Risk factors and key points in cardiogenic shock

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.52692/1857-0011.2025.2-82.11

Keywords:

cardiogenic shock, echocardiography, PiCCO, risk factor

Abstract

Cardiogenic shock is an acute, complex, and multifactorial syndrome caused by severe cardiac dysfunction leading to low cardiac output and tissue hypoperfusion. Identified risk factors (RFs) include: age >75 years, female sex, anterior or extensive acute myocardial infarction (AMI), angina pectoris, peripheral vascular disease, ejection fraction (EF) <30%, mitral regurgitation, and diabetes mellitus. Early diagnosis, advanced hemodynamic monitoring (HM) using PiCCO, identification of mortality-associated RFs, and guidance of fluid and vasopressor therapy are key points in CS management with a major impact on reducing mortality. The aim of our study was to assess mortality-associated RFs in CS and demonstrate the benefit of advanced HM via PiCCO in optimizing treatment and improving outcomes. Out of 86 analyzed parameters, we identified: 6 common RFs for both groups (PiCCO and ECHO): NT-proBNP >4N, acute pulmonary edema, cerebral edema, troponin >2N, total bilirubin >4N, creatinine >2N; 7 PiCCO-specific RFs: VO₂ <100 ml/min, DO₂ <250 ml/min, coma, right ventricular AMI, ERO₂ >60%, PaCO₂ >50 mmHg, hemoglobin <9.0 g/dL; 9 ECHO-specific RFs: hepatomegaly, oliguria <30 ml/h, pyelonephritis, transmural AMI, hepatic failure, stroke, inferior and anteroinferior AMI, lactate >2 mmol/L. All patients with ≥5 RFs (PiCCO group) and ≥7 RFs (ECHO group) died (100%). Male patients had a higher mortality rate (35.8% vs. 26.4%). PiCCO monitoring enabled individualized guidance of fluid and vasopressor therapy, early detection of cardiogenic pulmonary edema, and differentiation from non-cardiogenic forms. Mortality was significantly lower in the PiCCO group compared to the ECHO group (36.5% vs. 62.3%, p=0.0112).

Author Biographies

Lucia GIRBU, Nicolae Testemițanu University of Medicine and Pharmacy; Municipal Clinical Hospital “Holy Trinity”

Doctor of Medical Sciences, University Assistant

Liviu GRIB , Nicolae Testemițanu University of Medicine and Pharmacy

Doctor of Medical Sciences, Associate Professor

Elena SAMOHVALOV , Nicolae Testemițanu University of Medicine and Pharmacy

Doctor of Medical Sciences, Associate Professor

Alexandra GRAJDIERU, Nicolae Testemițanu University of Medicine and Pharmacy

Doctor of Medical Sciences, Associate Professor

Iraida CAMERZAN, Nicolae Testemițanu University of Medicine and Pharmacy; Municipal Clinical Hospital “Holy Trinity”

PhD student, physician AT

References

Chioncel O, et al. Epidemiology, pathophysiology and contemporary management of cardiogenic shock – a position statement from the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology. European Journal of Heart Failure, 2020;(8:(13):15-41.

Jentzer JC, et al. Shock in the cardiac intensive care unit: Changes in epidemiology and prognosis over time. Am Heart J, 2021;94-104.

Polyzogopoulou E, et al. Early Recognition and Risk Stratification in Cardiogenic Shock: Well Begun Is Half Done. J Clin Med. 2023; 12(7):2643.

Hanson ID, et al. SCAI Shock Classification in Acute Myocardial Infarction: Insights from the National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv, 2020;96:1137-42.

Samsky MD, et al. Cardiogenic Shock After Acute Myocardial Infarction A Review. JAMA, 2021;326(18):1840-50.

González-Pacheco H, et al. Cardiogenic Shock Among Patients with and without Acute Myocardial Infarction in a Latin American Country: A Single-Institution Study. Glob Heart, 2021;16(1):78.

Jung, C, et al. Management of cardiogenic shock: state- of-the-art. Intensive Care Med, 2024;50(11):1814-29.

Zapata L, et al. Cardiogenic shock as a health issue. Physiology, classification, and detection, 2024; 48(5):282-95.

Waksman R, et al. Standardized Definitions for Cardiogenic Shock Research and Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices: Scientific Expert Panel From the Shock Academic Research Consortium (SHARC). Circulation, 2023;148(14):1113-26.

Bruno RR, et al. Pharmacological treatment of cardiogenic shock – A state of the art. Pharmacol Ther, 2022; 240 (108230).

Laghlam D, et al. Management of cardiogenic shock: a narrative review. Annals of Intensive Care, 2024;14:45.

Lauridsen MD, et al. Positive predictive value of International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision, diagnosis codes for cardiogenic, hypovolemic, and septic shock. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 2015; 15(23).

Vahdatpour C, et al. J Am Heart Assoc, 2019;8(8).

Ostadal P, Belohlavek J, What is cardiogenic shock? New clinical criteria urgently needed. Curr Opin Crit Care, 2024; 6;30(4):319-23.

Nickson, C. Pulmonary Artery Catheter. Life in the Fast Lane, 2024. https://litfl.com/pulmonary-artery-catheter/.

Zhang YB, et al. Application of pulse index continuous cardiac output system in elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: A prospective randomized study. World J Clin Cases, 2019;7(11):1291-301.

Sinha SS, et al. Concise Clinical Guidance: An ACC Expert Consensus Statement on the Evaluation and Management of Cardiogenic Shock A Report of the American College of Cardiology Solution Set Oversight Committee. JACC, 2025;85(16):1618-41.

Diepen SV, et al. Contemporary Management of Cardiogenic Shock. Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 2017; 136 (17).

Jentzer JC, et al. Shock in the cardiac intensive care unit: Changes in epidemiology and prognosis over time. Am Heart J, 2021;232:94-104.

Pareek N, Dworakowski R, Webb I, Barash J. SCAI Cardiogenic Shock Classification after out of Hospital Cardiac Arrest and Association with Outcome. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2021;97:E288-E297.

Naidu SS, et al. SCAI SHOCK Stage Classification Expert Consensus Update: A Review and Incorporation of Validation Studies. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2022;79(9):933-46.

Hanson ID, et al. SCAI Shock Classification in Acute Myocardial Infarction: Insights from the National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2020;96:1137-42.

Jentzer JC, et al. Influence of Cardiac Arrest and SCAI Shock Stage on Cardiac Intensive Care Unit Mortality. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2020;96:1350-59.

Lawler PR, et al. The Range of Cardiogenic Shock Survival by Clinical Stage: Data from the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network Registry. Crit Care Med, 2021;49:1293-302.

Chang K, et al. Korean Society of Myocardial Infarction Expert Consensus Document on Revascularization for Acute Myocardial Infarction. Korean Circ J, 2021;51(4):289-307.

Maimaitiming M, et al. Risk factors for cardiogenic shock incidence and mortality after acute myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Communications Medicine, 2025;5 (200).

Published

2026-03-26

Issue

Section

Research Article

Categories