Mechanical circulatory support versus vasopressors alone in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

被引:4
|
作者
Javaid, Awad I. [1 ]
Michalek, Joel E. [2 ]
Gruslova, Aleksandra B. [3 ]
Hoskins, Serene A. [3 ]
Ahsan, Chowdhury H. [1 ]
Feldman, Marc D. [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Nevada, Div Cardiovasc Med, Kirk Kerkorian Sch Med, Las Vegas, NV 89154 USA
[2] Univ Texas Hlth San Antonio, Dept Populat Hlth Sci, San Antonio, TX USA
[3] Univ Texas Hlth San Antonio, Dept Med, Div Cardiol, San Antonio, TX USA
关键词
ACS-acute coronary syndrome; CS-cardiogenic shock; Impella; MCS-mechanical circulatory support; PCI-percutaneous coronary intervention; SCIENTIFIC STATEMENT; EARLY INITIATION; IMPELLA; 2.5; MANAGEMENT; SURVIVAL;
D O I
10.1002/ccd.30913
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
BackgroundPrevious studies have compared Impella use to intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) use in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Our objective was to compare clinical outcomes in patients with AMI-CS undergoing PCI who received Impella (percutaneous left ventricular assist device) without vasopressors, IABP without vasopressors, and vasopressors without mechanical circulatory support (MCS).MethodsWe queried the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) using ICD-10 codes (2015-2018) to identify patients with AMI-CS undergoing PCI. We created three propensity-matched cohorts to examine clinical outcomes in patients receiving Impella versus IABP, Impella versus vasopressors without MCS, and IABP versus vasopressors without MCS.ResultsAmong 17,762 patients, Impella use was associated with significantly higher in-hospital major bleeding (31.4% vs. 13.6%; p < 0.001) and hospital charges (p < 0.001) compared to IABP use, with no benefit in mortality (34.1% vs. 26.9%; p = 0.06). Impella use was associated with significantly higher mortality (42.3% vs. 35.7%; p = 0.02), major bleeding (33.9% vs. 22.7%; p = 0.001), and hospital charges (p < 0.001), when compared to the use of vasopressors without MCS. There were no significant differences in clinical outcomes between IABP use and the use of vasopressor without MCS.ConclusionsIn this analysis of retrospective data of patients with AMI-CS undergoing PCI, Impella use was associated with higher mortality, major bleeding, and in-hospital charges when compared to vasopressor therapy without MCS. When compared to IABP use, Impella was associated with no mortality benefit, along with higher major bleeding events and in-hospital charges. A vasopressor-only strategy suggested no difference in clinical outcomes when compared to IABP. This study uses the NIS for the first time to highlight outcomes in AMI-CS patients undergoing PCI when treated with vasopressor support without MCS, compared to Impella and IABP use.
引用
收藏
页码:30 / 41
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Mechanical Circulatory Support in Patients Without Cardiogenic Shock Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
    Miller, Elliott
    Gordon, Aliza
    Liu, Ying
    Ahmad, Tariq
    Girotra, Saket
    Davila, Carlos D.
    Crawford, Geoffrey
    Whitney, John
    Desai, Nihar R.
    CIRCULATION, 2023, 148
  • [2] Mechanical Circulatory Support in Patients Without Cardiogenic Shock Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
    Miller, P. Elliott
    Gordon, Aliza S.
    Liu, Ying
    Ahmad, Tariq
    Bromfield, Samantha G.
    Girotra, Saket
    Davila, Carlos D.
    Crawford, Geoffrey
    Whitney, John
    Desai, Nihar R.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION, 2025, 14 (02):
  • [3] Comparison of Impella, Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump, and Vasopressors Alone in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
    Javaid, Awad I.
    Michalek, Joel E.
    Aslam, Imran
    Gruslova, Aleksandra B.
    Hoskins, Serene A.
    Ahsan, Chowdhury H.
    Feldman, Marc D.
    CIRCULATION, 2022, 146
  • [4] Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support versus intraaortic balloon counterpulsation in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock
    Gupta, S.
    Tao, M.
    Gier, C.
    Pastena, P.
    Frye, J.
    Figueira, T.
    Price, J.
    Bench, T.
    Rahman, T.
    Mann, N.
    Tam, E.
    EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL, 2024, 45
  • [5] Dual mechanical circulatory support in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock
    Khalid, Nauman
    Ahmad, Sarah Aftab
    CARDIOVASCULAR REVASCULARIZATION MEDICINE, 2023, 55 : 74 - 75
  • [6] Ten-year trends, predictors and outcomes of mechanical circulatory support in percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock
    Vallabhajosyula, Saraschandra
    Prasad, Abhiram
    Sandhu, Gurpreet S.
    Bell, Malcolm R.
    Gulati, Rajiv
    Eleid, Mackram F.
    Best, Patricia J. M.
    Gersh, Bernard J.
    Singh, Mandeep
    Lerman, Amir
    Holmes, David R., Jr.
    Rihal, Charanjit S.
    Barsness, Gregory W.
    EUROINTERVENTION, 2021, 16 (15) : E1254 - U93
  • [7] Safety of Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Versus Intraaortic Balloon Counterpulsation in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock
    Gupta, Shivani
    Tao, Michael
    Frye, Jesse
    Gier, Chad
    Ibtida, Ishmam
    Pastena, Paola
    Figueira, Tekene
    Rahman, Tahmid
    Mann, Noelle
    Bench, Travis
    Tam, Edlira
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2024, 84 (18) : B59 - B59
  • [8] Survival of Elderly Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock
    Lim, Han S.
    Farouque, Omar
    Andrianopoulos, Nick
    Yan, Bryan P.
    Lim, Chris C. S.
    Brennan, Angela L.
    Reid, Chris M.
    Freeman, Melanie
    Charter, Kerrie
    Black, Alexander
    New, Gishel
    Ajani, Andrew E.
    Duffy, Stephen J.
    Clark, David J.
    JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2009, 2 (02) : 146 - 152
  • [9] Mortality in elderly patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock
    Lim, H. S.
    Farouque, O.
    Lim, C. S.
    Andrianopoulos, N.
    Charter, K.
    Brennan, A.
    Sahar, A.
    Eccleston, D.
    New, G.
    Clark, D.
    EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL, 2007, 28 : 847 - 847
  • [10] Mechanical circulatory support in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock
    Al-atta, Ayman
    Zaidan, Mohammad
    Abdalwahab, Ahmed
    Asswad, Amjad Ghazal
    Egred, Mohaned
    Zaman, Azfar
    Alkhalil, Mohammad
    REVIEWS IN CARDIOVASCULAR MEDICINE, 2022, 23 (02)