CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

Acute Coronary Syndrom

科研文章

荐读文献

Wearable Cardioverter-Defibrillator after Myocardial Infarction Frequency of nonsystem delays in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention and implications for door-to-balloon time reporting (from the American Heart Association Mission: Lifeline program) Effect of improved door-to-balloon time on clinical outcomes in patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction Changes in One-Year Mortality in Elderly Patients Admitted with Acute Myocardial Infarction in Relation with Early Management Prognostic Value of the Residual SYNTAX Score After Functionally Complete Revascularization in ACS Prevalence of Coronary Vasospasm Using Coronary Reactivity Testing in Patients With Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection 2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of chronic coronary syndromes: The Task Force for the diagnosis and management of chronic coronary syndromes of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Non-eligibility for reperfusion therapy in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: Contemporary insights from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) Decade-Long Trends (2001 to 2011) in the Use of Evidence-Based Medical Therapies at the Time of Hospital Discharge for Patients Surviving Acute Myocardial Infarction Complete Revascularization with Multivessel PCI for Myocardial Infarction
|<<... 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ...>>|

Clinical TrialVolume 72, Issue 2, July 2018

JOURNAL：J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Epinephrine Versus Norepinephrine for Cardiogenic Shock After Acute Myocardial Infarction

B Levy, R Clere-Jehl, A Legras et al. Keywords: acute myocardial infarctioncardiogenic shock; epinephrinenorepinephrinevasopressor

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND - Vasopressor agents could have certain specific effects in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) after myocardial infarction, which may influence outcome. Although norepinephrine and epinephrine are currently the most commonly used agents, no randomized trial has compared their effects, and intervention data are lacking.


OBJECTIVES - The goal of this paper was to compare in a prospective, double-blind, multicenter, randomized study, the efficacy and safety of epinephrine and norepinephrine in patients with CS after acute myocardial infarction.

METHODS - The primary efficacy outcome was cardiac index evolution, and the primary safety outcome was the occurrence of refractory CS. Refractory CS was defined as CS with sustained hypotension, end-organ hypoperfusion and hyperlactatemia, and high inotrope and vasopressor doses.

RESULTS - Fifty-seven patients were randomized into 2 study arms, epinephrine and norepinephrine. For the primary efficacy endpoint, cardiac index evolution was similar between the 2 groups (p = 0.43) from baseline (H0) to H72. For the main safety endpoint, the observed higher incidence of refractory shock in the epinephrine group (10 of 27 [37%] vs. norepinephrine 2 of 30 [7%]; p = 0.008) led to early termination of the study. Heart rate increased significantly with epinephrine from H2 to H24 while remaining unchanged with norepinephrine (p < 0.0001). Several metabolic changes were unfavorable to epinephrine compared with norepinephrine, including an increase in cardiac double product (p = 0.0002) and lactic acidosis from H2 to H24 (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS - In patients with CS secondary to acute myocardial infarction, the use of epinephrine compared with norepinephrine was associated with similar effects on arterial pressure and cardiac index and a higher incidence of refractory shock. (Study Comparing the Efficacy and Tolerability of Epinephrine and Norepinephrine in Cardiogenic Shock [OptimaCC]; NCT01367743)
>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 注册

> CBS 2019 会议日程

> CBS 2019 学术征集

> CBS 2019 热点

 CBSMD

> CBSMD 网站注册

> 教育中心

> 荐读文献

> Top 10 阅读文献

> 文献导读
CBS 2019 CBS 2019 主席团 教育中心 科研动态
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top