Author + information
- Received November 4, 2004
- Revision received January 7, 2005
- Accepted January 11, 2005
- Published online July 19, 2005.
- Lynn A. Sleeper, ScD⁎,⁎ (, )
- Krishnan Ramanathan, MD†,
- Michael H. Picard, MD‡,
- Thierry H. LeJemtel, MD§,
- Harvey D. White, MD∥,
- Vladimir Dzavik, MD¶,
- Deborah Tormey, RN#,
- Nancy E. Avis, PhD⁎⁎,
- Judith S. Hochman, MD†,
- SHOCK Investigators
- ↵⁎Reprint requests and correspondence:
Dr. Lynn A. Sleeper, New England Research Institutes, 9 Galen Street, Watertown, Massachusetts 02472.
Objectives Our goal was to describe the functional status of cardiogenic shock survivors, identify the correlates of cardiogenic shock, and compare global quality of life and functional status of patients randomly assigned to treatment with emergency revascularization (ERV) versus initial medical stabilization (IMS).
Background Historically, the hospital survival rate of patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction (MI) has been very low. Shock survivors are salvaged from a critically ill state, and their later functional status is not well documented. The SHould we emergently revascularize Occluded Coronaries for cardiogenic shocK (SHOCK) trial showed significantly improved one-year survival after ERV compared with IMS.
Methods The SHOCK trial survivors completed interviews at 2 weeks after discharge and at 6 and 12 months after MI. Functional status assessment included the Multidimensional Index of Life Quality and New York Heart Association (NYHA) congestive heart failure functional class.
Results Eighty-seven percent of one-year survivors of the SHOCK trial were in NYHA functional class I or II. Between two weeks after discharge and one year after MI, improvement was similar in the two treatment groups (18% overall), but fewer patients remained stable (44% vs. 71%), and more patients worsened or died (34% vs. 15%) in the IMS group compared with those assigned to ERV. Assignment to ERV was the only independent predictor of outcome at one year.
Conclusions Although one-year mortality after ERV is still high (54%), most survivors have good functional status. The ERV patients have a lower rate of deterioration than IMS patients. The level of recovery for shock patients undergoing ERV is similar to that of historical controls not in cardiogenic shock undergoing elective revascularization.
This work was completed with support from research grants R01 HL49970 and R01 HL50020 from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
- Received November 4, 2004.
- Revision received January 7, 2005.
- Accepted January 11, 2005.
- American College of Cardiology Foundation