Abstract
Objectives: To analyze the use and prognostic impact of active mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices in a large prospective contemporary cohort of patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Background: Although increasingly used in clinical practice, data on the efficacy and safety of active MCS devices in patients with CS complicating AMI are limited. Methods: This is a predefined subanalysis of the CULPRIT-SHOCK randomized trial and prospective registry. Patients with CS, AMI and multivessel coronary artery disease were categorized in two groups: (1) use of at least one active MCS device vs. (2) no active MCS or use of intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) only. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death or renal replacement therapy at 30 days. Results: Two hundred of 1055 (19%) patients received at least one active MCS device (n = 112 Impella®; n = 95 extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO); n = 6 other devices). The primary endpoint occurred significantly more often in patients treated with active MCS devices compared with those without active MCS devices (142 of 197, 72% vs. 374 of 827, 45%; p < 0.001). All-cause mortality and bleeding rates were significantly higher in the active MCS group (all p < 0.001). After multivariable adjustment, the use of active MCS was significantly associated with the primary endpoint (odds ratio (OR) 4.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.7–5.9; p < 0.001). Conclusions: In the CULPRIT-SHOCK trial, active MCS devices were used in approximately one fifth of patients. Patients treated with active MCS devices showed worse outcome at 30 days and 1 year.
Highlights
Revascularization significantly improves outcome in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMI) [1,2]
We aimed to investigate the use and impact of active mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices on clinical outcome
In the no active MCS group, 112 (13%) patients were treated with intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) only
Summary
Revascularization significantly improves outcome in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMI) [1,2]. The intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) is one of the oldest mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices and was frequently used in CS for many decades. Despite the rapid increase in active MCS devices in CS, data derived from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are scarce. A recent matched-pair analysis (237 matched pairs) comparing Impella®- and IABP-treated CS patients showed similar 30-day mortality in both groups [15]. In a meta-analysis of RCTs, active MCS devices (n = 77) did not result in a mortality benefit but an increased rate of bleeding complications compared with IABP (n = 71) [16]. Regarding veno-arterial ECMO, a meta-analysis of cohort studies suggested a mortality benefit with ECMO compared with IABP in CS patients without cardiac arrest [17]
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.