Timing of mechanical ventilation and its association with in-hospital outcomes in patients with cardiogenic shock following ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a multicentre observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between the timing of invasive mechanical ventilation (MV) initiation and clinical outcomes in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) secondary to ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of a multicentre registry. SETTING: Data were obtained from the Gulf-Cardiogenic Shock registry, which includes hospitals across six countries in the Middle East. PARTICIPANTS: 1117 patients diagnosed with STEMI and CS. Of these, 672 (60%) required MV and were included in this analysis. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included comparisons of baseline characteristics, Society of Coronary Angiogram and Intervention (SCAI) shock stage, and clinical parameters among groups based on time to MV. RESULTS: Participants were categorised by time from shock diagnosis to MV: early (≤15 min), intermediate (30 min) and late (≥60 min). Median times were 15 min (IQR 10-20), 30 min (IQR 25-35) and 60 min (IQR 45-70), respectively. Baseline characteristics were comparable across groups. Increased delay in MV was associated with a higher mortality risk during the first 60 min post-diagnosis, beyond which the risk plateaued. Delayed MV was an independent predictor of in-hospital mortality (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.36 to 3.38, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Early initiation of MV in patients with STEMI complicated by CS was associated with lower in-hospital mortality. These findings highlight the importance of timely respiratory support, warranting further investigation in prospective or randomised controlled studies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".