Abstract

ommend IABP to be routinely used. It is intended to be used in patients with non ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) with acute mechanical complications. ESC Guidelines considered meta-analyses by Sjauw el al and the major randomized clinical trial IABP SHOCK II. This research did not confirm degraded mortality 30 days after ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) with shock. There are several flaws to this study: the absence of long-term survival, not taking into account patients with mechanical complications of myocardial infarction, NSTEMI patients and cardiogenic shock after 12 hours. 50% of patients had blood pressure ≥ 90 mmHg, which rise the question of inclusion criteria. However, meta-analyses showed significant reduction in mortality in cardiogenic shock after STEMI in patients treated with thrombolysis and IABP, but without primary percutaneous coronary intervention. New randomized clinical trials are needed, so that a definite conclusion on long-term survival could be made, as well to establish if there are groups within those patients, which could benefit from the use of IABP. We present our IABP experience, in University Hospital Centre Osijek, in time period from 2014 to 2015, in acute coronary syndrome patients and cardiogenic shock, and their short term outcome and survival. This is ongoing study planned to follow long term outcome as well.

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.