Literature DB >> 26803418

Temporal Trends and Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Interventions for Cardiogenic Shock in the Setting of Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Report From the CathPCI Registry.

Siddharth A Wayangankar1, Sripal Bangalore2, Lisa A McCoy3, Hani Jneid4, Faisal Latif5, Wassef Karrowni6, Konstantinos Charitakis7, Dmitriy N Feldman7, Habib A Dakik8, Laura Mauri9, Eric D Peterson3, John Messenger10, Mathew Roe3, Debabrata Mukherjee11, Andrew Klein12.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to examine the temporal trends in demographics, clinical characteristics, management strategies, and in-hospital outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS-AMI) who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) from the Cath-PCI Registry (2005 to 2013).
BACKGROUND: The authors examined contemporary use and outcomes of PCI in patients with CS-AMI.
METHODS: The authors used the Cath-PCI Registry to evaluate 56,497 patients (January 2005 to December 2013) undergoing PCI for CS-AMI. Temporal trends in clinical variables and outcomes were assessed.
RESULTS: Compared with cases performed from 2005 to 2006, CS-AMI patients receiving PCI from 2011 to 2013 were more likely to have diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, previous PCI, dialysis, but less likely to have chronic lung disease, peripheral vascular disease, or heart failure within 2 weeks (p < 0.01). Between 2005 and 2006 to 2011 and 2013, intra-aortic balloon pump use decreased (49.5% to 44.9%; p < 0.01), drug-eluting stent use declined (65% to 46%; p < 0.01), and the use of bivalirudin increased (12.6% to 45.6%). Adjusted in-hospital mortality; increased (27.6% in 2005 to 2006 vs. 30.6% in 2011 to 2013, adjusted odds ratio: 1.09, 95% confidence interval: 1.005 to .173; p = 0.04) for patients who were managed with an early invasive strategy (<24 h from symptoms).
CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that despite the evolution of medical technology and use of contemporary therapeutic measures, in-hospital mortality in CS-AMI patients who are managed invasively continues to rise. Additional research and targeted efforts are indicated to improve outcomes in this high-risk cohort.
Copyright © 2016 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  acute coronary syndrome(s); acute myocardial infarction; cardiogenic shock; percutaneous coronary intervention

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26803418     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2015.10.039

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Interv        ISSN: 1936-8798            Impact factor:   11.195


  33 in total

Review 1.  Mechanical Circulatory Support: a Comprehensive Review With a Focus on Women.

Authors:  Manal Alasnag; Alexander G Truesdell; Holli Williams; Sara C Martinez; Syeda Kashfi Qadri; John P Skendelas; William A Jakobleff; Mirvat Alasnag
Journal:  Curr Atheroscler Rep       Date:  2020-04-23       Impact factor: 5.113

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

3.  Incidence and clinical outcomes of bleeding complications and acute limb ischemia in STEMI and cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  Mohit Pahuja; Sagar Ranka; Omar Chehab; Tushar Mishra; Emmanuel Akintoye; Oluwole Adegbala; Ahmed S Yassin; Tomo Ando; Katherine L Thayer; Palak Shah; Carey D Kimmelstiel; Payam Salehi; Navin K Kapur
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2020-05-30       Impact factor: 2.692

4.  Coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention for myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  Nathaniel R Smilowitz; Carlos L Alviar; Stuart D Katz; Judith S Hochman
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2020-03-12       Impact factor: 4.749

5.  Immediate non-culprit vessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock: a swinging pendulum.

Authors:  Juan J Russo; Akshay Bagai; Michel R Le May; Andrew T Yan
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 2.895

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.  'Combat' Approach to Cardiogenic Shock.

Authors:  Alexander G Truesdell; Behnam Tehrani; Ramesh Singh; Shashank Desai; Patricia Saulino; Scott Barnett; Stephen Lavanier; Charles Murphy
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2018-05

8.  Impact of Killip classification on acute myocardial infarction: data from the SAIKUMA registry.

Authors:  Eiji Taguchi; Yutaka Konami; Masayuki Inoue; Hiroto Suzuyama; Kazuhisa Kodama; Masayoshi Yoshida; Shinzo Miyamoto; Koichi Nakao; Tomohiro Sakamoto
Journal:  Heart Vessels       Date:  2017-07-05       Impact factor: 2.037

Review 9.  Systems of Care in Cardiogenic Shock.

Authors:  Maria M Patarroyo Aponte; Carlos Manrique; Biswajit Kar
Journal:  Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J       Date:  2020 Jan-Mar

10.  Is there light at the end of the tunnel?-new perspectives in ECMO survival.

Authors:  Federico Pappalardo; Andrea Montisci
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 2.895

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.