Key result
Persistent-high first-day lactate linked to ~481% higher in-hospital mortality vs low-stable trajectory in cardiogenic shock.
Why the study?
Lactate in cardiogenic shock is commonly summarized by a single measurement or two-point clearance, but its first-day pattern may offer a more interpretable account of early clinical evolution.
Do high or persistent first-day lactate trajectories increase subsequent in-hospital mortality in adults with cardiogenic shock?
Cohort (n=2,657)
Yes
Do high or persistent first-day lactate trajectories increase subsequent in-hospital mortality in adults with cardiogenic shock?
Odds Ratio: 5.81 (95% CI 3.57–9.46)
Absolute Event Rate: 72.88% vs 24.34%
p-value: p=<0.001
First-day lactate trajectories identify distinct risk profiles for in-hospital mortality in cardiogenic shock, though simpler last-lactate summaries provide better discrimination for pure prediction.
Persistent-high lactate trajectory was associated with higher mortality in cardiogenic shock; hypothesis-generating for dynamic stratification, does not yet inform practice.
Background Lactate in cardiogenic shock is commonly summarized by a single measurement or a two-point estimate of clearance, although its first-day pattern may offer a more interpretable account of early clinical evolution. We examined whether first-day lactate trajectories identify reproducible patterns associated with subsequent mortality. Methods This retrospective multicohort study used MIMIC-IV for trajectory discovery and internal prediction modeling and eICU-CRD to evaluate transportability. Adults with a first ICU admission for cardiogenic shock and at least two lactate measurements within 24 h were eligible for trajectory construction. Primary analyses were restricted to patients alive and still hospitalized at a 24-hour landmark. Results Four patterns were identified among 2,181 eligible MIMIC-IV patients: low-stable, moderate-decreasing, high-decreasing, and persistent-high. The 24-hour landmark risk set included 2,015 patients, with subsequent mortality ranging from 24.34% to 72.88%. Compared with low-stable, adjusted odds ratios were 2.08 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.56–2.77] for high-decreasing and 5.81 (95% CI 3.57–9.46) for persistent-high. After centering each trajectory at its initial window, the increasing pattern remained associated with mortality after adjustment for initial lactate and clinical covariates (odds ratio 2.91, 95% CI 1.75–4.85, vs. the largest-decrease pattern). In foldwise cross-validation, the trajectory model had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.724 and an area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC) of 0.572. Last lactate and initial plus last lactate performed better (AUROC 0.734 and 0.736; AUPRC 0.592 and 0.594). Among 429 landmark-eligible eICU-CRD patients assigned to fixed MIMIC-IV centroids, mortality ranged from 25.49% to 78.12%; in 366 complete cases, the adjusted risk ratio for group 4 was 2.30 (95% CI 1.47–3.62). Conclusion First-day lactate trajectories provided a clinically interpretable framework for characterizing lactate burden and evolution after repeated testing. The low-stable and persistent-high extremes showed the most consistent cross-database separation, whereas the four-group partition should be interpreted as a descriptive continuum rather than four validated clinical risk classes. Simpler last-lactate summaries provided better discrimination when prediction alone was the objective.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xu et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Cardiogenic shock (n=2,657). Persistent-high first-day lactate trajectory vs. Low-stable lactate trajectory was evaluated on Subsequent in-hospital mortality at 24-hour landmark (OR 5.81, 95% CI 3.57-9.46, p=<0.001). A persistent-high first-day lactate trajectory was associated with significantly higher subsequent in-hospital mortality compared to a low-stable trajectory in patients with cardiogenic shock (OR 5.81).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: