The impact of intra-aortic balloon counter-pulsation on in-hospital mortality in patients presenting with anterior ST-elevation myocardial infarction without cardiogenic shock

[Intra-aortic balloon pump in patients with myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock of stages A and B]

This article presents two clinical cases of patients with myocardial infarction and stage A (at risk) and B (beginning) cardiogenic shock who underwent intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation (IABP). In patients with a high risk of classic cardiogenic shock and/or the no-reflow phenomenon, stenting of the infarct-related coronary artery during this type of mechanical circulatory support was performed without complications. Theoretical and practical aspects of using IABP at different stages of cardiogenic shock are discussed.

Preoperative intra-aortic balloon pump inserted in acute myocardial infarction patients without cardiogenic shock undergoing surgical coronary revascularization

OBJECTIVES

The benefit of preoperative intra-aortic balloon pump implantation in high-risk cardiac surgery patients is still debated. The role of preoperative intra-aortic balloon pump insertion in acute myocardial infarction patients without cardiogenic shock undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting remains unknown. This study aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of the preoperative intra-aortic balloon pump insertion in those patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting.

METHODS

A total of 421 consecutive acute myocardial infarction patients without cardiogenic shock who underwent isolated off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting were enrolled in this retrospective observational propensity score-matched analysis study. Patients who received intra-aortic balloon pump before off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (the intra-aortic balloon pump group, n = 157) were compared with those who had not (control group, n = 264). The 30-day postoperative survival, postoperative complications, and postoperative hospital length of stay were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

A total of 99 pairs of patients were matched. The preoperative intra-aortic balloon pump did not show a 30-day postoperative survival benefit compared with the control group (hazard ratio, 0.9; 95% confidence interval, 0.2-4.2; p = 0.92). Patients with preoperative intra-aortic balloon pump were more likely to have shorter postoperative lengths of stay (8 (6-11) days vs. 10 (6-15) days, p = 0.02) and decreased total days in the hospital (median days: 18.2 vs. 21.8, p = 0.02) compared to patients without balloon pumps.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative intra-aortic balloon pump insertion in acute myocardial infarction patients without cardiogenic shock undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting improved convalescence as shown by significantly shorter postoperative lengths of hospital stay.

Impact of intra-aortic balloon pump on short-term clinical outcomes in ST-elevation myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: A "real life" single center experience

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the use and impact of the intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) upon the 30-day mortality rate and short-term clinical outcome of non-selected patients with ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction (acute STEMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS).

DESIGN

A single-center retrospective case-control study was carried out.

SETTING

Coronary Care Unit.

PATIENTS

Data were collected from 825 consecutive patients with acute STEMI admitted to a Coronary Care Unit from January 2009 to August 2015. Seventy-three patients with CS upon admission subjected to emergency percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were finally included in the analysis and were stratified according to IABP use (44 patients receiving IABP).

VARIABLES

Cardiovascular history, hemodynamic situation upon admission, angiographic and procedural characteristics, and variables derived from admission to the Coronary Care Unit.

RESULTS

Cumulative 30-day mortality was similar in the patients subjected to IABP and in those who received conventional medical therapy only (29.5% and 27.6%, respectively; HR with IABP 1.10, 95% CI 0.38-3.11; p=0.85). Similarly, no significant differences were found in terms of the short-term clinical outcome between the groups: time on mechanical ventilation, days to hemodynamic stabilization, vasoactive drug requirements and stay in the Coronary Care Unit. Poorer renal function (HR 3.9, 95% CI 1.4-10.6; p=0.008), known peripheral artery disease (HR 3.3, 95% CI 1.2-9.1; p=0.019) and a history of diabetes mellitus (HR 3.2, 95% CI 1.2-8.1; p=0.018) were the only variables independently associated to increased 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSION

In our "real life" experience, IABP does not modify 30-day mortality or the short-term clinical outcome in patients presenting STEMI complicated with CS and subjected to emergency percutaneous coronary revascularization.

The effectiveness of intra-aortic balloon pump for myocardial infarction in patients with or without cardiogenic shock: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Background

Conflicting reports on the efficacy of intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) incited us to evaluate the utility of IABP in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI).

Methods

Randomized clinical trials comparing patients, who received IABP vs. control (no IABP) during PCI, were hand-searched from MEDLINE, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases using the terms “intra-aortic balloon pump, percutaneous coronary intervention, myocardial infarction, acute coronary syndrome”. Mortality rate (30-day and 6-month mortality) was the primary outcome, while the secondary outcomes included 30-day bleeding rate, reinfarction rate, revascularization rate and stroke rate.

Results

Pooled results of the seven trials identified indicated that the 30-day and 6-month mortality rate were not significantly different between the IABP and control groups. However, in patients with MI, but without cardiogenic shock (CS), IABP was associated with lower odds of 30-day mortality (OR = 0.35, p = 0.015) and 6-month mortality (OR = 0.41, p = 0.020). The pooled results of 30-day bleeding rate was not significantly higher in patients with IABP than the control group, but for the patients with high risk PCI without CS, it was higher in patients with IABP than the control group (OR = 1.58, p = 0.009). The re-infarction, revascularization, and the stroke rate at 30 days of follow-up were not significantly different between the two groups.

Conclusions

The present results do not favor the clinical utility of IABP in patients suffering high-risk PCI without CS and AMI complicated with CS. However, in patients with AMI, but without CS, IABP may reduce the 30-day and 6-month mortality rate.

The outcomes of intra-aortic balloon pump usage in patients with acute myocardial infarction: a comprehensive meta-analysis of 33 clinical trials and 18,889 patients

BACKGROUND

The effects of intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) usage in patients with acute myocardial infarction remain controversial. This study sought to evaluate the outcomes of IABP usage in these patients.

METHODS

Medline, EMBASE, and other internet sources were searched for relevant clinical trials. The primary efficacy endpoints (in-hospital, midterm, and long-term mortality) and secondary endpoints (reinfarction, recurrent ischemia, and new heart failure in the hospital) as well as safety endpoints (severe bleeding requiring blood transfusion and stroke in-hospital) were subsequently analyzed.

RESULTS

Thirty-three clinical trials involving 18,889 patients were identified. The risk of long-term mortality in patients suffering from acute myocardial infarction was significantly decreased following IABP use (odds ratio [OR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.48-0.91, P=0.010). Both in-hospital and midterm mortality did not differ significantly between the IABP use group and no IABP use group (in-hospital: OR 0.87, 95% CI: 0.59-1.28, P=0.479; midterm: OR 1.12, 95% CI: 0.53-2.38, P=0.768). IABP insertion was not associated with the risk reduction of reinfarction, recurrent ischemia, or new heart failure. However, IABP use increased the risk of severe bleeding requiring blood transfusion (OR 2.05, 95% CI: 1.29-3.25, P=0.002) and stroke (OR 1.71, 95% CI: 1.04-2.82, P=0.035). In the thrombolytic therapy and cardiogenic shock subgroups, reduced mortality rates following IABP use were observed.

CONCLUSION

IABP insertion is associated with feasible benefits with respect to long-term survival rates in patients suffering from acute myocardial infarction, particularly those suffering from cardiogenic shock and receiving thrombolytic therapy, but at the cost of higher incidence of severe bleeding and stroke.

Current and future applications of the intra-aortic balloon pump

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) has been used for more than 40 years. Although recommended in a wide variety of clinical settings, most of these indications are not evidence-based. This review focuses on studies challenging these traditional indications and evaluates potentially new applications of intra-aortic counterpulsation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies have failed to confirm an improvement in clinical outcomes conferred by the IABP in patients developing cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction. This issue is in need of further investigations. While conflicting results of several retrospective studies and meta-analyses have been published regarding the performance of the IABP in high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions, it has recently been found to improve the long-term clinical outcomes of patients in whom it was implanted before the procedure. Small, single-center studies have reported the use of the IABP as a bridge to transplantation or candidacy for left-ventricular assist device implantation. The recently reported feasibility and safety of its insertion via the subclavian or axillary arteries will facilitate these applications.

SUMMARY

The revisiting of available data and the performance of new, thoughtfully designed trials should clarify the proper indications for the IABP.

Propensity-matched analysis of the effect of preoperative intraaortic balloon pump in coronary artery bypass grafting after recent acute myocardial infarction on postoperative outcomes

Introduction

There is substantial variability in the preoperative use of intraaortic balloon pumps (IABPs) in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting post myocardial infarction. The objective of this study is to determine the effect of preoperative IABPs on postsurgical outcomes in this subset of patients.

Methods

From 2007 to 2012, 877 patients underwent isolated coronary artery bypass post myocardial infarction. Four hundred and six patients were propensity-score matched based on the likelihood of receiving a preoperative balloon pump. Total blood transfusion requirements, composite in-hospital morbidity and/or mortality end point, total hours in the intensive care unit, and length of hospital stay were compared between the two groups.

Results

No significant differences in demographics, preoperative risk factors, intraoperative variables or length of hospital stay were found between patients with and without balloon pumps after propensity score matching. Compared to patients without balloon pumps, a higher percentage of patients with preoperative IABPs required transfusions. Patients with preoperative balloon pumps were more likely to have the composite end point of in-hospital morbidity (24.1% versus 12.8%, P <0.004), and increased hours in the intensive care unit (median hours: 69.0 versus 46.0, P <0.013) as compared to patients without balloon pumps.

Conclusions

The use of preoperative IABPs in patients undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass grafting after myocardial infarction is associated with increased transfusion requirements, increased in-hospital morbidity and longer postoperative intensive care unit stay as compared to patients without IABPs.

Overview of the 2012 Food and Drug Administration circulatory system devices panel meeting on the reclassification of external counterpulsation, intra-aortic balloon pump, and non-roller-type cardiopulmonary bypass blood pump devices

The Food and Drug Administration held a Circulatory System Devices Advisory Panel meeting, December 5 and 6, 2012, to review the classification or potential reclassification of the following device types: external counterpulsation, intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), and non-roller-type cardiopulmonary bypass blood pumps. These 3 devices are preamendment (Medical Device Amendments of 1976) class III devices. The advisory panel discussed the data and provided recommendations for reclassification of these devices. The panel recommended reclassification of ECP to class II for stable angina pectoris and to retain a class III for all other indications. For IABP, the recommendation was to reclassify IABP to class II for several indications (acute coronary syndrome, cardiac and noncardiac surgery, and heart failure complications) and remain class III for all other indications. As for non-roller type, the panel recommended that for cardiopulmonary bypass and temporary circulatory bypass, these devices should be reclassified to class II while retaining a class III device status for all other indications, including ventricular support both for hemodynamically unstable patients and for prophylactic support in high-risk percutaneous interventions.