Literature DB >> 10985708

Angiographic findings and clinical correlates in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: a report from the SHOCK Trial Registry. SHould we emergently revascularize Occluded Coronaries for cardiogenic shocK?

S C Wong1, T Sanborn, L A Sleeper, J G Webb, R Pilchik, D Hart, S Mejnartowicz, T A Antonelli, R Lange, J K French, G Bergman, T LeJemtel, J S Hochman.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We sought to delineate the angiographic findings, clinical correlates and in-hospital outcomes in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) complicating acute myocardial infarction.
BACKGROUND: Patients with CS complicating acute myocardial infarction carry a grave prognosis. Detailed angiographic findings in a large, prospectively identified cohort of patients with CS are currently lacking.
METHODS: We compared the clinical characteristics, angiographic findings, and in-hospital outcomes of 717 patients selected to undergo angiography and 442 not selected, overall and by shock etiology: left or right ventricular failure versus mechanical complications.
RESULTS: Patients who underwent angiography had lower baseline risk and a better hemodynamic profile than those who did not. Overall, 15.5% of the patients had significant left main lesions on angiography, and 53.4% had three-vessel disease, with higher rates of both for those with ventricular failure, compared with patients who had mechanical complications. Among patients who underwent angiography, those with ventricular failure had significantly lower in-hospital mortality than patients with mechanical complications (45.2% vs. 57.0%; p = 0.021). Importantly, for patients with ventricular failure, in-hospital mortality also correlated with disease severity: 35.0% for no or single-vessel disease versus 50.8% for three-vessel disease. Furthermore, mortality was associated with the culprit lesion location (78.6% in left main lesion, 69.7% in saphenous vein graft lesions, 42.4% in circumflex lesions, 42.3% in left anterior descending lesions, and 37.4% in right coronary artery lesions), and Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) flow grade (46.5% in TIMI 0/1, 49.4% in TIMI 2 and 26% in TIMI 3).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent angiographic study in the SHOCK Trial Registry had a more benign cardiac risk profile, more favorable hemodynamic findings and lower in-hospital mortality than those for whom angiograms were not obtained. Patients with CS caused by ventricular failure had more severe atherosclerosis, and a different distribution of culprit vessel involvement but lower in-hospital mortality, than those with mechanical complications. Overall in-hospital survival correlates with the extent of coronary artery obstructions, location of culprit lesion and baseline coronary TIMI flow grade.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10985708     DOI: 10.1016/s0735-1097(00)00873-1

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


  18 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

2.  Cardiogenic shock in acute coronary syndromes-miles to go?

Authors:  Salman Salahuddin; Balram Bhargava
Journal:  Indian Heart J       Date:  2012-04-28

3.  Predictive value of the baseline electrocardiogram ST-segment pattern in cardiogenic shock: Results from the CardShock Study.

Authors:  Tuija Javanainen; Heli Tolppanen; Johan Lassus; Markku S Nieminen; Alessandro Sionis; Jindrich Spinar; José Silva-Cardoso; Matias Greve Lindholm; Marek Banaszewski; Veli-Pekka Harjola; Raija Jurkko
Journal:  Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol       Date:  2018-05-30       Impact factor: 1.468

Review 4.  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 5.  Cardiogenic shock in ACS. Part 2: Role of mechanical circulatory support.

Authors:  Stephen Westaby; Kyriakos Anastasiadis; George M Wieselthaler
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2012-01-10       Impact factor: 32.419

Review 6.  [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

7.  Cardiogenic shock without flow-limiting angiographic coronary artery disease: (from the Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronary Arteries for Cardiogenic Shock Trial and Registry).

Authors:  John K French; Shannon Harkness; Lynn Sleeper; S Chiu Wong; Jacques Col; Vladimir Dzavik; Harvey D White; Judith S Hochman
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2009-05-04       Impact factor: 2.778

8.  Outcome after surgery and percutaneous intervention for cardiogenic shock and left main disease.

Authors:  Michael S Lee; Chi-Hong Tseng; Colin M Barker; Venu Menon; David Steckman; Richard Shemin; Judith S Hochman
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 4.330

9.  In-hospital mortality after acute STEMI in patients undergoing primary PCI.

Authors:  M Ali; S A Lange; T Wittlinger; G Lehnert; A G Rigopoulos; M Noutsias
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2017-10-09       Impact factor: 1.443

10.  Culprit lesion location and outcome in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction: a substudy of the IABP-SHOCK II-trial.

Authors:  Georg Fuernau; Karl Fengler; Steffen Desch; Ingo Eitel; Franz-Josef Neumann; Hans-Georg Olbrich; Antoinette de Waha; Suzanne de Waha; Gert Richardt; Marcus Hennersdorf; Klaus Empen; Rainer Hambrecht; Christian Jung; Michael Böhm; Janine Pöss; Ruth H Strasser; Steffen Schneider; Taoufik Ouarrak; Gerhard Schuler; Karl Werdan; Uwe Zeymer; Holger Thiele
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2016-07-04       Impact factor: 5.460

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.