Gender Disparities in Cardiogenic Shock Treatment and Outcomes

Jason E. Bloom, Emily Andrew, Ziad Nehme, Anna Beale, Luke P. Dawson, William Y. Shi, Pieter A. Vriesendorp, Himawan Fernando, Samer Noaman, Shelley Cox, Michael Stephenson, David Anderson, William Chan, David M. Kaye, Karen Smith, Dion Stub

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

3 Citations (Scopus)


Cardiogenic shock is associated with a high risk for morbidity and mortality. The impact of gender on treatment and outcomes is poorly defined. This study aimed to evaluate whether gender influences the clinical management and outcomes of patients with prehospital cardiogenic shock. Consecutive adult patients with cardiogenic shock who were transferred to hospital by emergency medical services (EMS) between January 1, 2015 and June 30, 2019 in Victoria, Australia were included. Data were obtained from individually linked ambulance, hospital, and state death index datasets. The primary outcome assessed was 30-day mortality, stratified by patient gender. Propensity score matching was performed for risk adjustment. Over the study period a total of 3,465 patients were identified and 1,389 patients (40.1%) were women. Propensity score matching yielded 1,330 matched pairs with no differences observed in baseline characteristics, including age, initial vital signs, pre-existing co-morbidities, etiology of shock, and prehospital interventions. In the matched cohort, women had higher rates of 30-day mortality (44.7% vs 39.2%, p = 0.009), underwent less coronary angiography (18.3% vs 27.2%, p <0.001), and revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention (8.9% vs 14.2%, p <0.001), compared with men. In conclusion, in this large population-based study, women with cardiogenic shock who were transferred by EMS to hospital had significantly worse survival outcomes and reduced rates of invasive cardiac interventions compared to men. These data underscore the urgent need for targeted public health measures to redress gender differences in outcomes and variation with clinical care for patients with cardiogenic shock.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)14-21
Number of pages8
JournalThe American Journal of Cardiology
Publication statusPublished - 15 Aug 2022

Cite this