Literature DB >> 29111770

Contemporary trends in cardiogenic shock: Incidence, intra-aortic balloon pump utilisation and outcomes from the London Heart Attack Group.

Krishnaraj S Rathod1, Sudheer Koganti1, M Bilal Iqbal2, Ajay K Jain1, Sundeep S Kalra3, Zoe Astroulakis4, Pitt Lim4, Roby Rakhit5, Miles C Dalby2, Tim Lockie5, Iqbal S Malik6, Charles J Knight1, Mark Whitbread7, Anthony Mathur1, Simon Redwood8, Philip A MacCarthy3, Alexander Sirker1, Constantinos O'Mahony1, Andrew Wragg1, Daniel A Jones1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cardiogenic shock remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. We aimed to assess the current trends in cardiogenic shock management, looking specifically at the incidence, use of intra-aortic balloon pump therapy and outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS AND
RESULTS: We undertook an observational cohort study of 21,210 ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients treated between 2005-2015 at the eight Heart Attack Centres in London, UK. Patients' details were recorded at the time of the procedure into local databases using the British Cardiac Intervention Society percutaneous coronary intervention dataset. There were 1890 patients who presented with cardiogenic shock. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at a median follow-up of 4.1 years (interquartile range: 2.2-5.8 years). Increasing rates of cardiogenic shock were seen over the course of the study with consistently high mortality rates of 45-70%. A total of 685 patients underwent intra-aortic balloon pump insertion during primary percutaneous coronary intervention for cardiogenic shock with decreasing rates over time. Those patients undergoing intra-aortic balloon pump therapy were younger, more likely to have poor left ventricular function and less likely to have had previous percutaneous coronary intervention compared to the control group. Procedural success rates were similar (86.0% vs 87.1%, p=0.292) although crude, in-hospital major adverse cardiac event rates were higher (43.8% vs 33.7%, p<0.0001) in patients undergoing intra-aortic balloon pump therapy. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated significantly higher mortality rates in patients receiving intra-aortic balloon pump therapy (50.9% intra-aortic balloon pump vs 39.9% control, p<0.0001) during the follow-up period. After multivariate Cox analysis (hazard ratio 1.04, 95% confidence interval 0.62-1.89) and the use of propensity matching (hazard ratio: 1.29, 95% confidence interval: 0.68-1.45) intra-aortic balloon pump therapy was not associated with mortality.
CONCLUSION: Cardiogenic shock treated by percutaneous coronary intervention is increasing in incidence and remains a condition associated with high mortality and limited treatment options. Intra-aortic balloon pump therapy was not associated with a long-term survival benefit in this cohort and may be associated with increased early morbidity.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Primary percutaneous coronary intervention; cardiogenic shock; intra-aortic balloon pump therapy; myocardial infarction

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29111770     DOI: 10.1177/2048872617741735

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care        ISSN: 2048-8726


  18 in total

1.  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

Review 2.  '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

3.  Catheter Ablation in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock and Refractory Ventricular Tachycardia.

Authors:  Jad A Ballout; Oussama M Wazni; Khaldoun G Tarakji; Walid I Saliba; Mohamed Kanj; Mohamed Diab; Mandeep Bhargava; Bryan Baranowski; Thomas J Dresing; Thomas D Callahan; Daniel J Cantillon; John Rickard; David O Martin; Niraj Varma; Mark J Niebauer; Mina K Chung; Patrick J Tchou; Bruce D Lindsay; Ayman A Hussein
Journal:  Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol       Date:  2020-04-12

4.  Shifting the attention from devices to treatment: the lesson from IABP-SHOCK II and other trials in cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  Francesco Saia
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 5.  Contemporary device management of cardiogenic shock following acute myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Tariq Suleiman; Alexander Scott; David Tong; Vikram Khanna; Vijay Kunadian
Journal:  Heart Fail Rev       Date:  2021-03-03       Impact factor: 4.214

6.  Prognostic Impact of Active Mechanical Circulatory Support in Cardiogenic Shock Complicating Acute Myocardial Infarction, Results from the Culprit-Shock Trial.

Authors:  Hans-Josef Feistritzer; Steffen Desch; Anne Freund; Janine Poess; Uwe Zeymer; Taoufik Ouarrak; Steffen Schneider; Suzanne de Waha-Thiele; Georg Fuernau; Ingo Eitel; Marko Noc; Janina Stepinska; Kurt Huber; Holger Thiele
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2020-06-24       Impact factor: 4.241

Review 7.  Cardiogenic shock: evolving definitions and future directions in management.

Authors:  Tara L Jones; Kenta Nakamura; James M McCabe
Journal:  Open Heart       Date:  2019-05-08

8.  Isoflurane Sedation in Patients Undergoing Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Treatment for Cardiogenic Shock-An Observational Propensity-Matched Study.

Authors:  Clemens Scherer; Danny Kupka; Thomas J Stocker; Dominik Joskowiak; Hanna Scheuplein; Carmen Maria Schönegger; Frank Born; Christopher Stremmel; Enzo Lüsebrink; Konstantin Stark; Mathias Orban; Tobias Petzold; Sven Peterss; Jörg Hausleiter; Christian Hagl; Steffen Massberg; Martin Orban
Journal:  Crit Care Explor       Date:  2020-03-24

9.  Contemporary trends in use of mechanical circulatory support in patients with acute MI and cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  Ole Kristian Lerche Helgestad; Jakob Josiassen; Christian Hassager; Lisette Okkels Jensen; Lene Holmvang; Nanna Louise Junker Udesen; Henrik Schmidt; Hanne Berg Ravn; Jacob Eifer Moller
Journal:  Open Heart       Date:  2020-03-04

10.  An Observational Study Assessing Immediate Complete Versus Delayed Complete Revascularisation in Patients with Multi-Vessel Disease Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Authors:  Krishnaraj Sinhji Rathod; Marco Spagnolo; Mark K Elliott; Anne-Marie Beirne; Elliot J Smith; Rajiv Amersey; Charles Knight; Roshan Weerackody; Andreas Baumbach; Anthony Mathur; Daniel A Jones
Journal:  Clin Med Insights Cardiol       Date:  2020-08-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.