Hemodynamic Support with Intra Aortic Balloon Pump Differs by Etiology of Cardiogenic Shock

Abstract

Purpose While intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) counterpulsation has not been shown to be of benefit in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) with cardiogenic shock (CS), emerging data suggest that patients with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) might be more likely to stabilize with this device. Methods Patients with hemodynamic evidence of CS related to either AMI or ADHF who received IABP support were studied retrospectively. Cardiac outputs (CO) and indices (CI) were calculated using the Fick method. Hemodynamics were compared before and after IABP insertion and between the AMI and ADHF cohorts. Results During the study period, 77 patients were supported with IABP for AMI related CS while 132 were supported for ADHF related CS. The mean age was 64.7±13.6 years and 75.1% were men. Mean arterial blood pressure was 75.6±10.6mmHg and 78.4±14.6mmHg among ADHF and AMI patients, respectively (p=0.12). Mean pulmonary artery pressure was higher among those with ADHF (37.9±9.3mmHg vs 33.6±8.9mmHg, p=0.002). Left ventricular ejection fraction was 18.0±8.9% among those with ADHF and 28.9±12.0% among those with AMI (p Conclusion While the degree of hemodynamic compromise was similar between those with CS related to AMI and ADHF, the response to IABP counterpulsation differed significantly between these cohorts suggesting that the device's efficacy may differ between etiologies of CS.