Literature DB >> 29754660

Predictors of intra-aortic balloon pump hemodynamic failure in non-acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock.

Steven Hsu1, Swetha Kambhampati2, Christopher M Sciortino3, Stuart D Russell2, Steven P Schulman2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To characterize patient profile and hemodynamic profile of those undergoing intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) for cardiogenic shock and define predictors of hemodynamic failure of IABP support.
BACKGROUND: Clinical characteristics of IABP support in cardiogenic shock not related to acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remain poorly characterized.
METHODS: We retrospectively studied a cohort of 74 patients from 2010 to 2015 who underwent IABP insertion for cardiogenic shock complicating acute decompensated heart failure not due to AMI.
RESULTS: In the overall cohort, which consisted primarily of patients with chronic systolic heart failure (89%), IABP significantly augmented cardiac index and lowered systemic vascular resistance (P<.05). Despite this improvement, 28% of these patients died (24%) or require urgent escalation in mechanical circulatory support (MCS) (4%). Multivariable regression revealed that baseline left ventricular cardiac power index (LVCPI), a measure of LV power output derived from cardiac index and mean arterial pressure (P=.01), and history of ischemic cardiomyopathy (P=.003) were significantly associated with the composite adverse-event endpoint of death or urgent MCS escalation. An IABP Failure risk score using baseline LVCPI <0.28 W/m2 and ischemic history predicted 28-day adverse events with excellent discrimination.
CONCLUSION: Despite hemodynamic improvements with IABP support, patients with non-AMI cardiogenic shock still suffer poor outcomes. Patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and low LVPCI fared significantly worse. These patients may warrant closer observation or earlier consideration of more advanced hemodynamic support.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29754660      PMCID: PMC5955398          DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2017.11.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am Heart J        ISSN: 0002-8703            Impact factor:   4.749


  21 in total

1.  A single center tertiary care experience utilizing the large volume mega 50cc intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation in contemporary clinical practice.

Authors:  Gautam K Visveswaran; Marc Cohen; Ahmed Seliem; Michael DiVita; Jonathan K R McNamara; Amar Dave; Najam Wasty; David A Baran
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 2.692

2.  Outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous ventricular assist device implantation for cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  David D Berg; Devraj Sukul; Molly O'Brien; Benjamin M Scirica; Piotr S Sobieszczyk; Benjamin A Olenchock; Erin A Bohula; David A Morrow
Journal:  Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care       Date:  2015-04-30

3.  Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (IABP-SHOCK II): final 12 month results of a randomised, open-label trial.

Authors:  Holger Thiele; Uwe Zeymer; Franz-Josef Neumann; Miroslaw Ferenc; Hans-Georg Olbrich; Jörg Hausleiter; Antoinette de Waha; Gert Richardt; Marcus Hennersdorf; Klaus Empen; Georg Fuernau; Steffen Desch; Ingo Eitel; Rainer Hambrecht; Bernward Lauer; Michael Böhm; Henning Ebelt; Steffen Schneider; Karl Werdan; Gerhard Schuler
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2013-09-03       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Development and prospective validation of a clinical index to predict survival in ambulatory patients referred for cardiac transplant evaluation.

Authors:  K D Aaronson; J S Schwartz; T M Chen; K L Wong; J E Goin; D M Mancini
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1997-06-17       Impact factor: 29.690

5.  Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Versus Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump in Cardiogenic Shock After Acute Myocardial Infarction.

Authors:  Dagmar M Ouweneel; Erlend Eriksen; Krischan D Sjauw; Ivo M van Dongen; Alexander Hirsch; Erik J S Packer; M Marije Vis; Joanna J Wykrzykowska; Karel T Koch; Jan Baan; Robbert J de Winter; Jan J Piek; Wim K Lagrand; Bas A J M de Mol; Jan G P Tijssen; José P S Henriques
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2016-10-31       Impact factor: 24.094

6.  Intraaortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  Holger Thiele; Uwe Zeymer; Franz-Josef Neumann; Miroslaw Ferenc; Hans-Georg Olbrich; Jörg Hausleiter; Gert Richardt; Marcus Hennersdorf; Klaus Empen; Georg Fuernau; Steffen Desch; Ingo Eitel; Rainer Hambrecht; Jörg Fuhrmann; Michael Böhm; Henning Ebelt; Steffen Schneider; Gerhard Schuler; Karl Werdan
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2012-08-26       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  The short-term prognosis of cardiogenic shock can be determined using hemodynamic variables: a retrospective cohort study*.

Authors:  Fabio Rigamonti; Guillaume Graf; Paolo Merlani; Karim Bendjelid
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 7.598

8.  Cardiac power index, mean arterial pressure, and Simplified Acute Physiology Score II are strong predictors of survival and response to revascularization in cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  Batric Popovic; Renaud Fay; Aurelie Cravoisy-Popovic; Bruno Levy
Journal:  Shock       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 3.454

9.  A randomized clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a percutaneous left ventricular assist device versus intra-aortic balloon pumping for treatment of cardiogenic shock caused by myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Melchior Seyfarth; Dirk Sibbing; Iris Bauer; Georg Fröhlich; Lorenz Bott-Flügel; Robert Byrne; Josef Dirschinger; Adnan Kastrati; Albert Schömig
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2008-11-04       Impact factor: 24.094

Review 10.  Mechanical circulatory support in the new era: an overview.

Authors:  Kiran Shekar; Shaun D Gregory; John F Fraser
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2016-03-16       Impact factor: 9.097

View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  Mechanical Left Ventricular Unloading to Reduce Infarct Size During Acute Myocardial Infarction: Insight from Preclinical and Clinical Studies.

Authors:  Navin K Kapur; Lara Reyelt; Lija Swain; Michele Esposito; Xiaoying Qiao; Shiva Annamalai; Bart Meyns; Richard Smalling
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Transl Res       Date:  2019-04-23       Impact factor: 4.132

Review 2.  Hemodynamics for the Heart Failure Clinician: A State-of-the-Art Review.

Authors:  Steven Hsu; James C Fang; Barry A Borlaug
Journal:  J Card Fail       Date:  2021-08-10       Impact factor: 5.712

Review 3.  Cardiogenic shock teams and centres: a contemporary review of multidisciplinary care for cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  Nima Moghaddam; Sean van Diepen; Derek So; Patrick R Lawler; Christopher B Fordyce
Journal:  ESC Heart Fail       Date:  2021-01-16

4.  Predicting survival in patients with acute decompensated heart failure complicated by cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  Nuccia Morici; Giovanna Viola; Laura Antolini; Gianfranco Alicandro; Michela Dal Martello; Alice Sacco; Maurizio Bottiroli; Federico Pappalardo; Luca Villanova; Laura De Ponti; Carlo La Vecchia; Maria Frigerio; Fabrizio Oliva; Justin Fried; Paolo Colombo; Arthur Reshad Garan
Journal:  Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc       Date:  2021-06-04

Review 5.  Mechanical Support in Early Cardiogenic Shock: What Is the Role of Intra-aortic Balloon Counterpulsation?

Authors:  Jesse R Kimman; Nicolas M Van Mieghem; Henrik Endeman; Jasper J Brugts; Alina A Constantinescu; Olivier C Manintveld; Eric A Dubois; Corstiaan A den Uil
Journal:  Curr Heart Fail Rep       Date:  2020-10
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.