% vs. 58%; P < 0.01) and Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions B and C CS (64% vs. 49%; P < 0.01). They were less likely to be managed with percutaneous ventricular assist devices (11% vs. 24%; P < 0.01) but more likely to receive veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (14% vs. 4%; P < 0.01) and heart transplantation (9% vs. 4%; P < 0.04). No differences were noted in in-hospital mortality [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.81; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.56-1.16; P = 0.25], major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (aOR 1.21; 95% CI: 0.87-1.68; P = 0.26), stroke (aOR 1.11; 95% CI: 0.65-1.91; P = 0.71) or renal replacement therapy (aOR 0.95; 95% CI: 0.66-1.37; P = 0.77).
conclusionsStandardized care for CS was associated with consistent in-hospital mortality over time despite changes in presentation and management. Further research is needed to identify the optimal care model during the vulnerable post-discharge period.
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.