Preoperative intra-aortic balloon pump in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing urgent cardiac bypass surgery

BACKGROUND

In patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), either with or without cardiogenic shock, mechanical circulatory support with an intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) is not associated with lower mortality. However, in STEMI patients undergoing urgent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), preoperative insertion of an IABP has been suggested to reduce mortality. In this study, the effect of preoperative IABP use on mortality in STEMI patients undergoing urgent CABG was investigated.

METHODS

All consecutive STEMI patients undergoing urgent CABG in a single centre between 2000 and 2018 were studied. The primary outcome, 30-day mortality, was compared between patients with and without a preoperative IABP. Subgroup analysis and multivariable analysis using a propensity score and inverse probability treatment weighting were performed to adjust for potential confounders.

RESULTS

A total of 246 patients were included, of whom 171 (69.5%) received a preoperative IABP (pIABP group) and 75 (30.5%) did not (non-pIABP group). In the pIABP group, more patients suffered from cardiogenic shock, persistent ischaemia and reduced left ventricular function. Unadjusted 30-day mortality was comparable between the pIABP and the non-pIABP group (13.3% vs 12.3%, p = 0.82). However, after correction for confounders and inverse probability treatment weighting preoperative IABP was associated with reduced 30-day mortality (relative risk 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.30-0.88).

CONCLUSION

In patients with STEMI undergoing urgent CABG, preoperative insertion of an IABP is associated with reduced mortality.

Prehospital crushed versus integral prasugrel loading dose in STEMI patients with a large myocardial area

BACKGROUND

The effect of administering a crushed prasugrel loading dose is uncertain in patients presenting with a large myocardial infarction and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

AIMS

The aim of this study was to investigate if patients with a large myocardial infarction may benefit from prehospital administration of a crushed prasugrel loading dose.

METHODS

Patients from the CompareCrush trial with an available ambulance electrocardiography (ECG) were included in the study. An independent core laboratory confirmed a prehospital large myocardial area. We compared pre- and postprocedural angiographic markers, including Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) 3 flow in the infarct-related artery, high thrombus burden, and myocardial blush grade 3, in STEMI patients with and without a prehospital large myocardial area.

RESULTS

Ambulance ECG was available for 532 patients, of whom 331 patients were identified with a prehospital large myocardial area at risk. Crushed prasugrel significantly improved postprocedural TIMI 3 flow rates in STEMI patients with a prehospital large myocardial area at risk (92% vs 79%, odds ratio [OR] 3.00, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.50-6.00) but not in STEMI patients without a prehospital large myocardial area at risk (91% vs 95%, OR 0.47, 95% CI: 0.14-1.57; pinteraction=0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

Administration of crushed prasugrel may improve postprocedural TIMI 3 flow in STEMI patients with signs of a large myocardial area at risk on the ambulance ECG. The practice of crushing tablets of prasugrel loading dose might, therefore, represent a safe, fast and cost-effective strategy to improve myocardial reperfusion in this high-risk STEMI subgroup undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

Beneficial Effects of IABP in Anterior Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock

Background and Objectives. Recent guidelines have downgraded the routine use of the intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) due to ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Despite this, its use in clinical practice remains high. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic impact of the IABP in patients with STEMI complicated by CS undergoing primary PCI (pPCI), focusing on patients with anterior MI in whom a major benefit has been previously hypothesized. Materials and Methods. We enrolled 2958 consecutive patients undergoing pPCI for STEMI in our department from 2005 to 2018. Propensity score matching and mortality analysis were performed. Results. CS occurred in 246 patients (8.3%); among these patients, 145 (60%) had anterior AMI. In the propensity-matched analysis, the use of the IABP was associated with a lower 30-day mortality (39.3% vs. 60.9%, p = 0.032) in the subgroup of patients with anterior STEMI. Conversely, in the whole group of CS patients and in the subgroup of patients with non-anterior STEMI, IABP use did not have a significant impact on mortality. Conclusions. The use of the IABP in cases of STEMI complicated by CS was found to improve survival in patients with anterior infarction. Prospective studies are needed before abandoning or markedly limiting the use of the IABP in this clinical setting.

INTRA-AORTIC BALLOON PUMP REDUCES 30-DAY MORTALITY IN EARLY-STAGE CARDIOGENIC SHOCK COMPLICATING ACUTE MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION ACCORDING TO SCAI CLASSIFICATION

ABSTRACT

Background: Cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMICS) remains a high 30-day mortality. Mechanical circulatory support devices are increasingly used in AMICS, but their effects on mortality vary partly because of shock severity. Aims: This study aimed to evaluate the association between intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) and 30-day mortality in patients with early-stage AMICS. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) based on a multicenter clinical trial (NCT04996901). Patients were stratified by IABP use, and shock severity was classified according to the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) SHOCK stages. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. The association between IABP and 30-day mortality was evaluated across shock stages using propensity score matching, weighting, and logistic regression. Results: Five thousand three hundred forty-three patients were included, and 299 received IABP. The SCAI SHOCK stage was associated with 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR], 20.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 13.60-29.97; P < 0.001). In the 580 matched patients, a significant interaction between IABP and 30-day mortality at different shock stages was observed ( P = 0.005). Intra-aortic balloon pump was associated with lower 30-day mortality among patients with shock stage A/B (5.8% vs. 1.2%; OR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.03-0.73; P = 0.034) but not stage C/D/E (29.3% vs. 38.1%; OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 0.84-2.65; P = 0.172). These results were confirmed by sensitivity analyses of the weighted cohort. Conclusions: Intra-aortic balloon pump reduced 30-day mortality in patients with early-stage AMICS. The SCAI SHOCK stage provides risk stratification for patients with STEMI and helps identify those who may respond well to IABP.

Contemporary Management of Cardiogenic Shock Complicating Acute Myocardial Infarction

Despite an improvement in pharmacological therapies and mechanical reperfusion, the outcome of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is still suboptimal, especially in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS). The incidence of CS accounts for 3-15% of AMI cases, with mortality rates of 40% to 50%. In contrast to a large number of trials conducted in patients with AMI without CS, there is limited evidence-based scientific knowledge in the CS setting. Therefore, recommendations and actual treatments are often based on registry data. Similarly, knowledge of the available options in terms of temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices is not equally widespread, leading to an underutilisation or even overutilisation in different regions/countries of these treatment options and nonuniformity in the management of CS. The aim of this article is to provide a critical overview of the available literature on the management of CS as a complication of AMI, summarising the most recent evidence on revascularisation strategies, pharmacological treatments and MCS use.

ANMCO POSITION PAPER: Role of intra-aortic balloon pump in patients with acute advanced heart failure and cardiogenic shock

The treatment of patients with advanced acute heart failure is still challenging. Intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) has widely been used in the management of patients with cardiogenic shock. However, according to international guidelines, its routinary use in patients with cardiogenic shock is not recommended. This recommendation is derived from the results of the IABP-SHOCK II trial, which demonstrated that IABP does not reduce all-cause mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock. The present position paper, released by the Italian Association of Hospital Cardiologists, reviews the available data derived from clinical studies. It also provides practical recommendations for the optimal use of IABP in the treatment of cardiogenic shock and advanced acute heart failure.

Optimum Blood Pressure in Patients With Shock After Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiac Arrest

BACKGROUND

In patients with shock after acute myocardial infarction (AMI), the optimal level of pharmacologic support is unknown. Whereas higher doses may increase myocardial oxygen consumption and induce arrhythmias, diastolic hypotension may reduce coronary perfusion and increase infarct size.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to determine the optimal mean arterial pressure (MAP) in patients with AMI and shock after cardiac arrest.

METHODS

This study used patient-level pooled analysis of post-cardiac arrest patients with shock after AMI randomized in the Neuroprotect (Neuroprotective Goal Directed Hemodynamic Optimization in Post-cardiac Arrest Patients; NCT02541591) and COMACARE (Carbon Dioxide, Oxygen and Mean Arterial Pressure After Cardiac Arrest and Resuscitation; NCT02698917) trials who were randomized to MAP 65 mm Hg or MAP 80/85 to 100 mm Hg targets during the first 36 h after admission. The primary endpoint was the area under the 72-h high-sensitivity troponin-T curve.

RESULTS

Of 235 patients originally randomized, 120 patients had AMI with shock. Patients assigned to the higher MAP target (n = 58) received higher doses of norepinephrine (p = 0.004) and dobutamine (p = 0.01) and reached higher MAPs (86 ± 9 mm Hg vs. 72 ± 10 mm Hg, p < 0.001). Whereas admission hemodynamics and angiographic findings were all well-balanced and revascularization was performed equally effective, the area under the 72-h high-sensitivity troponin-T curve was lower in patients assigned to the higher MAP target (median: 1.14 μg.72 h/l [interquartile range: 0.35 to 2.31 μg.72 h/l] vs. median: 1.56 μg.72 h/l [interquartile range: 0.61 to 4.72 μg. 72 h/l]; p = 0.04). Additional pharmacologic support did not increase the risk of a new cardiac arrest (p = 0.88) or atrial fibrillation (p = 0.94). Survival with good neurologic outcome at 180 days was not different between both groups (64% vs. 53%, odds ratio: 1.55; 95% confidence interval: 0.74 to 3.22).

CONCLUSIONS

In post-cardiac arrest patients with shock after AMI, targeting MAP between 80/85 and 100 mm Hg with additional use of inotropes and vasopressors was associated with smaller myocardial injury.

The role of mechanical support devices during percutaneous coronary intervention

The practice of interventional cardiology has changed dramatically over the last four decades since Andreas Gruentzig carried out the first balloon angioplasty. The obvious technological improvements in stent design and interventional techniques have facilitated the routine treatment of a higher risk cohort of patients, including those with complex coronary artery disease and poor left ventricular function, and more often in the setting of cardiogenic shock (CS) complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The use of mechanical cardiac support (MCS) in these settings has been the subject of intense interest, particularly over the past decade . A number of commercially available devices now add to the interventional cardiologist's armamentarium when faced with the critically unwell or high-risk patient in the cardiac catheter laboratory. The theoretical advantage of such devices in these settings is clear- an increase in cardiac output and hence mean arterial pressure, with variable effects on coronary blood flow. In doing so, they have the potential to prevent the downward cascade of ischaemia and hypoperfusion, but there is a paucity of evidence to support their routine use in any patient subset, even those presenting with cardiogenic shock. This review will discuss the use and haemodynamic effect of MCS devices during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and also examine the clinical evidence for their use in patients with cardiogenic shock, and those undergoing 'high risk' PCI.

Intraaortic balloon pump in myocardial infarction: Always, Never, or for the Right Patient?

SEMPER FI was a 100-patient pilot study that randomized acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients with persistent ischemia following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to intraaortic balloon pump (IABP) versus control. AMI patients with persistent ischemia receiving short-term IABP post-PCI had a greater resolution of persistent ST segment elevation and a trend for decreased clinical events. These results support a larger adequately powered trial of IABP versus control in AMI patients with persistent ischemia following primary PCI.

How to Bail Out Patients with Severe Acute Myocardial Infarction

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is the most serious complication of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The practice of early revascularization by percutaneous coronary intervention, and advances in pharmacotherapy have reduced the rate of complications of CS. However, when CS is combined with AMI, mortality from AMI is still high, and many clinicians are wondering how to treat CS with AMI. In recent years, mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices have improved the clinical outcome in AMI patients with CS. For best outcome, treatment of AMI with CS should always consider treatments that improve the prognosis of the patients.

Predicting the development of in-hospital cardiogenic shock in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated by primary percutaneous coronary intervention: the ORBI risk score

Aims

To derive and validate a readily useable risk score to identify patients at high-risk of in-hospital ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI)-related cardiogenic shock (CS).

Methods and results

In all, 6838 patients without CS on admission and treated by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI), included in the Observatoire Régional Breton sur l'Infarctus (ORBI), served as a derivation cohort, and 2208 patients included in the obseRvatoire des Infarctus de Côte-d'Or (RICO) constituted the external validation cohort. Stepwise multivariable logistic regression was used to build the score. Eleven variables were independently associated with the development of in-hospital CS: age >70 years, prior stroke/transient ischaemic attack, cardiac arrest upon admission, anterior STEMI, first medical contact-to-pPCI delay >90 min, Killip class, heart rate >90/min, a combination of systolic blood pressure <125 mmHg and pulse pressure <45 mmHg, glycaemia >10 mmol/L, culprit lesion of the left main coronary artery, and post-pPCI thrombolysis in myocardial infarction flow grade <3. The score derived from these variables allowed the classification of patients into four risk categories: low (0-7), low-to-intermediate (8-10), intermediate-to-high (11-12), and high (≥13). Observed in-hospital CS rates were 1.3%, 6.6%, 11.7%, and 31.8%, across the four risk categories, respectively. Validation in the RICO cohort demonstrated in-hospital CS rates of 3.1% (score 0-7), 10.6% (score 8-10), 18.1% (score 11-12), and 34.1% (score ≥13). The score demonstrated high discrimination (c-statistic of 0.84 in the derivation cohort, 0.80 in the validation cohort) and adequate calibration in both cohorts.

Conclusion

The ORBI risk score provides a readily useable and efficient tool to identify patients at high-risk of developing CS during hospitalization following STEMI, which may aid in further risk-stratification and thus potentially facilitate pre-emptive clinical decision making.

Ischemia Reperfusion Injury: Mechanisms of Damage/Protection and Novel Strategies for Cardiac Recovery/Regeneration

Ischemic diseases in an aging population pose a heavy social encumbrance. Moreover, current therapeutic approaches, which aimed to prevent or minimize ischemia-induced damage, are associated with relevant costs for healthcare systems. Early reperfusion by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) has undoubtedly improved patient's outcomes; however, the prevention of long-term complications is still an unmet need. To face these hurdles and improve patient's outcomes, novel pharmacological and interventional approaches, alone or in combination, reducing myocardium oxygen consumption or supplying blood flow via collateral vessels have been proposed. A number of clinical trials are ongoing to validate their efficacy on patient's outcomes. Alternative options, including stem cell-based therapies, have been evaluated to improve cardiac regeneration and prevent scar formation. However, due to the lack of long-term engraftment, more recently, great attention has been devoted to their paracrine mediators, including exosomes (Exo) and microvesicles (MV). Indeed, Exo and MV are both currently considered to be one of the most promising therapeutic strategies in regenerative medicine. As a matter of fact, MV and Exo that are released from stem cells of different origin have been evaluated for their healing properties in ischemia reperfusion (I/R) settings. Therefore, this review will first summarize mechanisms of cardiac damage and protection after I/R damage to track the paths through which more appropriate interventional and/or molecular-based targeted therapies should be addressed. Moreover, it will provide insights on novel non-invasive/invasive interventional strategies and on Exo-based therapies as a challenge for improving patient's long-term complications. Finally, approaches for improving Exo healing properties, and topics still unsolved to move towards Exo clinical application will be discussed.

Intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation in extensive myocardial infarction with persistent ischemia: The SEMPER FI pilot study

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to prospectively investigate intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation (IABP) support in large myocardial infarction complicated by persistent ischemia after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

BACKGROUND

Use of IABP is suggested to be effective by increasing diastolic aortic pressure, thereby improving coronary blood flow. This can only be expected with exhausted coronary autoregulation, typical in acute myocardial infarction complicated by persistent ischemia. In this situation, augmented diastolic pressure is expected to increase myocardial oxygenation.

METHODS

One hundred patients with large STEMI complicated by persistent ischemia after primary PCI were randomized to treatment with or without IABP therapy on top of standard care. IABP support was initiated following primary PCI, immediately after inclusion. Primary end point was all-cause mortality, need for (additional) mechanical hemodynamic support, or readmission for heart failure within 6 months.

RESULTS

Mean age was 63 ± 10 years, 76% were male. Mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure were 120 ± 25 mmHg and 73 ± 17 mmHg. Mean heart rate was 75 ± 18 mmHg. Before PCI, mean summed ST-deviation was 21 ± 8 mm with only minimal ST-resolution after PCI. One patient in the IABP group reached the primary end point versus four patients in the control group (2% vs. 8%; p = 0.16). After primary PCI, resolution of ST-deviation was significantly more pronounced in the IABP group (73 ± 17%) compared to the control group (56 ± 26%; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In this pilot study, in patients with large STEMI and persistent ischemia after primary PCI, use of IABP showed a nonsignificant decrease in mortality, necessity for (additional) mechanical hemodynamic support or readmission for heart failure at 6 months, and resulted in more rapid ST-resolution.

Intra-aortic Balloon Counterpulsation for High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Defining Coronary Responders

The effect of intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation (IABC) varies, and it is unknown whether this is due to a heterogeneous coronary physiological response. This study aimed to characterise the coronary and left ventricular (LV) effects of IABC and define responders in terms of their invasive physiology. Twenty-seven patients (LVEF 31 ± 9%) underwent coronary pressure and Doppler flow measurements in the target vessel and acquisition of LV pressure volume loops after IABC supported PCI, with and without IABC assistance. Through coronary wave intensity analysis, perfusion efficiency (PE) was calculated as the proportion of total wave energy comprised of accelerating waves, with responders defined as those with an increase in PE with IABC. The myocardial supply/demand ratio was defined as the ratio between coronary flow and LV pressure volume area (PVA). Responders (44.4%) were more likely to have undergone complex PCI (p = 0.03) with a higher pre-PCI disease burden (p = 0.02) and had lower unassisted mean arterial (87.4 ± 11.0 vs. 77.8 ± 11.6 mmHg, p = 0.04) and distal coronary pressures (88.0 ± 11.0 vs. 71.6 ± 12.4 mmHg, p < 0.001). There was no effect overall of IABC on the myocardial supply/demand ratio (p = 0.34). IABC has minimal effect on demand, but there is marked heterogeneity in the coronary response to IABC, with the greatest response observed in those patients with the most disordered autoregulation.

Current indications for the intra-aortic balloon pump: The CP-GARO registry

BACKGROUND

Intra-aortic balloon pumps (IABPs) have been used routinely since the 1970s. Recently, large randomized trials failed to show that IABP therapy has meaningful benefit, and international recommendations downgraded its place, particularly in cardiogenic shock.

AIMS

The aim of this registry was to describe the contemporary use of IABP therapy, in light of these new data.

METHODS

This prospective multicentre registry included 172 patients implanted with an IABP in 19 French cardiac centres in 2015. Baseline characteristics, aetiologies leading to IABP use, and IABP-related and disease-related complications were assessed. In-hospital and 1-year mortality rates were studied.

RESULTS

A total of 172 patients were included (mean age 65.5±12.0 years; 118 men [68.6%]). The reasons for IABP implantation were mainly haemodynamic (n=107; 62.2%), followed by bridge to revascularization (n=34; 19.8%) and four other "rare" aetiologies (n=29 patients; 16.8%). In-hospital and 1-year mortality rates were 40.7% and 45.8%, respectively. Fourteen patients (8.1%) experienced ischaemic or haemorrhagic complications, which were directly related to the IABP in seven patients (4.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite current international guidelines regarding the place of IABPs in ischaemic cardiogenic shock without mechanical complications, this aetiology remains the leading cause for its utilization in the contemporary era.

Predictors of cardiogenic shock in cardiac surgery patients receiving intra-aortic balloon pumps

BACKGROUND

Cardiogenic shock after cardiac surgery leads to severely increased mortality. Intra-aortic balloon pumps may be used during the preoperative period to increase coronary perfusion. The purpose of this study was to characterize predictors of postoperative cardiogenic shock in cardiac surgery patients with and without intra-aortic balloon pumps support.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of our institutional database of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons for patients operated between January 2008 to July 2015. Multivariable logistic regression was used to model postoperative cardiogenic shock in both the intra-aortic balloon pumps and matched control cohorts.

RESULTS

Overall, 4,741 cardiac surgery patients were identified during the study period, of whom 192 (4%) received a preoperative intra-aortic balloon pump. Intra-aortic balloon pumps patients had a greater prevalence of diabetes, previous cardiac surgery, congestive heart failure, and an urgent/emergent status (P < .001). Intra-aortic balloon pumps patients also had greater 30-day mortality and more postoperative cardiogenic shock (9% vs 3%, P < .001). On multivariable analysis of the matched control cohort, postoperative cardiogenic shock remained multifactorial. Among the intra-aortic balloon pumps cohort, only sex, previous percutaneous coronary intervention and preoperative arrhythmia remained significant on multivariable analysis (all P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Factors associated with cardiogenic shock among postcardiac surgery patients differ between those patients receiving intra-aortic balloon pumps and those who do not. Further analysis of the effects of prophylactic intra-aortic balloon pumps support is warranted. (Surgery 2017;160:XXX-XXX.).

Prognostic value of clinical, echocardiographic and angiographic indicators in patients with large anterior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction as a first acute coronary event

BACKGROUND

The risk of death in patients affected by ST-elevation segment myocardial infarction (STEMI) is well known, but more data are required to define the in-hospital mortality in special subsets. We sought to assess the prognostic value of indicators in patients with large anterior STEMI as a first acute coronary event, undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP).

METHODS AND RESULTS

We evaluated 48 consecutive large anterior STEMI patients admitted as first acute coronary event, undergoing in acute phase both PCI and IABP. Patient demographics, clinical, noninvasive and invasive findings, together with in-hospital complications, were collected. Moreover, findings obtained after a 24-month follow-up were reported. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality, whereas the secondary endpoints were out of hospital mortality, rehospitalization for heart failure or reinfarction, and New York Heart Association (NYHA) class at least 2 at follow-up visit. The univariate analysis showed a significant association with symptom to balloon, left anterior descending coronary artery, myocardial blush grade, and wall motion score index. Results of the multivariable analysis revealed the strongest predictive power for in-hospital mortality of proximal left anterior descending coronary artery (odds ratio: 6.9; 95% confidence interval: 1.1-67.7) and of myocardial blush grade 0-1 (odds ratio: 5.5; 95% confidence interval: 1.0-38.8). In-hospital death occurred in 13 patients (27% of total cases), whereas, at follow-up, the mean of survival was 66.7 ± 7.0%.

CONCLUSION

The patients with large anterior STEMI as a first acute coronary event, undergoing PCI and IABP, had a very high in-hospital mortality, whereas the mortality rate over the follow-up period was lower. The involvement of a large territory at risk and the ineffective treatment in terms of myocardial reperfusion were the main predictors of in-hospital mortality.

Benefits of Intraaortic Balloon Support for Myocardial Infarction Patients in Severe Cardiogenic Shock Undergoing Coronary Revascularization

Background

Prior studies have suggested intraaortic balloon pump (IABP) have a neutral effect on acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients with cardiogenic shock (CS). However, the effects of IABP on patients with severe CS remain unclear. We therefore investigated the benefits of IABP in AMI patients with severe CS undergoing coronary revascularization.

Methods and Results

This study identified 14,088 adult patients with AMI and severe CS undergoing coronary revascularization from Taiwan’s National Health Insurance Research Database between January 1, 1997 and December 31, 2011, dividing them into the IABP group (n = 7044) and the Nonusers group (n = 7044) after propensity score matching to equalize confounding variables. The primary outcomes included myocardial infarction(MI), cerebrovascular accidents or cardiovascular death. In-hospital events including dialysis, stroke, pneumonia and sepsis were secondary outcomes. Primary outcomes were worse in the IABP group than in the Nonusers group in 1 month (Hazard ratio (HR) = 1.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.84–2.12). The MI rate was higher in the IABP group (HR = 1.44, 95% CI = 1.16–1.79), and the cardiovascular death was much higher in the IABP group (HR = 2.07, 95% CI = 1.92–2.23). The IABP users had lower incidence of dialysis (8.5% and 9.5%, P = 0.04), stroke (2.6% and 3.8%, P<0.001), pneumonia (13.9% and 16.5%, P<0.001) and sepsis (13.2% and 16%, P<0.001) during hospitalization than Nonusers.

Conclusion

The use of IABP in patients with myocardial infarction and severe cardiogenic shock undergoing coronary revascularization did not improve the outcomes of recurrent myocardial infarction and cardiovascular death. However, it did reduce the incidence of dialysis, stroke, pneumonia and sepsis during hospitalization.

Current and novel approaches to treat patients presenting with ST elevation myocardial infarction

INTRODUCTION

Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) represents the gold-standard treatment for patients presenting with an ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Acute myocardial infarction is a complex clinical scenario, and an appropriate therapeutic approach could be represented by a balanced integration between healthcare system and medical competence.

AREAS COVERED

In this review we discuss how a primary PCI network, and the new therapeutic options could be coupled in order to obtain improved clinical outcomes. The present report will focus on three main issues related to STEMI patients, namely, out of hospital management, primary PCI and pharmacological treatment. Expert commentary: A possible correct approach to a patient presenting a STEMI could be considered as a stepwise process, given by 5 steps: reducing the time to reperfusion; dual antiplatelet administration; radial access; new generation drug eluting stent implantation; long term management.

Usefulness of Intra-aortic Balloon Pump Counterpulsation

Intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) counterpulsation is the most widely used mechanical circulatory support device because of its ease of use, low complication rate, and fast manner of insertion. Its benefit is still subject of debate, and a considerable gap exists between guidelines and clinical practice. Retrospective nonrandomized studies and animal experiments show benefits of IABP therapy. However, recent large randomized trials do not show benefit of IABP therapy, which has led to a downgrading in the guidelines. In our view, this dichotomy between trials and practice might be the result of insufficient understanding of the prerequisites needed for effective IABP therapy, that is, exhausted autoregulation, and of not including the right patient population in trials. The population included in recent large randomized trials has been heterogeneous, also including patients in whom benefit of IABP could not be expected. The clinical condition in which most benefit is expected, that is persistent ischemia in acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction, is discussed in this review. In conclusion, this review aims to explain the physiological principles needed for effective IABP therapy, to reflect critically on the large randomized trials, and to solve some of the controversies in this field.

Predictors of mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention and intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation

BACKGROUND

Cardiogenic shock remains the most serious complication of patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Early revascularization is the cornerstone of invasive therapy, while mechanical support with intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) is debatable. From our institutional shock registry we sought to determine predictors of in-hospital mortality-including the aspect of IABP timing-and to develop a clinical risk score for shock patients with AMI.

METHODS

From January 2005 till December 2010, 102 patients with cardiogenic shock due to AMI treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and IABP were analyzed. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify independent predictors of in-hospital mortality. Logistic regression analysis and receiver-operating curves were used to generate a mortality risk score.

RESULTS

The mean age of the cohort was 70.1 ± 11.0 years and 70 % were men. One third of patients had a non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction and 30 % had to be resuscitated before coronary intervention. Mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 25 %. After admission, 23 % of patients developed an acute renal failure and 10 % needed renal dialysis during hospital stay. In 52 % of patients IABP therapy was initiated after primary PCI, while the remaining patients had an IABP-assisted primary PCI. All-cause in-hospital mortality was 40.2 %. Using multivariate analysis, age (odds ratio [OR] 1.08, p = 0.006), resuscitation before PCI (OR 3.46, p = 0.045), vasopressor use (OR 7.88, p = 0.003), acute renal failure (OR 11.18, p = 0.001), and IABP implantation after PCI (OR 4.36, p = 0.011) were independently associated with in-hospital mortality. Based on these predictors, a mortality-risk score was calculated as follows: 1.5 × IABP timing before PCI + 0.1 × age + resuscitation before PCI + 2 × vasopressor use + 2.5 × acute renal failure. Using a cut-off value of 10.4, this score had a specificity of 83 % and a sensitivity of 82 % for prediction of in-hospital death.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified age, vasopressor use, resuscitation before PCI, acute renal failure and IABP implantation after PCI as independent predictors of in-hospital mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock due to AMI. The timing of IABP insertion was the only modifiable factor predicting in-hospital mortality in our cohort. Consequently, balloon pumping should be started before PCI to improve outcome of cardiogenic shock patients.