Outcomes of Patients Transferred to Tertiary Care Centers for Treatment of Cardiogenic Shock: A Cardiogenic Shock Working Group Analysis: Outcomes of Patients Transferred for Treatment of Cardiogenic Shock

Document Type


Publication Date


Journal Title

Journal of cardiac failure


BACKGROUND: Consensus recommendations for cardiogenic shock (CS) advise transfer of patients in need of advanced options beyond the capability of 'spoke' centers to tertiary/ 'hub' centers with higher capabilities. However, outcomes associated with such transfers are largely unknown, beyond those reported in individual health networks. OBJECTIVES: To analyze a contemporary, multicenter CS cohort with an aim to compare characteristics and outcomes of patients between transfer (between spoke and hub center) and non-transfer cohorts (those primarily admitted to a hub center), for both acute myocardial infarction (AMI-CS) and heart failure related (HF-CS) shock. We also aim to identify clinical characteristics of the transfer cohort that are associated with in-hospital mortality. METHODS: The Cardiogenic Shock Working Group (CSWG) registry is a national, multicenter, prospective registry including high volume (mostly hub) CS centers. Fifteen U.S. sites contributed data for this analysis from 2016-2020. RESULTS: Of 1890 consecutive CS patients enrolled into the CSWG registry, 1028 (54.4%) patients were transferred. Of these, 528 (58.1%) had heart failure related CS (HF-CS) and 381 (41.9%) had CS related to acute myocardial infarction (AMI-CS). Upon arrival to the CSWG site, transfer patients were more likely to be in SCAI stage C and D, when compared to non-transfer patients. Transfer patients had higher mortality (37% vs. 29%, <0.001) than non-transfer patients with the differences primarily driven by the HF-CS cohort. Logistic regression identified increasing age, mechanical ventilation, renal replacement therapy, and higher number of vasoactive drugs prior to, or within 24 hours after CSWG site transfer as independent predictors of mortality among HF-CS patients. Conversely, pulmonary artery catheter use prior to transfer, or within 24 hours of arrival was associated with decreased mortality. Among transfer AMI-CS patients BMI>28 kg/m, worsening renal failure, lactate>3 mg/dl and increasing number of vasoactive drugs were associated with increased mortality. CONCLUSION: More than half of CS patients managed at high volume CS centers were transferred from another hospital. Although transfer patients had higher mortality than those who were primarily admitted to hub centers, outcomes and their predictors varied significantly when classified by HF-CS versus AMI-CS.

Full text is not available here. Please contact your library for more information.