Cargando…

Contemporary trends in use of mechanical circulatory support in patients with acute MI and cardiogenic shock

OBJECTIVES: To describe the contemporary trends in the use of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock (AMICS). To evaluate survival benefit with early application of intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) or Impella CP. METHODS: A cohort stud...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Helgestad, Ole Kristian Lerche, Josiassen, Jakob, Hassager, Christian, Jensen, Lisette Okkels, Holmvang, Lene, Udesen, Nanna Louise Junker, Schmidt, Henrik, Berg Ravn, Hanne, Moller, Jacob Eifer
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7059524/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32201591
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/openhrt-2019-001214
_version_ 1783504067078651904
author Helgestad, Ole Kristian Lerche
Josiassen, Jakob
Hassager, Christian
Jensen, Lisette Okkels
Holmvang, Lene
Udesen, Nanna Louise Junker
Schmidt, Henrik
Berg Ravn, Hanne
Moller, Jacob Eifer
author_facet Helgestad, Ole Kristian Lerche
Josiassen, Jakob
Hassager, Christian
Jensen, Lisette Okkels
Holmvang, Lene
Udesen, Nanna Louise Junker
Schmidt, Henrik
Berg Ravn, Hanne
Moller, Jacob Eifer
author_sort Helgestad, Ole Kristian Lerche
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To describe the contemporary trends in the use of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock (AMICS). To evaluate survival benefit with early application of intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) or Impella CP. METHODS: A cohort study of all consecutive patients with AMICS undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) <24 hours of symptom onset (early PCI) in southeastern Denmark from 2010 to 2017. A matched case–control study comparing 30-day mortality between patients receiving early-IABP or early-Impella CP and their respective control group. Controls were matched on age, left ventricular ejection fraction, arterial lactate, estimated glomerular filtration rate and cardiac arrest before PCI. Early-IABP/Impella CP was defined as applied before PCI if shock developed pre-PCI, or immediately after PCI if shock developed during PCI. RESULTS: 903 patients with AMICS undergoing early PCI were identified. Use of MCS decreased from 50% in 2010 to 25% in 2017, p for trend of <0.001. The IABP was abandoned in 2012 and replaced mostly by Impella CP. Patients receiving MCS in 2013–2017 had more compromised haemodynamics compared with patients receiving MCS in 2010–2012. 40 patients received early IABP, and 40 patients received early Impella CP. Only the group receiving early Impella CP was associated with lower 30-day mortality compared with their matched control group (30-day mortality 40% vs 77.5%, plog-rank of<0.001). CONCLUSION: Use of MCS decreased by 50% from 2010 to 2017. Patients receiving MCS had more compromised haemodynamics in recent years. Early application of Impella CP was associated with reduced 30-day mortality compared with a matched control group.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7059524
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70595242020-03-20 Contemporary trends in use of mechanical circulatory support in patients with acute MI and cardiogenic shock Helgestad, Ole Kristian Lerche Josiassen, Jakob Hassager, Christian Jensen, Lisette Okkels Holmvang, Lene Udesen, Nanna Louise Junker Schmidt, Henrik Berg Ravn, Hanne Moller, Jacob Eifer Open Heart Interventional Cardiology OBJECTIVES: To describe the contemporary trends in the use of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock (AMICS). To evaluate survival benefit with early application of intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) or Impella CP. METHODS: A cohort study of all consecutive patients with AMICS undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) <24 hours of symptom onset (early PCI) in southeastern Denmark from 2010 to 2017. A matched case–control study comparing 30-day mortality between patients receiving early-IABP or early-Impella CP and their respective control group. Controls were matched on age, left ventricular ejection fraction, arterial lactate, estimated glomerular filtration rate and cardiac arrest before PCI. Early-IABP/Impella CP was defined as applied before PCI if shock developed pre-PCI, or immediately after PCI if shock developed during PCI. RESULTS: 903 patients with AMICS undergoing early PCI were identified. Use of MCS decreased from 50% in 2010 to 25% in 2017, p for trend of <0.001. The IABP was abandoned in 2012 and replaced mostly by Impella CP. Patients receiving MCS in 2013–2017 had more compromised haemodynamics compared with patients receiving MCS in 2010–2012. 40 patients received early IABP, and 40 patients received early Impella CP. Only the group receiving early Impella CP was associated with lower 30-day mortality compared with their matched control group (30-day mortality 40% vs 77.5%, plog-rank of<0.001). CONCLUSION: Use of MCS decreased by 50% from 2010 to 2017. Patients receiving MCS had more compromised haemodynamics in recent years. Early application of Impella CP was associated with reduced 30-day mortality compared with a matched control group. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-03-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7059524/ /pubmed/32201591 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/openhrt-2019-001214 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Interventional Cardiology
Helgestad, Ole Kristian Lerche
Josiassen, Jakob
Hassager, Christian
Jensen, Lisette Okkels
Holmvang, Lene
Udesen, Nanna Louise Junker
Schmidt, Henrik
Berg Ravn, Hanne
Moller, Jacob Eifer
Contemporary trends in use of mechanical circulatory support in patients with acute MI and cardiogenic shock
title Contemporary trends in use of mechanical circulatory support in patients with acute MI and cardiogenic shock
title_full Contemporary trends in use of mechanical circulatory support in patients with acute MI and cardiogenic shock
title_fullStr Contemporary trends in use of mechanical circulatory support in patients with acute MI and cardiogenic shock
title_full_unstemmed Contemporary trends in use of mechanical circulatory support in patients with acute MI and cardiogenic shock
title_short Contemporary trends in use of mechanical circulatory support in patients with acute MI and cardiogenic shock
title_sort contemporary trends in use of mechanical circulatory support in patients with acute mi and cardiogenic shock
topic Interventional Cardiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7059524/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32201591
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/openhrt-2019-001214
work_keys_str_mv AT helgestadolekristianlerche contemporarytrendsinuseofmechanicalcirculatorysupportinpatientswithacutemiandcardiogenicshock
AT josiassenjakob contemporarytrendsinuseofmechanicalcirculatorysupportinpatientswithacutemiandcardiogenicshock
AT hassagerchristian contemporarytrendsinuseofmechanicalcirculatorysupportinpatientswithacutemiandcardiogenicshock
AT jensenlisetteokkels contemporarytrendsinuseofmechanicalcirculatorysupportinpatientswithacutemiandcardiogenicshock
AT holmvanglene contemporarytrendsinuseofmechanicalcirculatorysupportinpatientswithacutemiandcardiogenicshock
AT udesennannalouisejunker contemporarytrendsinuseofmechanicalcirculatorysupportinpatientswithacutemiandcardiogenicshock
AT schmidthenrik contemporarytrendsinuseofmechanicalcirculatorysupportinpatientswithacutemiandcardiogenicshock
AT bergravnhanne contemporarytrendsinuseofmechanicalcirculatorysupportinpatientswithacutemiandcardiogenicshock
AT mollerjacobeifer contemporarytrendsinuseofmechanicalcirculatorysupportinpatientswithacutemiandcardiogenicshock