Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 3, 2026

Real-time Pressure-volume Analysis of Acute Myocardial Infarction in Mice
Published on: July 2, 2018
Phenotyping cardiogenic shock: an insight from the gulf cardiogenic shock registry
Ahmed Elmahrouk1,2, Amin Daoulah1, Ahmed Jamjoom1
1King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre - Jeddah, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Insights
Machine learning identified four distinct cardiogenic shock (CS) phenotypes. These phenotypes show varied mortality rates, enabling better risk stratification and personalized treatment for CS patients.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Machine Learning
- Medical Informatics
Background:
- Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a critical condition with high mortality and diverse clinical presentations.
- A uniform management strategy may not be optimal for all CS patients.
Purpose of the Study:
- To identify distinct clinical phenotypes of CS using unsupervised machine learning.
- To characterize the mortality and SCAI stages associated with each identified CS phenotype.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of 1,513 CS patients from the Gulf registry.
- Unsupervised machine learning (agglomerative hierarchical clustering) applied to seven key variables.
- Phenotypes validated against in-hospital mortality and SCAI Shock Stage.
Main Results:
- Four distinct CS phenotypes were identified with significant differences in mortality.
- Phenotype 1 (Compensated Low-Risk) had 22.4% mortality; Phenotype 2 (Metabolic Dysfunction) had 41.9% mortality.
- Phenotype 3 (Multi-organ Failure) had 78.4% mortality; Phenotype 4 (Elderly Decompensated) had 60.7% mortality.
Conclusions:
- Unsupervised machine learning successfully identified four prognostically significant CS phenotypes.
- These data-driven phenotypes offer a novel framework for risk stratification beyond traditional systems.
- The identified phenotypes may aid in developing personalized therapeutic strategies for cardiogenic shock.
Background:
Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a life-threatening condition characterized by clinical heterogeneity and high mortality. A "one-size-fits-all" approach to management may be suboptimal. We aimed to identify distinct clinical phenotypes of CS using an unsupervised machine learning approach and to characterize their associated mortality and SCAI stages.
Methods:
We conducted a retrospective analysis of 1,513 patients with CS from the Gulf registry. An unsupervised machine learning methodology was employed, using agglomerative hierarchical clustering on seven key continuous variables (Age, Ejection Fraction, Mean Arterial Pressure, Lactate, pH, Creatinine, and Alanine Transaminase) to identify patient subgroups. The optimal number of clusters was determined using a combination of quantitative metrics and clinical interpretability. The identified phenotypes were then validated against external outcomes, including in-hospital mortality and SCAI Shock Stage.
Results:
Four distinct clinical phenotypes were identified. Phenotype 1 ("Compensated Low-Risk," n = 492, 32.5%) had the lowest mortality rate (22.4%). Phenotype 2 ("Metabolic Dysfunction," n = 418, 27.6%) was characterized by severe left ventricular dysfunction and had a mortality of 41.9%. Phenotype 3 ("Multi-organ Failure," n = 204, 13.5%) presented with severe metabolic, renal, and hepatic derangement and had the highest mortality (78.4%). Phenotype 4 ("Elderly Decompensated," n = 399, 26.4%) included older patients with moderate metabolic dysfunction and had a mortality of 60.7%. A steep mortality gradient was observed across the phenotypes (p < 0.001), and the distribution of SCAI shock stages differed significantly, aligning with the risk profile of each cluster.
Conclusion:
In a large, contemporary registry of CS patients, an unsupervised machine learning approach successfully identified four distinct and prognostically significant phenotypes. These data-driven phenotypes, characterized by unique clinical and biomarker profiles, provide a novel framework for risk stratification that moves beyond traditional classification systems and may facilitate the development of personalized therapeutic strategies for cardiogenic shock.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Blood Pressure Imbalances and Circulatory Shock
Blood Pressure: Hypertension and Hypotension
Normal blood pressure is 120/80 mm Hg. Elevated blood pressure is 120-129/under 80 mm Hg. Hypertension, warranting treatment at 130/80 mm Hg, is often asymptomatic and can lead to severe cardiovascular events, aneurysms, peripheral arterial disease, chronic renal disease, or cardiac...
Acute Coronary Syndrome III: Diagnostic Studies
Introduction Cardiac Emergencies
Cardiomyopathy I: Introduction and Classification
Cardiomyopathy II: Dilated Cardiomyopathy
Cardiomyopathy III: Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy

