Aviso: para depositar documentos, por favor, inicia sesión e identifícate con tu cuenta de correo institucional de la UCM con el botón MI CUENTA UCM. No emplees la opción AUTENTICACIÓN CON CONTRASEÑA
 

External validation and comparison of the CardShock and IABP-SHOCK II risk scores in real-world cardiogenic shock patients

dc.contributor.authorRivas Lasarte, Mercedes
dc.contributor.authorNoriega, Francisco J.
dc.contributor.authorViana Tejedor, Ana Teresa
dc.contributor.authorSionis, Alessandro
dc.date.accessioned2024-02-09T10:34:36Z
dc.date.available2024-02-09T10:34:36Z
dc.date.issued2020-06-10
dc.description.abstractMortality from cardiogenic shock remains high and early recognition and risk stratification are mandatory for optimal patient allocation and to guide treatment strategy. The CardShock and the Intra-Aortic Balloon Counterpulsation in Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock (IABP-SHOCK II) risk scores have shown good results in predicting short-term mortality in cardiogenic shock. However, to date, they have not been compared in a large cohort of ischaemic and non-ischaemic real-world cardiogenic shock patients. The Red-Shock is a multicentre cohort of non-selected cardiogenic shock patients. We calculated the CardShock and IABP-SHOCK II risk scores in each patient and assessed discrimination and calibration. Results: We included 696 patients. The main cause of cardiogenic shock was acute coronary syndrome, occurring in 62% of the patients. Compared with acute coronary syndrome patients, non-acute coronary syndrome patients were younger and had a lower proportion of risk factors but higher rates of renal insufficiency; intra-aortic balloon pump was also less frequently used (31% vs 56%). In contrast, non-acute coronary syndrome patients were more often treated with mechanical circulatory support devices (11% vs 3%, p=0.001 for both). Both risk scores were good predictors of in-hospital mortality in acute coronary syndrome patients and had similar areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (area under the curve: 0.742 for the CardShock vs 0.752 for IABP-SHOCK II, p=0.65). Their discrimination performance was only modest when applied to non-acute coronary syndrome patients (0.648 vs 0.619, respectively, p=0.31). Calibration was acceptable for both scores (Hosmer-Lemeshow p=0.22 for the CardShock and 0.68 for IABP-SHOCK II). In our cohort, both the CardShock and the IABP-SHOCK II risk scores were good predictors of in-hospital mortality in acute coronary syndrome-related cardiogenic shock.
dc.description.departmentDepto. de Medicina
dc.description.facultyFac. de Medicina
dc.description.refereedTRUE
dc.description.statuspub
dc.identifier.citationRivas-Lasarte M, Sans-Roselló J, Collado-Lledó E, González-Fernández V, Noriega FJ, Hernández-Pérez FJ, Fernández-Martínez J, Ariza A, Lidón RM, Viana-Tejedor A, Segovia-Cubero J, Harjola VP, Lassus J, Thiele H, Sionis A. External validation and comparison of the CardShock and IABP-SHOCK II risk scores in real-world cardiogenic shock patients. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. 2020 Jan 31:2048872619895230. doi: 10.1177/2048872619895230
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/2048872619895230
dc.identifier.essn2048-8734
dc.identifier.issn2048-8726
dc.identifier.officialurlhttps://academic.oup.com/ehjacc/article/10/1/16/6145500?login=true
dc.identifier.pmid32004078
dc.identifier.relatedurlhttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32004078/
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/100821
dc.issue.number1
dc.journal.titleEuropean Heart Journal – Acute CardioVascular Care
dc.language.isoeng
dc.page.final24
dc.page.initial16
dc.publisherOxford University Press
dc.rights.accessRightsrestricted access
dc.subject.cdu616.12
dc.subject.keywordCardiogenic shock
dc.subject.keywordMortality
dc.subject.keywordAcute coronary syndrome
dc.subject.keywordPrognosis
dc.subject.keywordScores
dc.subject.ucmCiencias Biomédicas
dc.subject.unesco32 Ciencias Médicas
dc.titleExternal validation and comparison of the CardShock and IABP-SHOCK II risk scores in real-world cardiogenic shock patients
dc.typejournal article
dc.type.hasVersionVoR
dc.volume.number10
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isAuthorOfPublication796635b3-1e3c-41b3-b33c-e1acb2477a48
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery796635b3-1e3c-41b3-b33c-e1acb2477a48

Download

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Validación del CARD SHOCK EHJ ACC 2020.pdf
Size:
539.51 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format

Collections