Mechanical circulatory support versus vasopressors alone in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

被引:1
|
作者
Javaid, Awad I. [1 ]
Michalek, Joel E. [2 ]
Gruslova, Aleksandra B. [3 ]
Hoskins, Serene A. [3 ]
Ahsan, Chowdhury H. [1 ]
Feldman, Marc D. [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Nevada, Div Cardiovasc Med, Kirk Kerkorian Sch Med, Las Vegas, NV 89154 USA
[2] Univ Texas Hlth San Antonio, Dept Populat Hlth Sci, San Antonio, TX USA
[3] Univ Texas Hlth San Antonio, Dept Med, Div Cardiol, San Antonio, TX USA
关键词
ACS-acute coronary syndrome; CS-cardiogenic shock; Impella; MCS-mechanical circulatory support; PCI-percutaneous coronary intervention; SCIENTIFIC STATEMENT; EARLY INITIATION; ESC GUIDELINES; IMPELLA; 2.5; MANAGEMENT; DIAGNOSIS; SURVIVAL;
D O I
10.1002/ccd.30913
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
BackgroundPrevious studies have compared Impella use to intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) use in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Our objective was to compare clinical outcomes in patients with AMI-CS undergoing PCI who received Impella (percutaneous left ventricular assist device) without vasopressors, IABP without vasopressors, and vasopressors without mechanical circulatory support (MCS).MethodsWe queried the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) using ICD-10 codes (2015-2018) to identify patients with AMI-CS undergoing PCI. We created three propensity-matched cohorts to examine clinical outcomes in patients receiving Impella versus IABP, Impella versus vasopressors without MCS, and IABP versus vasopressors without MCS.ResultsAmong 17,762 patients, Impella use was associated with significantly higher in-hospital major bleeding (31.4% vs. 13.6%; p < 0.001) and hospital charges (p < 0.001) compared to IABP use, with no benefit in mortality (34.1% vs. 26.9%; p = 0.06). Impella use was associated with significantly higher mortality (42.3% vs. 35.7%; p = 0.02), major bleeding (33.9% vs. 22.7%; p = 0.001), and hospital charges (p < 0.001), when compared to the use of vasopressors without MCS. There were no significant differences in clinical outcomes between IABP use and the use of vasopressor without MCS.ConclusionsIn this analysis of retrospective data of patients with AMI-CS undergoing PCI, Impella use was associated with higher mortality, major bleeding, and in-hospital charges when compared to vasopressor therapy without MCS. When compared to IABP use, Impella was associated with no mortality benefit, along with higher major bleeding events and in-hospital charges. A vasopressor-only strategy suggested no difference in clinical outcomes when compared to IABP. This study uses the NIS for the first time to highlight outcomes in AMI-CS patients undergoing PCI when treated with vasopressor support without MCS, compared to Impella and IABP use.
引用
收藏
页码:30 / 41
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Versus Percutaneous Coronary Intervention For Acute Myocardial Infarction With Cardiogenic Shock In The United States
    Smilowitz, Nathaniel R.
    Alviar, Carlos L.
    Katz, Stuart D.
    Hochman, Judith S.
    [J]. CIRCULATION, 2019, 140
  • [32] Cangrelor in patients with percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction after cardiac arrest and/or with cardiogenic shock
    Zeymer, Uwe
    Lober, Christiane
    Richter, Stephan
    Olivier, Christoph B.
    Huber, Kurt
    Haring, Bernhard
    Schwimmbeck, Peter
    Andrassy, Martin
    Akin, Ibrahim
    Cuneo, Alessandro
    Desch, Steffen
    Thiele, Holger
    Geisler, Tobias
    [J]. EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL-ACUTE CARDIOVASCULAR CARE, 2023, 12 (07) : 462 - 463
  • [33] Facilitated percutaneous coronary intervention reduces mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock due to acute myocardial infarction
    Rux, S
    Lenssen, K
    Sonntag, S
    Bruch, L
    Waurick, PE
    Kleber, FX
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 2003, 92 (6A): : 1L - 1L
  • [34] Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock due to end-stage heart failure and acute myocardial infarction
    Lim, H. S. Hoong Sern
    Musa, T.
    Ranasinghe, A.
    Howell, N.
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEART FAILURE, 2017, 19 : 461 - 461
  • [35] Early Utilization of Mechanical Circulatory Support in Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock: The National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative
    Basir, Mir B.
    Lemor, Alejandro
    Gorgis, Sarah
    Patel, Kirit C.
    Kolski, Brian C.
    Bharadwaj, Aditya S.
    Todd, Joshua W.
    Tehrani, Behnam N.
    Truesdell, Alexander G.
    Lasorda, David M.
    Lalonde, Thomas A.
    Kaki, Amir
    Schrieber, Theodore L.
    Patel, Nainesh C.
    Senter, Shaun R.
    Gelormini, Joseph L.
    Marso, Steven P.
    Rahman, Ayaz M.
    Federici, Robert E.
    Wilkins, Charles E.
    Thomas McRae, A.
    Nsair, Ali
    Caputo, Christopher P.
    Khuddus, Matheen A.
    Chahin, Juan J.
    Dupont, Allison G.
    Goldsweig, Andrew M.
    Lim, Michael J.
    Kapur, Navin K.
    Wohns, David H. W.
    Zhou, Yueren
    Hacala, Michael J.
    O'Neill, William W.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION, 2023, 12 (23):
  • [36] Feasibility of early mechanical circulatory support in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: The Detroit cardiogenic shock initiative
    Basir, Mir B.
    Schreiber, Theodore
    Dixon, Simon
    Alaswad, Khaldoon
    Patel, Kirit
    Almany, Steven
    Khandelwal, Akshay
    Hanson, Ivan
    George, Augustine
    Ashbrook, Michael
    Blank, Nimrod
    Abdelsalam, Murad
    Sareen, Nishtha
    Timmis, Steven B. H.
    O'Neill, William W.
    [J]. CATHETERIZATION AND CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2018, 91 (03) : 454 - 461
  • [37] Feasibility of Early Mechanical Circulatory Support in Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock: The Detroit Cardiogenic Shock Initiative
    Basir, Mir
    Schreiber, Theodore
    Dixon, Simon
    Alaswad, Khaldoon
    Patel, Kiritkumar
    Almany, Steven
    Khandelwal, Akshay
    George, Augustine
    Ashbrook, Michael
    Blank, Nimrod
    Sareen, Nishtha
    O'Neill, William
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2017, 70 (18) : B43 - B44
  • [38] Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support for Cardiogenic Shock
    Morine K.J.
    Kapur N.K.
    [J]. Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine, 2016, 18 (1) : 1 - 14
  • [39] Trends and outcomes of different mechanical circulatory support modalities for acute myocardial infarction associated cardiogenic shock in patients undergoing early revascularization
    Ali, Shafaqat
    Kumar, Manoj
    Badu, Irisha
    Farooq, Faryal
    Alsaeed, Thannon
    Sultan, Muhammad
    Atti, Lalitsiri
    Duhan, Sanchit
    Agrawal, Pratik
    Brar, Vijaywant
    Helmy, Tarek
    Tayeb, Taher
    [J]. AMERICAN HEART JOURNAL PLUS: CARDIOLOGY RESEARCH AND PRACTICE, 2024, 46
  • [40] Delirium in patients with cardiogenic shock and percutaneous mechanical circulatory support
    Tersalvi, G.
    Seiler, T.
    Winterton, D.
    Attinger-Toller, A.
    Cioffi, G. M.
    Madanchi, M.
    Somm, S.
    Koch, T.
    Moccetti, F.
    Wolfrum, M.
    Toggweiler, S.
    Bloch, A.
    Kobza, R.
    Cuculi, F.
    Bossard, M.
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEART FAILURE, 2023, 25 : 343 - 343