Literature DB >> 22429669

Extracorporeal life support for cardiogenic shock or cardiac arrest due to acute coronary syndrome.

Shingo Sakamoto1, Norimasa Taniguchi, Shunsuke Nakajima, Akihiko Takahashi.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Few data are available on the clinical outcome of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) complicated by refractory cardiogenic shock or cardiac arrest who receive percutaneous extracorporeal life support (ECLS). We investigated the in-hospital outcome and predictors of mortality in these patients.
METHODS: The investigation was a single-center, retrospective cohort study of 98 ACS patients who received ECLS to reverse hemodynamic collapse refractory to conventional treatment.
RESULTS: Circulatory status before ECLS introduction was cardiogenic shock in 34, ventricular fibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia in 23, and asystole or pulseless electrical activity in 41. Ninety-four patients (95.9%) underwent emergency revascularization, including 92 who received percutaneous coronary intervention and 2 who received isolated coronary artery bypass grafting. Successful angioplasty was achieved in 65 of 92 patients (70.7%). Fifty-four patients (55.1%) were weaned from ECLS, and ECLS-related complications occurred in 35 (35.7%). All-cause in-hospital mortality rate was 67.3%, and the survival rate to hospital discharge was 32.7%. Multivariate analysis revealed that independent predictors of in-hospital mortality were unsuccessful angioplasty, asystole or pulseless electrical activity before ECLS introduction, and ECLS-related complications.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite hemodynamic support with ECLS, patients with ACS complicated by cardiogenic shock or cardiac arrest refractory to conventional treatment had high mortality. However, the higher than 30% in-hospital survival rate in this extremely critical population indicates that ECLS might improve outcomes in ACS by saving the lives of patients in this specialized category. Unsuccessful angioplasty, asystole or pulseless electrical activity before ECLS introduction, and ECLS-related complications were predictors of in-hospital mortality.
Copyright © 2012 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22429669     DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2012.01.032

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg        ISSN: 0003-4975            Impact factor:   4.330


  41 in total

1.  Percutaneous extracorporeal life support for patients in therapy refractory cardiogenic shock: initial results of an interdisciplinary team.

Authors:  Sabina Guenther; Hans D Theiss; Matthias Fischer; Stefan Sattler; Sven Peterss; Frank Born; Maximilian Pichlmaier; Steffen Massberg; Christian Hagl; Nawid Khaladj
Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg       Date:  2013-12-13

2.  [Use of ECMO in adult patients with cardiogenic shock: a position paper of the Austrian Society of Cardiology].

Authors:  Philipp Pichler; Herwig Antretter; Martin Dünser; Stephan Eschertzhuber; Roman Gottardi; Gottfried Heinz; Gerhard Pölzl; Ingrid Pretsch; Angelika Rajek; Andrä Wasler; Daniel Zimpfer; Alexander Geppert
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2015-03-28       Impact factor: 1.704

3.  Determinants of survival and favorable neurologic outcomes in ischemic heart disease treated by veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

Authors:  Keisuke Yonezu; Kenichi Sakakura; Yusuke Watanabe; Yousuke Taniguchi; Kei Yamamoto; Hiroshi Wada; Shin-Ichi Momomura; Hideo Fujita
Journal:  Heart Vessels       Date:  2017-08-03       Impact factor: 2.037

Review 4.  Initiation and management of adult veno-arterial extracorporeal life support.

Authors:  Ahmet Kilic; Bassam N Shukrallah; Arman Kilic; Bryan A Whitson
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2017-02

Review 5.  ECMO and Short-term Support for Cardiogenic Shock in Heart Failure.

Authors:  Mathew Jose Chakaramakkil; Cumaraswamy Sivathasan
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2018-08-16       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 6.  Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices in Cardiogenic Shock.

Authors:  Aditya Mandawat; Sunil V Rao
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 6.546

7.  Door-to-implantation time of extracorporeal life support systems predicts mortality in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

Authors:  Jürgen Leick; Christoph Liebetrau; Sebastian Szardien; Ulrich Fischer-Rasokat; Matthias Willmer; Arnaud van Linden; Johannes Blumenstein; Holger Nef; Andreas Rolf; Matthias Arlt; Thomas Walther; Christian Hamm; Helge Möllmann
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2013-05-09       Impact factor: 5.460

8.  Simulation-based training for handling extracorporeal membrane oxygenation emergencies.

Authors:  Shingo Sakamoto
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 2.895

9.  Position paper for the organization of ECMO programs for cardiac failure in adults.

Authors:  Darryl Abrams; A Reshad Garan; Akram Abdelbary; Matthew Bacchetta; Robert H Bartlett; James Beck; Jan Belohlavek; Yih-Sharng Chen; Eddy Fan; Niall D Ferguson; Jo-Anne Fowles; John Fraser; Michelle Gong; Ibrahim F Hassan; Carol Hodgson; Xiaotong Hou; Katarzyna Hryniewicz; Shingo Ichiba; William A Jakobleff; Roberto Lorusso; Graeme MacLaren; Shay McGuinness; Thomas Mueller; Pauline K Park; Giles Peek; Vin Pellegrino; Susanna Price; Erika B Rosenzweig; Tetsuya Sakamoto; Leonardo Salazar; Matthieu Schmidt; Arthur S Slutsky; Christian Spaulding; Hiroo Takayama; Koji Takeda; Alain Vuylsteke; Alain Combes; Daniel Brodie
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2018-02-15       Impact factor: 17.440

10.  The Role of Percutaneous Haemodynamic Support in High-risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Cardiogenic Shock.

Authors:  Dagmar M Ouweneel; Bimmer E Claessen; Krischan D Sjauw; José Ps Henriques
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2015-03
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.