Prognostic impact of body mass index in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic Shock: an ECLS-SHOCK subanalysis.

Clin Res CardiolJul 28, 2025 (epub)
Clinical ResearchCardiologyOpen access

Tobias Schupp, Holger Thiele, Tienush Rassaf et al.

✦ AI-curated · Sources linked

In 30 seconds

This subanalysis of the multicentre, randomised ECLS-SHOCK trial examined the association between BMI and outcomes in 407 patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. Mortality was 53.9% with BMI ≥ 30.0 kg/m², 45.3% with BMI 25.0-29.9 kg/m², and 47.7% with BMI 18.5-24.9 kg/m². Neither higher BMI category was associated with increased mortality versus the normal-BMI reference group, and outcomes did not identify BMI groups with differing benefit or harm from ECLS.

Key findings

  • Thirty-day mortality was 53.9%, 45.3% and 47.7% for BMI ≥ 30.0, 25.0-29.9 and 18.5-24.9 kg/m², respectively.
  • Compared with BMI 18.5-24.9 kg/m², BMI ≥ 30.0 kg/m² was not associated with mortality (OR = 1.28; 95% CI 0.76-2.16; p = 0.35).
  • BMI 25.0-29.9 kg/m² was not associated with mortality versus the reference group (OR = 0.91; 95% CI 0.56-1.46; p = 0.68).
  • Safety endpoints did not differ across BMI groups, and no BMI subgroup showed greater benefit or less harm from ECLS.

Why it matters

Patients with obesity in this cohort had substantial 30-day mortality, but BMI categories were not associated with a statistically significant difference in mortality, and did not identify differential ECLS outcomes. These findings suggest BMI alone may not distinguish prognosis or ECLS response in AMI-related cardiogenic shock, while underscoring the high mortality across the studied groups.

What to keep in mind

This was a subanalysis of a trial cohort, and the abstract does not report whether the analysis was powered to detect differences between BMI groups.

Source

Published in Clin Res Cardiol. This summary was written by xxcode from the publication's abstract and metadata. It is not peer reviewed and is not a substitute for the original article. For clinical decisions, review the original publication.

ShareTelegramLinkedIn

AI-generated summaries may contain errors or omissions. Verify clinically important information with the original publication.

More in Cardiology

Want this personalized?

Stop searching the literature. Choose what you follow and xxcode will build your personalized medical digest.

  • Your specialties
  • Your filters and thresholds
  • Clinical Research + Case Reports, tuned separately
  • Automatic weekly delivery
  • Audio and text

Prefer listening? Personalized audio digests are available with Pro.

Stay updated for free

Get the 3 most interesting publications in one specialty each week.

Weekly email. Unsubscribe anytime.