CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

De-escalation of antianginal medications after successful chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention: Frequency and relationship with health status Stent fracture is associated with a higher mortality in patients with type-2 diabetes treated by implantation of a second-generation drug-eluting stent New technologies for intensive prevention programs after myocardial infarction: rationale and design of the NET-IPP trial Defining Staged Procedures for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Trials A Guidance Document Cardiac Sympathetic Denervation for Refractory Ventricular Arrhythmias Left Ventricular Assist Device as a Bridge to Recovery for Patients With Advanced Heart Failure Prospective Elimination of Distal Coronary Sinus to Left Atrial Connection for Atrial Fibrillation Ablation (PRECAF) Randomized Controlled Trial Oxidative Stress and Cardiovascular Risk: Obesity, Diabetes, Smoking, and Pollution: Part 3 of a 3-Part Series Impact of age and comorbidity on risk stratification in idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension Association of Parenteral Anticoagulation Therapy With Outcomes in Chinese Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome

Original Research2019 Jun 1;93(7):1173-1183.

JOURNAL:Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Improved Outcomes Associated with the use of Shock Protocols: Updates from the National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative

Basir MB, Kapur NK, National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative Investigators. Keywords: ACS/NSTEMI; ECMO/IABP/Tandem/Impella; acute myocardial infarction/STEMI; heart failure; hemodynamics; mechanical circulatory support; shock, cardiogenic

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - The National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative is a single-arm, prospective, multicenter study to assess outcomes associated with early mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock (AMICS) treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

 

METHODS - Between July 2016 and February 2019, 35 sites participated and enrolled into the study. All centers agreed to treat patients with AMICS using a standard protocol emphasizing invasive hemodynamic monitoring and rapid initiation of MCS. Inclusion and exclusion criteria mimicked those of the "SHOCK" trial with an additional exclusion criteria of intra-aortic balloon pump counter-pulsation prior to MCS.

 

RESULTS - A total of 171 consecutive patients were enrolled. Patients had an average age of 63 years, 77% were male, and 68% were admitted with AMICS. About 83% of patients were on vasopressors or inotropes, 20% had a witnessed out of hospital cardiac arrest, 29% had in-hospital cardiac arrest, and 10% were under active cardiopulmonary resuscitation during MCS implantation. In accordance with the protocol, 74% of patients had MCS implanted prior to PCI. Right heart catheterization was performed in 92%. About 78% of patients presented with ST-elevation myocardial infarction with average door to support times of 85 ± 63 min and door to balloon times of 87 ± 58 min. Survival to discharge was 72%. Creatinine 2, lactate >4, cardiac power output (CPO) <0.6 W, and age70 years were predictors of mortality. Lactate and CPO measurements at 12-24 hr reliably predicted overall mortality postindex procedure.

 

CONCLUSION - In contemporary practice, use of a shock protocol emphasizing best practices is associated with improved outcomes.

 

© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.