Abstract

BackgroundIntra-aortic balloon pumps (IABP) have generally been used for patients undergoing high-risk mechanical coronary revascularization. However, there is still insufficient evidence to determine whether they can improve outcomes in reperfusion therapy patients, mainly by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stenting or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). This study was designed to determine the difference between high-risk mechanical coronary revascularization with and without IABPs on mortality, by performing a meta-analysis on randomized controlled trials of the current era.MethodsPubmed and Embase databases were searched from inception to May 2015. Unpublished data were obtained from the investigators. Randomized clinical trials of IABP and non-IABP in high-risk coronary revascularization procedures (PCI or CABG) were included. In the case of PCI procedures, stents should be used in more than 80% of patients. Numbers of events at the short-term and long-term follow-up were extracted.ResultsA total of 12 randomized trials enrolling 2155 patients were included. IABPs did not significantly decrease short-term mortality (relative risk (RR) 0.66; 95% CI, 0.42–1.01), or long-term mortality (RR 0.79; 95% CI, 0.47–1.35), with low heterogeneity across the studies. The findings remained stable in patients with acute myocardial infarction with or without cardiogenic shock. But in high-risk CABG patients, IABP was associated with reduced mortality (71 events in 846 patients; RR 0.40; 95%CI 0.25–0.67).ConclusionIn patients undergoing high-risk coronary revascularization, IABP did not significantly decrease mortality. But high-risk CABG patients may be benefit from IABP. Rigorous criteria should be applied to the use of IABPs.

Highlights

  • Nowadays, coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stents are the most common techniques of coronary revascularization

  • Intra-aortic balloon pumps (IABP) did not significantly decrease short-term mortality (relative risk (RR) 0.66; 95% CI, 0.42–1.01), or longterm mortality (RR 0.79; 95% CI, 0.47–1.35), with low heterogeneity across the studies

  • In high-risk CABG patients, IABP was associated with reduced mortality (71 events in 846 patients; Relative risk (RR) 0.40; 95%CI 0.25–0.67)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stents are the most common techniques of coronary revascularization. As a circulatory-assist device, the intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) has been shown to improve clinical outcomes and decrease the mortality rate in high-risk patients undergoing coronary revascularization [2]. Adjunctive use of IABPs can significantly increase diastolic and mean blood pressure in the aorta and coronary artery and decrease systolic pressure, thereby unloading the heart. It can improve myocardial perfusion at the tissue level, and reduce the extent of no-reflow caused by micro vascular obstruction[4]. There is still insufficient evidence to determine whether they can improve outcomes in reperfusion therapy patients, mainly by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stenting or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). This study was designed to determine the difference between high-risk mechanical coronary revascularization with and without IABPs on mortality, by performing a metaanalysis on randomized controlled trials of the current era

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

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.