Cargando…

Effect of Cardiogenic Shock Hospital Volume on Mortality in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock

BACKGROUND: Cardiogenic shock (CS) is associated with significant morbidity, and mortality rates approach 40% to 60%. Treatment for CS requires an aggressive, sophisticated, complex, goal‐oriented, therapeutic regimen focused on early revascularization and adjunctive supportive therapies, suggesting...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shaefi, Shahzad, O'Gara, Brian, Kociol, Robb D., Joynt, Karen, Mueller, Ariel, Nizamuddin, Junaid, Mahmood, Eitezaz, Talmor, Daniel, Shahul, Sajid
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4330069/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25559014
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.114.001462
_version_ 1782357536560644096
author Shaefi, Shahzad
O'Gara, Brian
Kociol, Robb D.
Joynt, Karen
Mueller, Ariel
Nizamuddin, Junaid
Mahmood, Eitezaz
Talmor, Daniel
Shahul, Sajid
author_facet Shaefi, Shahzad
O'Gara, Brian
Kociol, Robb D.
Joynt, Karen
Mueller, Ariel
Nizamuddin, Junaid
Mahmood, Eitezaz
Talmor, Daniel
Shahul, Sajid
author_sort Shaefi, Shahzad
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Cardiogenic shock (CS) is associated with significant morbidity, and mortality rates approach 40% to 60%. Treatment for CS requires an aggressive, sophisticated, complex, goal‐oriented, therapeutic regimen focused on early revascularization and adjunctive supportive therapies, suggesting that hospitals with greater CS volume may provide better care. The association between CS hospital volume and inpatient mortality for CS is unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS: We used the Nationwide Inpatient Sample to examine 533 179 weighted patient discharges from 2675 hospitals with CS from 2004 to 2011 and divided them into quartiles of mean annual hospital CS case volume. The primary outcome was in‐hospital mortality. Multivariate adjustments were performed to account for severity of illness, relevant comorbidities, hospital characteristics, and differences in treatment. Compared with the highest volume quartile, the adjusted odds ratio for inpatient mortality for persons admitted to hospitals in the lowest‐volume quartile (≤27 weighted cases per year) was 1.27 (95% CI 1.15 to 1.40), whereas for admission to hospitals in the low‐volume and medium‐volume quartiles, the odds ratios were 1.20 (95% CI 1.08 to 1.32) and 1.12 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.24), respectively. Similarly, improved survival was observed across quartiles, with an adjusted inpatient mortality incidence of 41.97% (95% CI 40.87 to 43.08) for hospitals with the lowest volume of CS cases and a drop to 37.01% (95% CI 35.11 to 38.96) for hospitals with the highest volume of CS cases. Analysis of treatments offered between hospital quartiles revealed that the centers with volumes in the highest quartile demonstrated significantly higher numbers of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting, percutaneous coronary intervention, or intra‐aortic balloon pump counterpulsation. A similar relationship was demonstrated with the use of mechanical circulatory support (ventricular assist devices and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation), for which there was significantly higher use in the higher volume quartiles. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated an association between lower CS case volume and higher mortality. There is more frequent use of both standard supportive and revascularization techniques at the higher volume centers. Future directions may include examining whether early stabilization and transfer improve outcomes of patients with CS who are admitted to lower volume centers.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4330069
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Blackwell Publishing Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43300692015-04-14 Effect of Cardiogenic Shock Hospital Volume on Mortality in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock Shaefi, Shahzad O'Gara, Brian Kociol, Robb D. Joynt, Karen Mueller, Ariel Nizamuddin, Junaid Mahmood, Eitezaz Talmor, Daniel Shahul, Sajid J Am Heart Assoc Original Research BACKGROUND: Cardiogenic shock (CS) is associated with significant morbidity, and mortality rates approach 40% to 60%. Treatment for CS requires an aggressive, sophisticated, complex, goal‐oriented, therapeutic regimen focused on early revascularization and adjunctive supportive therapies, suggesting that hospitals with greater CS volume may provide better care. The association between CS hospital volume and inpatient mortality for CS is unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS: We used the Nationwide Inpatient Sample to examine 533 179 weighted patient discharges from 2675 hospitals with CS from 2004 to 2011 and divided them into quartiles of mean annual hospital CS case volume. The primary outcome was in‐hospital mortality. Multivariate adjustments were performed to account for severity of illness, relevant comorbidities, hospital characteristics, and differences in treatment. Compared with the highest volume quartile, the adjusted odds ratio for inpatient mortality for persons admitted to hospitals in the lowest‐volume quartile (≤27 weighted cases per year) was 1.27 (95% CI 1.15 to 1.40), whereas for admission to hospitals in the low‐volume and medium‐volume quartiles, the odds ratios were 1.20 (95% CI 1.08 to 1.32) and 1.12 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.24), respectively. Similarly, improved survival was observed across quartiles, with an adjusted inpatient mortality incidence of 41.97% (95% CI 40.87 to 43.08) for hospitals with the lowest volume of CS cases and a drop to 37.01% (95% CI 35.11 to 38.96) for hospitals with the highest volume of CS cases. Analysis of treatments offered between hospital quartiles revealed that the centers with volumes in the highest quartile demonstrated significantly higher numbers of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting, percutaneous coronary intervention, or intra‐aortic balloon pump counterpulsation. A similar relationship was demonstrated with the use of mechanical circulatory support (ventricular assist devices and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation), for which there was significantly higher use in the higher volume quartiles. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated an association between lower CS case volume and higher mortality. There is more frequent use of both standard supportive and revascularization techniques at the higher volume centers. Future directions may include examining whether early stabilization and transfer improve outcomes of patients with CS who are admitted to lower volume centers. Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2015-01-05 /pmc/articles/PMC4330069/ /pubmed/25559014 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.114.001462 Text en © 2015 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley Blackwell. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Original Research
Shaefi, Shahzad
O'Gara, Brian
Kociol, Robb D.
Joynt, Karen
Mueller, Ariel
Nizamuddin, Junaid
Mahmood, Eitezaz
Talmor, Daniel
Shahul, Sajid
Effect of Cardiogenic Shock Hospital Volume on Mortality in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock
title Effect of Cardiogenic Shock Hospital Volume on Mortality in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock
title_full Effect of Cardiogenic Shock Hospital Volume on Mortality in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock
title_fullStr Effect of Cardiogenic Shock Hospital Volume on Mortality in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock
title_full_unstemmed Effect of Cardiogenic Shock Hospital Volume on Mortality in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock
title_short Effect of Cardiogenic Shock Hospital Volume on Mortality in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock
title_sort effect of cardiogenic shock hospital volume on mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4330069/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25559014
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.114.001462
work_keys_str_mv AT shaefishahzad effectofcardiogenicshockhospitalvolumeonmortalityinpatientswithcardiogenicshock
AT ogarabrian effectofcardiogenicshockhospitalvolumeonmortalityinpatientswithcardiogenicshock
AT kociolrobbd effectofcardiogenicshockhospitalvolumeonmortalityinpatientswithcardiogenicshock
AT joyntkaren effectofcardiogenicshockhospitalvolumeonmortalityinpatientswithcardiogenicshock
AT muellerariel effectofcardiogenicshockhospitalvolumeonmortalityinpatientswithcardiogenicshock
AT nizamuddinjunaid effectofcardiogenicshockhospitalvolumeonmortalityinpatientswithcardiogenicshock
AT mahmoodeitezaz effectofcardiogenicshockhospitalvolumeonmortalityinpatientswithcardiogenicshock
AT talmordaniel effectofcardiogenicshockhospitalvolumeonmortalityinpatientswithcardiogenicshock
AT shahulsajid effectofcardiogenicshockhospitalvolumeonmortalityinpatientswithcardiogenicshock