MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411152630 · doi:10.1002/ehf2.15322

Pre-Admission Beta-Blocker Therapy and Outcomes in Cardiogenic Shock: Insights from the Altshock-2 Registry

2025· article· en· W4411152630 on OpenAlexaff
Matteo Pagnesi, Mauro Riccardi, Alice Sacco, Giovanni Tavecchia, Giovanna Viola, Simone Frea, Martina Briani, Letizia Bertoldi, Maurizio Bertaina, Luciano Potena, Serafina Valente, Marco Marini, Gaetano Maria De Ferrari, Nicoletta D’Ettore, Astrid Cardinale, Rita Camporotondo, Matteo Rota, Guido Tavazzi, Nuccia Morici, Federico Pappalardo, Marco Metra

Bibliographic record

VenueESC Heart Failure · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Canadian institutionsSurgical Specialties (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCardiogenic shockMedicineBeta blockerHeart failureInternal medicineCardiologyBETA (programming language)Intensive care medicineEmergency medicineMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: We aimed to assess the impact of pre-admission beta-blocker (BB) therapy on the clinical characteristics, in-hospital treatment and outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock (CS). METHODS: All patients enrolled in the multicentre prospective Altshock-2 registry since March 2020 with available data on pre-admission BB therapy were included. Clinical characteristics, in-hospital management, haemodynamic parameters and clinical outcomes were compared in patients with versus without BB therapy. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 668 patients were included [median age 66 (56-74) years, male sex 76.5%]: 299 patients (44.8%) with and 369 patients (55.2%) without previous BB therapy. Patients receiving pre-admission BB therapy had more frequently heart failure-related CS (43.8% vs. 17.9%) and less frequently cardiac arrest at presentation (20.1% vs. 27.8%, P = 0.027). Levosimendan was used less frequently and dobutamine was used more frequently in patients with baseline BB therapy (P = 0.033 and P = 0.043, respectively). Differences in the early haemodynamic response to vasoactive drugs were observed between patients with and without previous BB therapy, with a significant impact of baseline BB on mean arterial pressure (MAP) response during norepinephrine infusion (P = 0.012) and with dobutamine having a reduced response in MAP and heart rate in patients receiving BBs before admission (P = 0.023 and P = 0.001, respectively). In-hospital mortality was not significantly different between the BB and no-BB groups (40% vs. 33.7%; adjusted odds ratio 1.32, 95% confidence interval 0.84-2.07, P = 0.224). Similarly, baseline BB therapy was not independently associated with 48 h mortality (12.7% vs. 14.6%; adjusted odds ratio 1.09, 95% confidence interval 0.64-1.87, P = 0.749). The lack of association between baseline BB therapy and mortality was also confirmed at inverse probability of treatment weighting-adjusted analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In a real-world, contemporary cohort of patients with CS, previous BB therapy influenced the haemodynamic response to vasoactive drugs, but it was not associated with in-hospital mortality.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.411
Threshold uncertainty score0.638

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueESC Heart FailureSame topicMechanical Circulatory Support DevicesFrench-language works237,207