In line with the ESC mission, newly presented content is made available to all for a limited time (4 months for ESC Congress, 3 months for other events). ESC Professional Members, Association Members (Ivory & above) benefit from year-round access to all the resources from their respective Association, and to all content from previous years. Fellows of the ESC (FESC), and Professionals in training or under 40 years old, who subscribed to a Young Combined Membership package benefit from access to all ESC 365 content from all events, all editions, all year long. Find out more about ESC Memberships here.
Current use and impact on 30-day mortality of pulmonary artery catheter in cardiogenic shock patients: results from the CardShock Study.
Authors : M Rivas Lasarte (Barcelona,ES), J Sans-Rosello (Barcelona,ES), M Vila (Barcelona,ES), H Tolppanen (Helsinki,FI), J Lassus (Helsinki,FI), M Lindholm (Copenhagen,DK), A Mebazaa (Paris,FR), V-P Harjola (Helsinki,FI), A Sionis (Barcelona,ES)
M Rivas Lasarte1
1Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Cardiology Department - Barcelona - Spain
2Helsinki University Central Hospital, Cardiology department - Helsinki - Finland
3Rigshospitalet - Copenhagen University Hospital - Copenhagen - Denmark
4Inserm UMR-S 942 - Paris - France
On behalf: CardShock Investigators
European Journal of Heart Failure
Background: Cardiogenic Shock (CS) is the most life-threatening manifestation of heart failure (HF). Its complexity and high mortality, would justify the need for invasive monitoring with a pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) that may allow the clinician to establish an accurate diagnosis at all times and to guide treatment. Randomized clinical trials have failed to demonstrate clinical benefit of PAC use in critically ill patients, but CS patients were grossly underrepresented.
Purpose: This study aims to describe the real-world use of PAC in a contemporary cohort of patients with CS and to evaluate its prognostic impact on 30-day mortality.
Methods: This is a sub-study of the previous published CardShock study an observational, prospective, multicenter cohort of patients with CS. The use of PAC was within the discretion of the physician in charge.
Results: The CardShock study included 219 patients; PAC was used in 82 patients (37.4%). The management was more aggressive in those with PAC (table). Overall 30-day mortality was 38.6%, with no differences between PAC and non-PAC patients (figure).PAC use did not affect mortality [OR: 1.24 (95% CI 0.60-2.56) p= 0.56], in a multivariate analysis adjusted by a propensity score (including the history of prior myocardial infarction, inotropic use at admission, etiology of shock, mechanical ventilation, and assist device use).
Conclusions: This study revealed that PAC is used in 1/3 of CS patients. They are characterized by a prior poorer prognosis and by more aggressive management. PAC use was not associated with 30-day mortality.
(82 patients, 37.4%)
(137 patients, 62.6%)
SBP at admission, mean (SD)
Inotrope use at admission*, n (%)
Confusion at admission, n (%)
Baseline LVEF, mean (SD)
IABP, n (%)
ECMO and LVAD, n (%)
Mechanical ventilation, n (%)
30-day mortality, n (%)
PAC: pulmonary artery catheter; SD: standard deviation; SBP: systolic blood pressure; HR: heart rate; ACS: acute coronary syndrome, LVEF: left ventricular ejection fraction, IABP: intra-aortic balloon pump; ECMO: extracorporeal membrane oxygenation; LVAD: left ventricular assist device, CRR: continuous renal replacement.
*Inotrope use refers to dobutamine, adrenaline, levosimendan or milrinone use.
ESC 365 is supported by Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim and Lilly Alliance, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer Alliance, Novartis Pharma AG and Vifor Pharma in the form of educational grants. The sponsors were not involved in the development of this platform and had no influence on its content.
Our mission: To reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease