Literature DB >> 15976965

Thrombolysis and counterpulsation to improve survival in myocardial infarction complicated by hypotension and suspected cardiogenic shock or heart failure: results of the TACTICS Trial.

E Magnus Ohman1, John Nanas, Robert J Stomel, Massoud A Leesar, Dennis W T Nielsen, Daniel O'Dea, Felix J Rogers, Daniel Harber, Michael P Hudson, Elizabeth Fraulo, Linda K Shaw, Kerry L Lee.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Sustained hypotension, cardiogenic shock, and heart failure all imply a poor prognosis in acute myocardial infarction (MI). We assessed the benefit of adding 48 hours of intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation (IABP) to standard treatment for MI, in an international trial among hospitals without primary angioplasty capabilities.
METHODS: We randomized 57 patients with MI complicated by sustained hypotension, possible cardiogenic shock, or possible heart failure to receive either fibrinolytic therapy and IABP or fibrinolysis alone. The primary end point was all-cause mortality at 6 months.
RESULTS: In all, IABP was inserted in 27 of 30 assigned patients a median 30 minutes after fibrinolysis began and continued for a median 34 hours. Of the 27 patients assigned to fibrinolysis alone, 9 deteriorated such that IABP was required. The IABP group was at slightly higher risk at baseline, but the incidence of the primary end point did not differ significantly between groups (34% for combined treatment versus 43% for fibrinolysis alone; adjusted P = 0.23). Patients with Killip class III or IV showed a trend toward greater benefit from IABP (6-month mortality 39% for combined therapy versus 80% for fibrinolysis alone; P = 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: While early IABP use was not associated with a definitive survival benefit when added to fibrinolysis for patients with MI and hemodynamic compromise in this small trial, its use suggested a possible benefit for patients with the most severe heart failure or hypotension. ABBREVIATED ABSTRACT: We assessed the benefit of adding 48 hours of intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation to fibrinolytic therapy among 57 patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by sustained hypotension, possible cardiogenic shock, or possible heart failure. The primary end point, mortality at 6 months, did not differ between groups (34% for combined treatment versus 43% for fibrinolysis alone [n = 27]; adjusted P = 0.23), although patients with Killip class III or IV did show a trend toward greater benefit from IABP (39% for combined therapy versus 80% for fibrinolysis; P = 0.05).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15976965     DOI: 10.1007/s11239-005-0938-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis        ISSN: 0929-5305            Impact factor:   2.300


  19 in total

1.  Aortic counterpulsation in acute myocardial infarction: physiologically important but does the patient benefit?

Authors:  E M Ohman; J S Hochman
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 4.749

2.  Thrombolysis plus aortic counterpulsation: improved survival in patients who present to community hospitals with cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  P J Kovack; M A Rasak; E R Bates; E M Ohman; R J Stomel
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 24.094

3.  Treatment of myocardial infarction in a coronary care unit. A two year experience with 250 patients.

Authors:  T Killip; J T Kimball
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  1967-10       Impact factor: 2.778

4.  Use of intraaortic balloon counterpulsation in patients presenting with cardiogenic shock: observations from the GUSTO-I Study. Global Utilization of Streptokinase and TPA for Occluded Coronary Arteries.

Authors:  R D Anderson; E M Ohman; D R Holmes; I Col; A L Stebbins; E R Bates; R J Stomel; C B Granger; E J Topol; R M Califf
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 24.094

5.  Early revascularization in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. SHOCK Investigators. Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock.

Authors:  J S Hochman; L A Sleeper; J G Webb; T A Sanborn; H D White; J D Talley; C E Buller; A K Jacobs; J N Slater; J Col; S M McKinlay; T H LeJemtel
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1999-08-26       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 6.  Interventional management of cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  J G Webb
Journal:  Can J Cardiol       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 5.223

7.  An analysis of the cause of early mortality after administration of thrombolytic therapy. The Thrombolysis Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction Study Group.

Authors:  E M Ohman; E J Topol; R M Califf; E R Bates; S G Ellis; D J Kereiakes; B S George; J K Samaha; E Kline; K N Sigmon
Journal:  Coron Artery Dis       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 1.439

8.  Arterial diastolic pressure augmentation by intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation enhances the onset of coronary artery reperfusion by thrombolytic therapy.

Authors:  P A Gurbel; R D Anderson; C S MacCord; H Scott; S F Komjathy; J Poulton; J L Stafford; J Godard
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 29.690

9.  Early and 1-year survival rates in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: a retrospective study comparing coronary angioplasty with medical treatment.

Authors:  H Eltchaninoff; C Simpfendorfer; I Franco; R E Raymond; P N Casale; P L Whitlow
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 4.749

10.  Enhanced coronary blood flow velocity during intraaortic balloon counterpulsation in critically ill patients.

Authors:  M J Kern; F V Aguirre; S Tatineni; D Penick; H Serota; T Donohue; K Walter
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  1993-02       Impact factor: 24.094

View more
  26 in total

Review 1.  [Intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) counterpulsation. Do we still need it and if so when?].

Authors:  M Russ
Journal:  Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed       Date:  2015-09-04       Impact factor: 0.840

Review 2.  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

Review 3.  [Mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock].

Authors:  M W Ferrari
Journal:  Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed       Date:  2018-11-06       Impact factor: 0.840

4.  Intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation: are we optimizing the management of cardiogenic shock?

Authors:  F Shahid; M Akhtar; F Khan; C A A Chahal
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 5.344

Review 5.  Mechanical Circulatory Support in High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Authors:  Bhuvnesh Aggarwal; Wahaj Aman; Omar Jeroudi; Neal S Kleiman
Journal:  Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J       Date:  2018 Jan-Mar

Review 6.  Vasopressors for acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  R Prondzinsky; K Hirsch; L Wachsmuth; M Buerke; S Unverzagt
Journal:  Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed       Date:  2017-12-04       Impact factor: 0.840

Review 7.  [Therapeutic strategies in acute decompensated heart failure and cardiogenic shock].

Authors:  M Buerke; H Lemm; M Russ; A Schlitt; K Werdan
Journal:  Internist (Berl)       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 0.743

8.  Therapeutic strategies for cardiogenic shock, 2006.

Authors:  Troy C Ellis; Eli Lev; Naji F Yazbek; Neal S Kleiman
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2006-02

9.  A severity scoring system for risk assessment of patients with cardiogenic shock: a report from the SHOCK Trial and Registry.

Authors:  Lynn A Sleeper; Harmony R Reynolds; Harvey D White; John G Webb; Vladimir Dzavík; Judith S Hochman
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 4.749

10.  Temporal trends in the use of intraaortic balloon pump associated with percutaneous coronary intervention in the United States, 1998-2008.

Authors:  Hiren Patel; Anupama Shivaraju; Gregg C Fonarow; Hui Xie; Weihua Gao; Adhir R Shroff; Mladen I Vidovich
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2014-06-06       Impact factor: 4.749

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.