In‐hospital and long‐term outcomes of cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction versus heart failure.

Aims: This study sought to examine the difference in clinical characteristics, treatment strategy, trends in mortality, and medical costs according to the aetiologies of cardiogenic shock (CS). Methods and results: This was a population‐based, nationwide, cohort study from the Korean National Health Insurance Service database. All CS adults (≥18 years) were admitted to an intensive care unit from January 2010 to December 2020. The primary outcome was in‐hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes were cardiac replacement therapy (left ventricular assisted device implantation or heart transplantation), all‐cause mortality, ischaemic stroke, rehospitalization for heart failure (HF) during follow‐up, and actual in‐hospital medical costs. Among 136 092 individuals with CS, 48 704 (29.7%) cases were due to acute myocardial infarction‐related CS (AMI‐CS), and the remaining 87 388 (71.3%) were due to HF‐CS (ischaemic cardiomyopathy [ICM] vs. non‐ICM, 49 504 [56.6%] vs. 37 884 [45.4%]). Patients with HF‐CS were older, less likely to be male, and less likely to receive mechanical circulatory support, compared to those with AMI‐CS. During the 10‐year study period, the in‐hospital mortality rate decreased, and actual medical costs tended to increase, regardless of CS aetiology. Compared with AMI‐CS, HF‐CS was associated with higher risks of in‐hospital mortality (40.3% vs. 28.5%; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.43–1.52), cardiac replacement therapy (adjusted OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.16–2.34), as well as follow‐up mortality after successful discharge (19.3% vs. 8.5%; adjusted‐hazard ratio 1.54, 95% CI 1.48–1.59). HF‐CS had lower medical costs than AMI‐CS (adjusted ratio 0.79, 95% CI 0.79–0.80). Conclusions: With medical advances during the past 10 years, the mortality of CS has decreased significantly, but the mortality of HF‐CS remains high. The findings highlight the need for effective treatment strategies for patients with HF‐CS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]