CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

血流储备分数

Abstract

Recommended Article

Diagnosis of ischemia-causing coronary stenoses by noninvasive fractional flow reserve computed from coronary computed tomographic angiograms. Results from the prospective multicenter DISCOVER-FLOW Fractional Flow Reserve-Guided Complete Revascularization Improves the Prognosis in Patients With ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Severe Nonculprit Disease: A DANAMI 3-PRIMULTI Substudy (Primary PCI in Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Multivessel Disease: Treatment Prognostic Implication of Thermodilution Coronary Flow Reserve in Patients Undergoing Fractional Flow Reserve Measurement Physiologic Characteristics and Clinical Outcomes of Patients With Discordance Between FFR and iFR Impact of myocardial supply area on the transstenotic hemodynamics as determined by fractional flow reserve Relationship between fractional flow reserve value and the amount of subtended myocardium High-Resolution Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging Techniques for the Identification of Coronary Microvascular Dysfunction Diagnostic Performance of Angiogram-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve: A Pooled Analysis of 5 Prospective Cohort Studies

Clinical Trial2018 Jul 19.[Epub ahead of print]

JOURNAL:Circulation. Article Link

Mild Hypothermia in Cardiogenic Shock Complicating Myocardial Infarction - The Randomized SHOCK-COOL Trial

Fuernau G, Beck J, Thiele H et al. Keywords: Acute Coronary Syndromes, Heart Failure and Cardiomyopathies, Invasive Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention, Acute Heart Failure, Interventions and ACS

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - Experimental trials suggest improved outcome by mild therapeutic hypothermia for cardiogenic shock following acute myocardial infarction. The objective of this study was to investigate hemodynamic effects of mild therapeutic hypothermia in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction.


METHODS - Patients (n=40) with cardiogenic shock undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention without classical indication for mild therapeutic hypothermia underwent randomization in a 1:1 fashion to mild therapeutic hypothermia for 24 h or control. The primary endpoint was cardiac power index at 24 h; secondary endpoints included other hemodynamic parameters as well as serial measurements of arterial lactate.


RESULTS - No relevant differences were observed for the primary endpoint cardiac power index at 24 h (mild therapeutic hypothermia vs. control: 0.41 [interquartile range 0.31-0.52] vs. 0.36 [inter-quartile range 0.31-0.48] W/m2; p=0.50, median difference -0.025 [95% confidence interval -0.12 to 0.06 W/m2]). Similarly, all other hemodynamic measurements were not statistically different. Arterial lactate levels at 6, 8 and 10 hours were significantly higher in patients in the MTH group with a slower decline (p for interaction 0.03). There were no differences in 30-day mortality: (60 vs. 50%, hazard ratio 1.27 [95% confidence interval 0.55-2.94]; p=0.55).


CONCLUSIONS - In this randomized trial mild therapeutic hypothermia failed to show a substantial beneficial effect in patients with cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction on cardiac power index at 24 h.


CLINICAL TRAIL REGISTRATION - URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov Unique Identifier: NCT01890317.