Short-Term Efficacy and Safety of Different Mechanical Hemodynamic Support Devices for Cardiogenic Shock or High-Risk Pci: a Network Meta-Analysis of Thirty-Seven Trials

Perspectives and Considerations of IABP in the Era of ECMO for Cardiogenic Shock

The development of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) has been rapid, and its use worldwide in patients with cardiogenic shock is increasingly widespread. However, current statistical data and clinical research do not demonstrate its significant improvement in the patient prognosis. This review focuses on the widely used intra-aortic balloon pumps (IABP) and veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO), analyzing and comparing their characteristics, efficacy, risk of complications, and the current exploration status of left ventricular mechanical unloading. Subsequently, we propose a rational approach to viewing the negative outcomes of current MCS, and look ahead to the future development trends of IABP.

2023 Chinese expert consensus on the impact of COVID-19 on the management of cardiovascular diseases

The primary site of infection in COVID-19 exhibit is the respiratory system, but multiple organ systems could be affected. The virus could directly invade cardiomyocytes. Alternatively, cytokine storm could lead to myocardial injury. More importantly, the management of existing cardiovascular diseases must be re-examined in COVID-19 due to, for example, interaction between antiviral agents and with a wide variety of pharmacological agents. The Branch of Cardiovascular Physicians of Chinese Medical Doctor Association organized a panel of experts in cardiovascular and related fields to discuss this important issue, and formulated the "2023 Chinese Expert Consensus on the Impact of COVID-19 on the Management of Cardiovascular Diseases." The Consensus was drafted on the basis of systematic review of existing evidence and diagnosis and treatment experience, and covers three major aspects: myocardial injury caused by COVID-10 and COVID-19 vaccine, the impact of COVID-19 on patients with cardiovascular disease, and the impact of COVID-19 on the cardiovascular system of healthy people, and rehabilitation guidance recommendations. The Consensus involves 11 core clinical issues, including incidence, pathogenesis, clinical manifestations, treatment strategies, prognosis, and rehabilitation. It is our hope that this Consensus will provide a practical guidance to cardiologists in the management of cardiovascular diseases in the new era of COVID-19 pandemic.

eCPR Combined With Therapeutic Hypothermia Could Improve Survival and Neurologic Outcomes for Patients With Cardiac Arrest: A Meta-Analysis

Background: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation with CPR (eCPR) or therapeutic hypothermia (TH) seems to be a very effective CPR strategy to save patients with cardiac arrest (CA). Furthermore, the subsequent post-CA neurologic outcomes have become the focus. Therefore, there is an urgent need to find a way to improve survival and neurologic outcomes for CA. Objective: We conducted this meta-analysis to find a more suitable CPR strategy for patients with CA. Method: We searched four online databases (PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and Web of Science). From an initial 1,436 articles, 23 studies were eligible into this meta-analysis, including a total of 2,035 patients. Results: eCPR combined with TH significantly improved the short-term (at discharge or 28 days) survival [OR = 2.27, 95% CIs (1.60-3.23), p < 0.00001] and neurologic outcomes [OR = 2.60, 95% CIs (1.92-3.52), p < 0.00001). At 3 months of follow-up, the results of survival [OR = 3.36, 95% CIs (1.65-6.85), p < 0.0008] and favorable neurologic outcomes [OR = 3.02, 95% CIs (1.38-6.63), p < 0.006] were the same as above. Furthermore, there was no difference in any bleeding needed intervention [OR = 1.33, 95% CIs (0.09-1.96), p = 0.16] between two groups. Conclusions: From this meta-analysis, we found that eCPR combined with TH might be a more suitable CPR strategy for patients with CA in improving survival and neurologic outcomes, and eCPR with TH did not increase the risk of bleeding. Furthermore, single-arm meta-analyses showed a plausible way of temperature and occasion of TH.

Mechanical circulatory support in patients with cardiogenic shock not secondary to cardiotomy: a network meta-analysis

To compare the efficacy and safety of different mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices in CS. A total of 24 studies (7 randomized controlled trials—RCTs—and 17 non-RCTs) involving 11,117 patients were entered in a Bayesian network meta-analysis. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. Secondary endpoints were stroke and bleeding (requiring transfusion and/or intracranial and/or fatal). Compared with no MCS, extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) reduced 30-day mortality when used both alone (OR 0.37, 95% CrI 0.15–0.90) and together with the micro-axial pump Impella (OR 0.13, 95% CrI 0.02–0.80) or intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) (OR 0.19, 95% CrI 0.05–0.63), although the relevant articles were affected by significant publication bias. Consistent results were obtained in a sensitivity analysis including only studies of CS due to myocardial infarction. After halving the weight of studies with a non-RCT design, only the benefit of ECMO + IABP on 30-day mortality was maintained (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.057–0.76). The risk of bleeding was increased by TandemHeart (OR 13, 95% CrI 3.50–59), Impella (OR 5, 95% CrI 1.60–18), and IABP (OR 2.2, 95% CrI 1.10–4.4). No significant differences were found across MCS strategies regarding stroke. Although limited by important quality issues, the studies performed so far indicate that ECMO, especially if combined with Impella or IABP, reduces short-term mortality in CS. MCS increases the hazard of bleeding.