Abstract:Background Multivessel coronary artery disease frequently occurs in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (AMICS), which is associated with a higher mortality rate. Previous studies have focused on revascularisation during the initial admission. The need for revascularisation after discharge has not yet been well-studied. Purpose To determine the incidence of revascularisation after discharge in patients initially hospitalised with AMICS compared to ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients without CS. Methods Data from a cohort of individually validated AMICS patients admitted to two tertiary cardiac centres in Denmark between 2010 and 2017 - the RETROSHOCK cohort - were included (fig.1). Data were cross-linked with The National Patient Register, containing diagnostic and procedural codes for all hospital contacts for Danish citizens. For comparison, an age- and sex-matched cohort of STEMI patients (4:1 ratio) without CS treated at the same centres and within the same timeframe was established from The National Patient Register. The incidence of revascularisation (percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and/or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)) was assessed in patients surviving a "blanking period" of 60 days after discharge to take staged elective revascularisation into account and until a maximum follow-up of 5 years. The cumulative incidence function with death as a competing event was used. Gray's test was used for comparison of incidence functions. Results A total of 1,716 AMICS patients were included, of whom 753 (44%) survived to 60 days after discharge – of those, 538 (71%) patients had STEMI. Revascularisation was performed during follow-up and after the 60-day 'blanking period' in 68 patients (9%) – median follow-up time was 3.4 years in the AMICS group and 3.5 years in the control group. Multivessel disease, out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and hyperlipidaemia at index hospitalisation were more prevalent in patients revascularised during the follow-up period (69% vs. 52% p=0.009, 62% vs. 47% p=0.018 and 42% vs. 27% p=0.014) for revascularised vs. not-revascularised). No significant differences in sex or age were present in revascularised vs. not-revascularised patients. The five-year cumulative incidence rate for revascularisation after discharge was 10.0% (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 7.9-12.7%), which was similar compared to the matched STEMI cohort without CS (11.5% 95% (CI) 10.7-12.4%), HR 0.88 95% (CI) 0.68-1.13, p=0.319) (fig.1a). The finding was similar in a subgroup analysis of STEMI-only patients with CS compared to the non-CS cohort. Conclusions The cumulative incidence of revascularisation after discharge for AMICS patients was comparable to STEMI patients without CS during five years follow-up. Multivessel disease, out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and hyperlipidaemia at index admission were more prevalent in patients who were revascularised during follow-up.

The processes of care and long-term mortality of acute myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock survivors: A nationwide cohort study

The quality of care and long-term mortality of out of hospital cardiac arrest survivors after acute myocardial infarction: a nationwide cohort study

Characteristics of High-Performing Hospitals in Cardiogenic Shock Following Acute Myocardial Infarction

Long-term outcomes of cardiogenic shock survivors: a contemporary retrospective analysis from a tertiary center

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

Resource Utilization and Costs Associated With Cardiogenic Shock Complicating Myocardial Infarction: A Population-Based Cohort Study

Predictors of Mortality in Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock despite Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump: Opportunities for Advanced Mechanical Circulatory Support in Asia

Factors Associated with the Prognosis of Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock

US trends of in-hospital morbidity and mortality for acute myocardial infarctions complicated by cardiogenic shock

Revascularisation after discharge in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock

Factors associated with 30-day mortality in patients receiving mechanical circulatory support for cardiogenic shock

Long-term 5-year outcome of the randomized IMPRESS in severe shock trial: percutaneous mechanical circulatory support vs. intra-aortic balloon pump in cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction

Long-term clinical outcomes and patterns of follow-up after cardiogenic shock: insights from an advanced heart failure referral center registry

Trends and outcomes of different mechanical circulatory support modalities for acute myocardial infarction associated cardiogenic shock in patients undergoing early revascularization

Frailty and In-Hospital Outcomes for Management of Cardiogenic Shock without Acute Myocardial Infarction

A practical nomogram and risk stratification system for predicting in-hospital mortality of patients with non-acute myocardial infarction related cardiogenic shock

Early vs. Delayed Mechanical Circulatory Support in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock

Short term outcomes and resource utilization in de-novo versus acute on chronic heart failure related cardiogenic shock: a nationwide analysis

Safety Of Mechanical Circulatory Support Use For Acute Myocardial Infarction Cardiogenic Shock Among Octogenerians: A Nationwide Cohort Analysis Of United States

Clinical outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: The Gulf-Cardiogenic Shock (G-CS) Registry

Decoding cardiogenic shock: assessing shock index and its variants as prognostic indicators for in‐hospital mortality