Skip to main content
. 2024 Mar 8;13(6):e031979. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.123.031979

Table 2.

Resource Use and Outcomes in Major Cardiogenic Shock Trials With Data Combined Between Study Arms

SHOCK 21 IABP SHOCK II 41 CULPRIT SHOCK 42 DOREMI 43 ECMO CS 39 ECLS SHOCK 44
In‐hospital or 30‐d mortality 51.3% 40.4% 47.4% 39.6% 48.7% 48.4%
Catecholamines 99.0% 90.0% 89.5% 85.5% 95.4%
Mechanical ventilation 83.1% 81.0% 72.3% 86.3%
Dialysis 14.0% 19.3% 6.2% 11.0%
Nonfatal myocardial infarction or stroke 3.3% 4.2% 2.1% 4.3%
Moderate or severe bleeding 28.0% 20.7% 19.3% 25.6% 16.5%
Cardiac arrest 8.3% 12.0%
Sepsis 19.0% 18.0% 39.0% 10.0%
Median intensive care unit stay (days) 5 5 9

Note: Not all variables and outcomes were reported in all studies, and in some cases combination of event counts for different outcomes could have led to overestimation. CULPRIT‐SHOCK indicates Culprit Lesion Only PCI [Percutaneous Coronary Intervention] Versus Multivessel PCI in Cardiogenic Shock; DOREMI, Milrinone as Compared With Dobutamine in the Treatment of Cardiogenic Shock; ECLS‐SHOCK, Extracorporeal Life Support in Cardiogenic Shock; ECMO CS, Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in the Therapy of Cardiogenic Shock; IABP‐SHOCK II, Intraaortic Balloon Pump in Cardiogenic Shock II; and SHOCK, Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock.