Literature DB >> 29112104

Cardiogenic Shock Due to End-Stage Heart Failure and Acute Myocardial Infarction: Characteristics and Outcome of Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support.

Hoong Sern Lim1, Neil Howell.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is increasingly used in cardiogenic shock, but outcomes may differ between patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) or end-stage heart failure (ESHF). This study aimed to describe the characteristics of patients with cardiogenic shock due to AMI and ESHF.
METHODS: Single-center study of consecutive patients with cardiogenic shock due to AMI (n = 26) and ESHF (n = 42) who underwent MCS (extracorporeal life support, Impella or temporary ventricular assist devices). Arterial and venous O2 content and CO2 tension (PCO2), O2-hemoglobin affinity (P50) were measured. Veno-arterial difference in PCO2/arterio-venous difference in O2 content ratio was derived. Acid-base balance was characterized by the Gilfix method. MCS-related complications that required intervention or surgery were collected.
RESULTS: Patients with ESHF had lower ejection fraction, higher right and left-sided filling pressures, pulmonary artery pressure and vascular resistance, lower oxygen delivery (DO2) compared with AMI, which was not fully compensated by the increased hemoglobin P50. As a result, patients with ESHF had higher veno-arterial difference in PCO2 relative to arterio-venous difference in O2 content. Despite greater anerobic metabolism, patients with ESHF had less severe metabolic acidosis and base deficit compared with AMI, predominantly due to differences in strong ions.
CONCLUSION: The cardiogenic shock phenotype in ESHF was distinct from AMI, characterized by higher filling and pulmonary artery pressures, lower DO2, greater anaerobic metabolism but less severe metabolic acidosis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29112104     DOI: 10.1097/SHK.0000000000001052

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Shock        ISSN: 1073-2322            Impact factor:   3.454


  9 in total

1.  Association of Lymphocyte to Monocyte Ratio and Risk of in-Hospital Mortality in Patients with Cardiogenic Shock: A Propensity Score Matching Study.

Authors:  Zhengwei Zhang; Qionghua Hu; Tianyang Hu
Journal:  Int J Gen Med       Date:  2021-08-12

2.  Outcomes of temporary mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock due to end-stage heart failure.

Authors:  Hoong Sern Lim; Aaron Ranasinghe; David Quinn; Colin Chue; Jorge Mascaro
Journal:  J Intensive Care Soc       Date:  2021-01-22

3.  De Novo vs Acute-on-Chronic Presentations of Heart Failure-Related Cardiogenic Shock: Insights from the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network Registry.

Authors:  Ankeet S Bhatt; David D Berg; Erin A Bohula; Carlos L Alviar; Vivian M Baird-Zars; Christopher F Barnett; James A Burke; Anthony P Carnicelli; Sunit-Preet Chaudhry; Lori B Daniels; James C Fang; Christopher B Fordyce; Daniel A Gerber; Jianping Guo; Jacob C Jentzer; Jason N Katz; Norma Keller; Michael C Kontos; Patrick R Lawler; Venu Menon; Thomas S Metkus; Jose Nativi-Nicolau; Nicholas Phreaner; Robert O Roswell; Shashank S Sinha; R Jeffrey Snell; Michael A Solomon; Sean Van Diepen; David A Morrow
Journal:  J Card Fail       Date:  2021-10       Impact factor: 6.592

Review 4.  A Standardized and Comprehensive Approach to the Management of Cardiogenic Shock.

Authors:  Behnam N Tehrani; Alexander G Truesdell; Mitchell A Psotka; Carolyn Rosner; Ramesh Singh; Shashank S Sinha; Abdulla A Damluji; Wayne B Batchelor
Journal:  JACC Heart Fail       Date:  2020-11       Impact factor: 12.035

5.  Outcome differences in acute vs. acute on chronic heart failure and cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  Tara L Jones; Michael C Tan; Vidang Nguyen; Kathleen E Kearney; Charles C Maynard; Emily Anderson; Claudius Mahr; James M McCabe
Journal:  ESC Heart Fail       Date:  2020-03-11

6.  Temporal trends, predictors, and outcomes of acute kidney injury and hemodialysis use in acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  Saraschandra Vallabhajosyula; Shannon M Dunlay; Gregory W Barsness; Saarwaani Vallabhajosyula; Shashaank Vallabhajosyula; Pranathi R Sundaragiri; Bernard J Gersh; Allan S Jaffe; Kianoush Kashani
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-09-18       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Outcomes of Hospitalizations for Cardiogenic Shock at Left Ventricular Assist Device Versus Non-Left Ventricular Assist Device Centers.

Authors:  Joseph I Wang; Daniel Y Lu; Dmitriy N Feldman; Stephen A McCullough; Parag Goyal; Maria G Karas; Irina Sobol; Evelyn M Horn; Luke K Kim; Udhay Krishnan
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2020-11-23       Impact factor: 5.501

Review 8.  Pulmonary artery catheterization in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: A review of contemporary literature.

Authors:  Shiva P Ponamgi; Muhammad Haisum Maqsood; Pranathi R Sundaragiri; Michael G DelCore; Arun Kanmanthareddy; Wissam A Jaber; William J Nicholson; Saraschandra Vallabhajosyula
Journal:  World J Cardiol       Date:  2021-12-26

9.  Pulmonary artery catheter use in acute myocardial infarction-cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  Saraschandra Vallabhajosyula; Aditi Shankar; Sri Harsha Patlolla; Abhiram Prasad; Malcolm R Bell; Jacob C Jentzer; Shilpkumar Arora; Saarwaani Vallabhajosyula; Bernard J Gersh; Allan S Jaffe; David R Holmes; Shannon M Dunlay; Gregory W Barsness
Journal:  ESC Heart Fail       Date:  2020-04-02
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.