Why the study?
Clinician assessment of SCAI shock staging may differ from algorithmic application, and the implications of the 2022 SCAI criteria update remain incompletely defined.
How do clinician assessment and algorithmic application of the 2019 and 2022 SCAI shock stages compare in stratifying in-hospital mortality risk for patients with cardiogenic shock?
How do clinician assessment and algorithmic application of the 2019 and 2022 SCAI shock stages compare in stratifying in-hospital mortality risk for patients with cardiogenic shock?
The updated 2022 SCAI shock criteria algorithm, incorporating the vasoactive-inotropic score, refines risk stratification and more closely approximates clinician staging than the 2019 criteria.
Supports adopting the updated 2022 SCAI criteria for refined cardiogenic shock risk stratification.
Background: Algorithmic application of the 2019 Society of Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention (SCAI) shock stages effectively stratifies mortality risk for patients with cardiogenic shock. However, clinician assessment of SCAI staging may differ. Moreover, the implications of the 2022 SCAI criteria update remain incompletely defined. Methods: The Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network is a multicenter registry of cardiac intensive care units (CICUs). Between 2019 and 2021, participating centers (n=32) contributed at least a 2-month snapshot of consecutive medical CICU admissions. In-hospital mortality was assessed across 3 separate staging methods: clinician assessment, Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network algorithmic application of the 2019 SCAI criteria, and a revision of the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network application using the 2022 SCAI criteria. Results: Of 9612 admissions, 1340 (13.9%) presented with cardiogenic shock with in-hospital mortality of 35.2%. Both clinician and algorithm-based staging using the 2019 SCAI criteria identified a stepwise gradient of mortality risk (stage C–E: 19.0% to 83.7% and 14.6% to 52.2%, respectively; P trend <0.001 for each). Clinician assignment of SCAI stages identified higher risk patients compared with algorithm-based assignment (stage D: 49.9% versus 29.3%; stage E: 83.7% versus 52.2%). Algorithmic application of the 2022 SCAI criteria, with incorporation of the vasoactive-inotropic score, more closely approximated clinician staging (mortality for stage C-E: 21.9% to 70.5%; P trend <0.001). Conclusions: Both clinician and algorithm-based application of the 2019 SCAI stages identify a stepwise gradient of mortality risk, although clinician-staging may better allocate higher risk patients into advanced SCAI stages. Updated algorithmic staging using the 2022 SCAI criteria and vasoactive-inotropic score further refines risk stratification.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Patel et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: