Vol 82, No 11 (2024)
Review paper
Published online: 2024-11-30

open access

Page views 81
Article views/downloads 50
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

Cardiogenic shock in women: From risk factors to therapy

Sigrun Halvorsen12, Christian Hassager34
DOI: 10.33963/v.phj.103739
Pol Heart J 2024;82(11):1071-1075.

Abstract

Cardiogenic shock (CS) in women is a serious cardiovascular (CV) event associated with a high mortality rate. Non-ischemic etiologies are the most common etiologies in women, such as stress-induced cardiomyopathy, peripartum/postpartum cardiomyopathy, heart failure-related CS, or CS due to myocarditis or valvular heart disease. Although not being the most common etiology in women, acute myocardial infarction is still an important one. Guidelines recommend similar treatment of CS in both sexes, but women have consistently been underrepresented in randomized trials regarding treatment of CS, and more robust data on the optimal management of CS in women is needed. Particularly, the role of mechanical circulatory support in women with CS is still unsettled. Several registries have shown that women with CS are less likely to receive evidence-based therapy compared to men. There is therefore a need for increased awareness about CS in women, in order to increase timely diagnosis and management. In this paper we give a short overview over the etiology, risk factors, diagnosis and treatment of CS in women.

Article available in PDF format

View PDF Download PDF file

References

  1. Vogel B, Tycinska A, Sambola A. Cardiogenic shock in women — A review and call to action. Int J Cardiol. 2023; 386: 98–103.
  2. Thiele H, Ohman EM, de Waha-Thiele S, et al. Management of cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction: an update 2019. Eur Heart J. 2019; 40(32): 2671–2683.
  3. Sundermeyer J, Kellner C, Beer BN, et al. Sex-related differences in patients presenting with heart failure-related cardiogenic shock. Clin Res Cardiol. 2024; 113(4): 612–625.
  4. Rubini Gimenez M, Zeymer U, Desch S, et al. Sex-specific management in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock: A substudy of the CULPRIT-SHOCK trial. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2020; 13(3): e008537.
  5. Ton VK, Kanwar MK, Li B, et al. Impact of female sex on cardiogenic shock outcomes: A cardiogenic shock working group report. JACC Heart Fail. 2023; 11(12): 1742–1753.
  6. Yan I, Schrage B, Weimann J, et al. Sex differences in patients with cardiogenic shock. ESC Heart Fail. 2021; 8(3): 1775–1783.
  7. Bukhari S, Fatima S, Elgendy IY. Cardiogenic shock in the setting of acute myocardial infarction: Another area of sex disparity? World J Cardiol. 2021; 13(6): 170–176.
  8. Berg DD, Bohula EA, van Diepen S, et al. Epidemiology of shock in contemporary cardiac intensive care units. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2019; 12(3): e005618.
  9. Osman M, Syed M, Simpson TF, et al. Incidence and outcomes of cardiogenic shock among women with spontaneous coronary artery dissection. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2022; 100(4): 530–534.
  10. Yang C, Inohara T, Alfadhel M, et al. Spontaneous coronary artery dissection and cardiogenic shock: incidence, etiology, management, and outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021; 77(12): 1592–1594.
  11. Jiménez-Quevedo P, Alonso-Martin C, Campuzano Ruiz R, et al. Cardiovascular disease in women: Do we need new diagnostic and therapeutic strategies? Kardiol Pol. 2023; 81(4): 338–349.
  12. Isorni MA, Aissaoui N, Angoulvant D, et al. Temporal trends in clinical characteristics and management according to sex in patients with cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction: The FAST-MI programme. Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2018; 111(10): 555–563.
  13. Elgendy IY, Wegermann ZK, Li S, et al. Sex differences in management and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction patients presenting with cardiogenic shock. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2022; 15(6): 642–652.
  14. Heidenreich PA, Bozkurt B, Aguilar D, et al. 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022; 79(17): e263–e421.
  15. Zeymer U, Bueno H, Granger CB, et al. Acute Cardiovascular Care Association position statement for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: A document of the Acute Cardiovascular Care Association of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. 2020; 9(2): 183–197.
  16. Wang Y, Zeller M, Auffret V, et al. Sex-specific prediction of cardiogenic shock after acute coronary syndromes: the SEX-SHOCK score. Eur Heart J. 2024; 45(43): 4564–4578.
  17. Schaubroeck H, Rossberg M, Thiele H, et al. ICU management of cardiogenic shock before mechanical support. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2024; 30(4): 362–370.
  18. Jentzer JC, Pöss J, Schaubroeck H, et al. Advances in the management of cardiogenic shock. Crit Care Med. 2023; 51(9): 1222–1233.
  19. Sambola A, Halvorsen S, Adlam D, et al. Management of cardiac emergencies in women: a clinical consensus statement of the Association for Acute CardioVascular Care (ACVC), the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI), the Heart Failure Association (HFA), and the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) of the ESC, and the ESC Working Group on Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy. Eur Heart J Open. 2024; 4(2): oeae011.
  20. Laghlam D, Benghanem S, Ortuno S, et al. Management of cardiogenic shock: a narrative review. Ann Intensive Care. 2024; 14(1): 45.
  21. De Backer D, Biston P, Devriendt J, et al. SOAP II Investigators. Comparison of dopamine and norepinephrine in the treatment of shock. N Engl J Med. 2010; 362(9): 779–789.
  22. Mathew R, Di Santo P, Hibbert B, et al. Milrinone as compared with dobutamine in the treatment of cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med. 2021; 385(22): 2107–2109.
  23. Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Webb JG, et al. Early revascularization and long-term survival in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. JAMA. 2006; 295(21): 2511–2515.
  24. Thiele H, Akin I, Sandri M, et al. PCI strategies in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med. 2017; 377(25): 2419–2432.
  25. Thiele H, Zeymer U, Neumann FJ, et al. Intraaortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med. 2012; 367(14): 1287–1296.
  26. Thiele H, Zeymer U, Akin I, et al. Extracorporeal life support in infarct-related cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med. 2023; 389(14): 1286–1297.
  27. Møller JE, Engstrøm T, Jensen LO, et al. Microaxial flow pump or standard care in infarct-related cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med. 2024; 390(15): 1382–1393.
  28. Mangner NHC, Jensen LO, Eiskjær H, et al. Do women have less effect of mircoaxial flow pump in infarct related cardiogenic shock: A secondary analysis of the danger shock trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2024; 84: B319.
  29. Thiele H, Møller JE, Henriques JPS, et al. Temporary mechanical circulatory support in infarct-related cardiogenic shock: An individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised trials with 6-month follow-up. Lancet. 2024; 404(10457): 1019–1028.
  30. Beneduce A, Ziviello F, Briguori C, et al. Multicenter registry of patients treated with Impella mechanical circulatory support device in Italy: Sex subanalysis. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2023; 16(1): 124–126.
  31. Schrage B, Weimann J, Dabboura S, et al. Patient characteristics, treatment and outcome in non-ischemic vs. ischemic cardiogenic shock. J Clin Med. 2020; 9(4): 931.
  32. Davis MB, Arany Z, McNamara DM, et al. Peripartum cardiomyopathy: JACC state-of-the-art review. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020; 75(2): 207–221.
  33. Alasnag M, Truesdell AG, Williams H, et al. Mechanical circulatory support: A comprehensive review with a focus on women. Curr Atheroscler Rep. 2020; 22(3): 11.
  34. Wang AS, Nemeth S, Kurlansky P, et al. Sex differences in patients with cardiogenic shock requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2022; 164(3): 960–969.e6.
  35. Bloom JE, Andrew E, Nehme Z, et al. Gender disparities in cardiogenic shock treatment and outcomes. Am J Cardiol. 2022; 177: 14–21.
  36. Smith E, Tamis-Holland JE. Sex differences in the presentation and outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: a critical review of contemporary data and a look towards future directions. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2024; 30(4): 344–353.
  37. Epps KC, Tehrani BN, Rosner C, et al. Sex-related differences in patient characteristics, hemodynamics, and outcomes of cardiogenic shock: INOVA-SHOCK registry. J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2023; 2(5): 100978.