CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

急性冠脉综合征

科研文章

荐读文献

Pharmacotherapy in the Management of Anxiety and Pain During Acute Coronary Syndromes and the Risk of Developing Symptoms of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Eruptive Calcified Nodules as a Potential Mechanism of Acute Coronary Thrombosis and Sudden Death Coronary Angiography in Patients With Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Without ST-Segment Elevation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Evaluation and Management of Nonculprit Lesions in STEMI Epidemiology and Clinical Outcomes of Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease Presenting With Acute Coronary Syndrome From Early Pharmacology to Recent Pharmacology Interventions in Acute Coronary Syndromes Phosphoproteomic Analysis of Neonatal Regenerative Myocardium Revealed Important Roles of CHK1 via Activating mTORC1/P70S6K Pathway Impact of tissue protrusion after coronary stenting in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction Diagnosis and Prognosis of Coronary Artery Disease with SPECT and PET Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Chronic Total Occlusion—The Michigan Experience: Insights From the BMC2 Registry

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.