ArticleAcute and critical care2026
Prognostic validation and risk stratification of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions cardiogenic shock classification in a large, real-world intensive care unit cohort in South Korea.
Article in Acute and critical care, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCardiogenic shock (CS) imparts a high mortality rate, yet a standardized classification of its severity remains lacking. The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) proposed a five-stage classification scheme to improve risk stratification, but its prognostic value in real-world intensive care unit (ICU) populations is still insufficiently validated.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 3,074 adults admitted to the medical and cardiovascular ICUs under the Division of Cardiology at a tertiary academic medical center between 2010 and 2019. SCAI shock stages (A-E) were assigned at admission using data on hemodynamic instability, hypoperfusion, clinical deterioration, and refractory shock. The primary outcome was ICU mortality.
resultsICU mortality rates across stages A-E were 0.5%, 4.3%, 5.2%, 18.8%, and 53.2% (P<0.001). Compared to stage A, higher stages were independently associated with mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 3.93-31.58). The discriminatory ability of the SCAI CS classification was moderate (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC], 0.787) but improved markedly with the addition of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores (AUROC, 0.929).
conclusionsThe SCAI CS classification offers clear, incremental risk stratification of ICU mortality. When combined with global severity scores, it provides superior prognostic accuracy, supporting its routine use in the management and study of 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.