CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Acute Coronary Syndrom

Abstract

Recommended Article

Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction During the COVID-19 Pandemic 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization - The Task Force on myocardial revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and European Association for Cardio- Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) Prognostic significance of QRS fragmentation and correlation with infarct size in patients with anterior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated with percutaneous coronary intervention: Insights from the INFUSE-AMI trial Comparison of Delay Times Between Symptom Onset of an Acute ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction and Hospital Arrival in Men and Women <65 Years Versus ≥65 Years of Age.: Findings From the Multicenter Munich Examination of Delay in Patients Experiencing Acute Myocardial Infarction (MEDEA) Study Comparison of Physician Visual Assessment With Quantitative Coronary Angiography in Assessment of Stenosis Severity in China Silent Myocardial Infarction and Long-Term Risk of Heart Failure: The ARIC Study 2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization: The Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)Developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) PCI Strategies in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock
|<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ...>>|

Original Research2017 Oct;6(7):601-609.

JOURNAL：Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. Article Link

Editor's Choice- Impact of immediate multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention versus culprit lesion intervention on 1-year outcome in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: Results of the randomised IABP-SHOCK II trial

Zeymer U, Werdan K, Thiele H et al. Keywords: multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention; cardiogenic shock; culprit artery; mortality; myocardial infarction; IABP-SHOCK II trial

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND - Current guidelines recommend immediate multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with cardiogenic shock, despite the lack of randomised trials. We sought to investigate the use and impact on outcome of multivessel PCI in comparison to culprit lesion only PCI in a retrospective analysis in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction.

 

METHODS AND RESULTS - In the randomised IABP-SHOCK II trial, investigating the effect of intra-aortic balloon pump on outcome, 451 (75%) of the total of 600 patients had multivessel coronary artery disease and underwent PCI. Immediate multivessel PCI was performed in 167 (37%) patients. TIMI 3 patency after PCI in all treated vessels was observed in 83.2% versus 79.0% of patients after multivessel versus culprit lesion PCI, respectively. The 30-day (44.9% vs. 42.3%) and 12-month (54.8% vs. 52.7%) mortality rates did not significantly differ between the two groups. In the multivariate analysis multivessel PCI was not associated with an improved mortality after 12 months (odds ratio 0.92, 95% confidence intervals 0.69-1.21).

 

CONCLUSION - In this retrospective analysis of the largest randomised study in cardiogenic shock immediate multivessel PCI was used in approximately one third of patients with cardiogenic shock. There was no benefit with immediate multivessel PCI in comparison to culprit lesion only PCI. Therefore a randomised trial is needed to determine the definitive role of multivessel PCI in cardiogenic shock.

 

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION - ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT00491036.

>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 REGISTRATION

> CBS 2019 PROGRAM

> CBS 2019 CALL FOR SCIENCE

> CBS 2019 SPOTLIGHTS

 CBSMD

> CBSMD WEBSITE REGISTRATION

> EDUCATION CENTER

> RECOMMANDED PAPER

> TOP 10 RESEARCH PAPER

> PRE-READING

CBS 2019 CBS 2019 FACULTY Education Resource CBSMD Scientific Library
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top