TCT-30 A Comparative Analysis of Patient Characteristics in Cardiogenic Shock Trials: Differences Between Randomized Trials and Real-World Registries

Document Type

Conference Proceeding

Publication Date

11-1-2021

Publication Title

J Am Coll Cardiol

Abstract

Background: Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a leading cause of mortality in patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Enrollment of patients into clinical trials, however, is challenging and may not be representative of real-world patients.

Methods: We performed a systematic review of studies in patients presenting with AMI-related CS (AMICS) and compared patient characteristics of those enrolled into randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with those in registries.

Results: We included 14 RCTs (n = 2,154) and 12 registries (n = 133,617). RCTs included more men (73% vs 67.7%, P < 0.001) compared with registries. Patient enrolled into RCT had fewer comorbidities, including less hypertension (61.6% vs 65.9%, P < 0.001), dyslipidemia (36.4% vs 53.6%, P < 0.001), history of stroke or transient ischemic attack (7.1% vs 10.7%, P < 0.001), and previous coronary artery bypass graft surgery (5.4% vs 7.5%, P < 0.001). Patients enrolled into RCTs also had lower lactate levels (4.7 ± 2.3 vs 5.9 ± 1.9 mmol/L, P < 0.001) and higher mean arterial pressure (73.0 ± 8.8 vs 62.5 ± 12.2 mm Hg, P < 0.001). Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (97.5% vs 58.4%, P < 0.001), multivessel PCI (31% vs 27.4%, P < 0.001), and left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) (11.7% vs 6.9%, P < 0.001) were used more often in RCTs. In-hospital and 30-day mortality were similar in both groups.

Conclusion: RCTs in AMICS tend to enroll fewer women and lower-risk patients when compared with registries. Patients enrolled into RCTs are also more likely to receive aggressive treatment, including PCI and LVAD.

Volume

78

Issue

19

First Page

B12

Find It @ Sladen

Share

COinS