| Literature DB >> 31782697 |
Yin Liu1, Chang-Ping Li2, Peng-Ju Lu1, Xu-Ying Wang3, Jian-Yong Xiao1, Ming-Dong Gao1, Ji-Xiang Wang1, Xiao-Wei Li1, Nan Zhang1, Chun-Jie Li1, Jun Ma2, Jing Gao4.
Abstract
There is little evidence to recommend the optimal invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) modes and ideal positive end-expiratory pressure stress levels for acute myocardial infarction-cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) patients. The aim of this study was to compare the mortality outcome in patients with AMI-CS who were treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) assisted by intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) + IMV with historical controls. From January 1, 2016 to June 1, 2017, 60 patients were retrospectively enrolled at Tianjin Chest Hospital. Out of these, 88.3% of patients achieved thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow 3 after PCI. The all-cause mortality rate in-hospital and at 1 year was 25% (95% CI: 0.14-0.36) and 33.9% (0.22-0.46), respectively. A systematic review followed by meta-analysis was performed with four historical studies of patients treated by PCI + IMV with partial IABP, which found an in-hospital mortality rate of 66.0% (95% CI: 0.62-0.71). Recently, a meta-analysis of patients receiving PCI + IABP with partial IMV showed that the 1 year mortality rate was 52.2% (95% CI: 0.47-0.58). In Cox regression analysis of patient data from the current study, lactic acid level ≥4.5 mmol/L, hyperuricemia, and TIMI flow <3 were independent predictors of death at 1 year. All-cause mortality, in-hospital and at 1 year, in patients with AMI-CS treated with PCI + IABP and IMV was lower than in those treated with PCI + partial IABP or IMV. Larger, longer-term direct comparisons are warranted.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 31782697 PMCID: PMC7664793 DOI: 10.17305/bjbms.2019.4500
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bosn J Basic Med Sci ISSN: 1512-8601 Impact factor: 3.363
FIGURE 1Overall study design. AMI: Acute myocardial infarction; CS: Cardiogenic shock; IMV: Invasive mechanical ventilation; IABP: Intra-aortic balloon pump; PCI: Percutaneous coronary intervention; MACE: Major adverse cardiac events.
Baseline characteristics and laboratory parameters of patients included in the retrospective cohort study
Clinical outcomes of patients treated with PCI assisted by both IMV and IABP (PCI+IMV+IABP) in the retrospective cohort study
FIGURE 2In-hospital mortality of patients with acute myocardial infarction-cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) receiving percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) assisted by invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and partial intra-aortic balloon pump [IABP] (PCI + IMV + partial IABP).
FIGURE 3Comparisons of mortality among the three different therapeutic strategies at indicated time points. PCI: Percutaneous coronary intervention; IABP: Intra-aortic balloon pump; IMV: Invasive mechanical ventilation.
Predictors of 1-year mortality rate by univariable and stepwise multivariable Cox regression analyses after treatment with PCI+IMV+partial IABP
FIGURE 4Time-to-event curves of subgroups segregated based on the independent risk factors for 1-year all-cause mortality. (A) Hyperuricemia, (B) arterial lactate, (C) thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow grade, (D) all patients.