Background: Clinical investigations of shock in cardiac intensive care units (CICUs) have primarily focused on acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (AMICS). Few studies have evaluated the full spectrum of shock in contemporary CICUs. Methods and Results: The Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network is a multicenter network of advanced CICUs in North America. Anytime between September 2017 and September 2018, each center (n=16) contributed a 2-month snap-shot of all consecutive medical admissions to the CICU. Data were submitted to the central coordinating center (TIMI Study Group, Boston, MA). Shock was defined as sustained systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg with end-organ dysfunction ascribed to the hypotension. Shock type was classified by site investigators as cardiogenic, distributive, hypovolemic, or mixed. Among 3049 CICU admissions, 677 (22%) met clinical criteria for shock. Shock type was varied, with 66% assessed as cardiogenic shock (CS), 7% as distributive, 3% as hypovolemic, 20% as mixed, and 4% as unknown. Among patients with CS (n=450), 30% had AMICS, 18% had ischemic cardiomyopathy without AMI, 28% had nonischemic cardiomyopathy, and 17% had a cardiac cause other than primary myocardial dysfunction. Patients with mixed shock had cardiovascular comorbidities similar to patients with CS. The median CICU stay was 4.0 days (interquartile range [IQR], 2.5–8.1 days) for AMICS, 4.3 days (IQR, 2.1–8.5 days) for CS not related to AMI, and 5.8 days (IQR, 2.9–10.0 days) for mixed shock versus 1.9 days (IQR, 1.0–3.6) for patients without shock ( P <0.01 for each). Median Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores were higher in patients with mixed shock (10; IQR, 6–13) versus AMICS (8; IQR, 5–11) or CS without AMI (7; IQR, 5–11; each P <0.01). In-hospital mortality rates were 36% (95% CI, 28%–45%), 31% (95% CI, 26%–36%), and 39% (95% CI, 31%–48%) in AMICS, CS without AMI, and mixed shock, respectively. Conclusions: The epidemiology of shock in contemporary advanced CICUs is varied, and AMICS now represents less than one-third of all CS. Despite advanced therapies, mortality in CS and mixed shock remains high. Investigation of management strategies and new therapies to treat shock in the CICU should take this epidemiology into account.

Background—: Growth-differentiation factor-15 (GDF-15) is emerging as a prognostic marker in patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD), but its prognostic value in community-dwelling adults has not been reported. We hypothesized that GDF-15 would add incremental power for prediction of mortality in a population of community-dwelling older adults without known heart disease. Methods and Results—: We measured plasma GDF-15, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), and C-reactive protein levels in 1391 Rancho Bernardo Study participants, mean age 70 years, with no history of CVD and followed them for a mean of 11 years. In models adjusted for traditional CVD risk factors, GDF-15 was a robust predictor of all-cause, cardiovascular, and noncardiovascular mortality. GDF-15 was a stronger predictor of all-cause mortality than either NT-proBNP or C-reactive protein (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] per SD log ₁₀ units 1.5 [1.3 to 1.8], P <0.0001 for GDF-15 versus 1.3 [1.2 to 1.5], P <0.0001 for NT-proBNP; C-reactive protein was not a significant predictor). Among biomarkers considered, only GDF-15 predicted noncardiovascular death (hazard ratio 1.6 [1.4 to 2.0], P <0.0001). Growth differentiation factor-15 improved discrimination and modestly but significantly improved reclassification for all-cause and noncardiovascular mortality with borderline improvement for cardiovascular mortality; NT-proBNP significantly improved reclassification for all-cause and for cardiovascular mortality; C-reactive protein did not improve reclassification for any end point tested. Participants in the highest quartile of both GDF-15 and NT-proBNP had an increased risk of death compared with participants with only NT-proBNP elevated (hazard ratio 1.5 [1.1 to 2.0], P =0.01). Conclusions—: Growth differentiation factor-15 is a strong predictor of all-cause, cardiovascular, and noncardiovascular mortality in community-dwelling older individuals, adding incremental value to traditional risk factors and to NT-proBNP and C-reactive protein levels.

Guidelines for primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases focus on prediction of coronary heart disease and stroke. We assessed whether or not measurement of N-terminal-pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) concentration could enable a more integrated approach than at present by predicting heart failure and enhancing coronary heart disease and stroke risk assessment. In this individual-participant-data meta-analysis, we generated and harmonised individual-participant data from relevant prospective studies via both de-novo NT-proBNP concentration measurement of stored samples and collection of data from studies identified through a systematic search of the literature (PubMed, Scientific Citation Index Expanded, and Embase) for articles published up to Sept 4, 2014, using search terms related to natriuretic peptide family members and the primary outcomes, with no language restrictions. We calculated risk ratios and measures of risk discrimination and reclassification across predicted 10 year risk categories (ie, <5%, 5% to <7·5%, and ≥7·5%), adding assessment of NT-proBNP concentration to that of conventional risk factors (ie, age, sex, smoking status, systolic blood pressure, history of diabetes, and total and HDL cholesterol concentrations). Primary outcomes were the combination of coronary heart disease and stroke, and the combination of coronary heart disease, stroke, and heart failure. We recorded 5500 coronary heart disease, 4002 stroke, and 2212 heart failure outcomes among 95 617 participants without a history of cardiovascular disease in 40 prospective studies. Risk ratios (for a comparison of the top third vs bottom third of NT-proBNP concentrations, adjusted for conventional risk factors) were 1·76 (95% CI 1·56-1·98) for the combination of coronary heart disease and stroke and 2·00 (1·77-2·26) for the combination of coronary heart disease, stroke, and heart failure. Addition of information about NT-proBNP concentration to a model containing conventional risk factors was associated with a C-index increase of 0·012 (0·010-0·014) and a net reclassification improvement of 0·027 (0·019-0·036) for the combination of coronary heart disease and stroke and a C-index increase of 0·019 (0·016-0·022) and a net reclassification improvement of 0·028 (0·019-0·038) for the combination of coronary heart disease, stroke, and heart failure. In people without baseline cardiovascular disease, NT-proBNP concentration assessment strongly predicted first-onset heart failure and augmented coronary heart disease and stroke prediction, suggesting that NT-proBNP concentration assessment could be used to integrate heart failure into cardiovascular disease primary prevention. British Heart Foundation, Austrian Science Fund, UK Medical Research Council, National Institute for Health Research, European Research Council, and European Commission Framework Programme 7.