Literature DB >> 10985707

The clinical profile of patients with suspected cardiogenic shock due to predominant left ventricular failure: a report from the SHOCK Trial Registry. SHould we emergently revascularize Occluded Coronaries in cardiogenic shocK?

V Menon1, H White, T LeJemtel, J G Webb, L A Sleeper, J S Hochman.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the frequency of pulmonary congestion and associated clinical and hemodynamic findings in patients with suspected cardiogenic shock (CS).
BACKGROUND: The prevalence of pulmonary congestion in the setting of CS is uncertain.
METHODS: The 571 SHOCK Trial Registry patients with predominant left ventricular failure (LVF) were divided into four groups: Group A = no pulmonary congestion/no hypoperfusion = 14 (3%), Group B = isolated pulmonary congestion = 32 (6%), Group C = isolated hypoperfusion = 158 (28%) and Group D = congestion with hypoperfusion = 367 (64%). Statistical comparisons between Group C and D only, with regard to patient demographics, hemodynamics, treatment and outcome, were made.
RESULTS: A significant proportion of patients with shock had no pulmonary congestion (Group C = 28%, 95% CI, 24% to 31%). Age and gender in this group were similar to Group D. Group C patients were less likely to have a prior MI (p = 0.028), congestive heart failure (p = 0.005) and renal insufficiency (p = 0.032), and the index MI was less likely to be anterior (p = 0.044). Cardiac output, cardiac index and ejection fraction were similar for the two groups but pulmonary capillary wedge pressure was slightly lower for Group C (22 vs. 24 mm Hg, p = 0.012). Treatment with thrombolysis, angioplasty and bypass surgery was similar in the two groups. In-hospital mortality rates for Groups C and D were 70% and 60%, respectively (p = 0.036). After adjustment, this difference was no longer statistically significant (p = 0.153).
CONCLUSIONS: Absence of pulmonary congestion at initial clinical evaluation does not exclude a diagnosis of CS due to predominant LVF and is not associated with a better prognosis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10985707     DOI: 10.1016/s0735-1097(00)00874-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol        ISSN: 0735-1097            Impact factor:   24.094


  26 in total

Review 1.  Management of cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Venu Menon; Judith S Hochman
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 5.994

Review 2.  Heart failure and shock complicating acute coronary syndromes.

Authors:  Frederick A Spencer; Theo Meyer
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 3.  Management of refractory cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  Alex Reyentovich; Maya H Barghash; Judith S Hochman
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2016-06-30       Impact factor: 32.419

4.  Predictive value of outcome scores in patients suffering from cardiogenic shock complicating AMI: APACHE II, APACHE III, Elebute-Stoner, SOFA, and SAPS II.

Authors:  P Kellner; R Prondzinsky; L Pallmann; S Siegmann; S Unverzagt; H Lemm; S Dietz; J Soukup; K Werdan; M Buerke
Journal:  Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed       Date:  2013-04-06       Impact factor: 0.840

Review 5.  [Cardiogenic shock].

Authors:  S Rasche; C Georgi
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 1.041

Review 6.  Evaluation and Management of ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction and Shock.

Authors:  Lee Chang; Robert Yeh
Journal:  Eur Cardiol       Date:  2014-12

Review 7.  Cardiogenic shock in ACS. Part 1: prediction, presentation and medical therapy.

Authors:  Stephen Westaby; Rajesh Kharbanda; Adrian P Banning
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2011-12-20       Impact factor: 32.419

Review 8.  [Infarct-related cardiogenic shock : Prognosis and treatment].

Authors:  R Prondzinsky; H Lemm; A Geppert; M Buerke; M Russ; K Werdan
Journal:  Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed       Date:  2018-05-02       Impact factor: 0.840

9.  [Cardiogenic shock].

Authors:  S Rasche; C Georgi
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 1.443

Review 10.  [Cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction].

Authors:  U Janssens
Journal:  Internist (Berl)       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 0.743

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.