Interhospital transfer for early revascularization in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock-a report from the SHould we revascularize Occluded Coronaries for cardiogenic shocK? (SHOCK) trial and registry

American Heart Journal

Volumn 152, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 686-692

  Jeger, Raban V ^a   Tseng, Chi Hong ^a   Hochman, Judith S ^a   Bates, Eric R ^b  

^a NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FIBRINOLYTIC AGENT; INOTROPIC AGENT;

ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; AGED; ANAMNESIS; ARTICLE; CARDIOGENIC SHOCK; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; FEMALE; HEART INFARCTION; HEART LEFT VENTRICLE FAILURE; HOSPITAL ADMISSION; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; HYPERTENSION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEAN ARTERIAL PRESSURE; MORTALITY; PATIENT TRANSPORT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REGISTER; REVASCULARIZATION; ST SEGMENT ELEVATION;

AGED; COHORT STUDIES; CORONARY DISEASE; COUNTERPULSATION; FEMALE; HOSPITAL MORTALITY; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION; MYOCARDIAL REVASCULARIZATION; PATIENT ADMISSION; PATIENT TRANSFER; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS; REGISTRIES; SHOCK, CARDIOGENIC; THROMBOLYTIC THERAPY; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 33748703097     PISSN: 00028703     EISSN: 10976744     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2006.06.010     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Widimsky P., Groch L., Zelizko M., et al. Multicentre randomized trial comparing transport to primary angioplasty vs immediate thrombolysis vs combined strategy for patients with acute myocardial infarction presenting to a community hospital without a catheterization laboratory. The PRAGUE study. Eur Heart J 21 (2000) 823-831
2. Widimsky P., Budesinsky T., Vorac D., et al. Long distance transport for primary angioplasty vs immediate thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction. Final results of the randomized national multicentre trial-PRAGUE-2. Eur Heart J 24 (2003) 94-104
3. Grines C.L., Westerhausen Jr. D.R., Grines L.L., et al. A randomized trial of transfer for primary angioplasty versus on-site thrombolysis in patients with high-risk myocardial infarction: the Air Primary Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction study. J Am Coll Cardiol 39 (2002) 1713-1719
4. Andersen H.R., Nielsen T.T., Rasmussen K., et al. A comparison of coronary angioplasty with fibrinolytic therapy in acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 349 (2003) 733-742
5. Liem A.L., van 't Hof A.W., Hoorntje J.C., et al. Influence of treatment delay on infarct size and clinical outcome in patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with primary angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol 32 (1998) 629-633
6. Rogers W.J., Canto J.G., Barron H.V., et al. Treatment and outcome of myocardial infarction in hospitals with and without invasive capability. Investigators in the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 35 (2000) 371-379
7. Babaev A., Frederick P.D., Pasta D.J., et al. Trends in management and outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. JAMA 294 (2005) 448-454
8. Stomel R.J., Rasak M., and Bates E.R. Treatment strategies for acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock in a community hospital. Chest 105 (1994) 997-1002
9. Kovack P.J., Rasak M.A., Bates E.R., et al. Thrombolysis plus aortic counterpulsation: improved survival in patients who present to community hospitals with cardiogenic shock. J Am Coll Cardiol 29 (1997) 1454-1458
10. Ohman E.M., Nanas J., Stomel R.J., et al. Thrombolysis and counterpulsation to improve survival in myocardial infarction complicated by hypotension and suspected cardiogenic shock or heart failure: results of the TACTICS Trial. J Thromb Thrombolysis 19 (2005) 33-39
11. Antman E.M., Anbe D.T., Armstrong P.W., et al. ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction-executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 1999 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction). Circulation 110 (2004) 588-636
12. Hochman J.S., Sleeper L.A., Godfrey E., et al. SHould we emergently revascularize Occluded Coronaries for cardiogenic shocK: an international randomized trial of emergency PTCA/CABG-trial design. Am Heart J 137 (1999) 313-321
13. Jeger R.V., Harkness S.M., Ramanathan K., et al. Emergency revascularization in patients with cardiogenic shock on admission: a report from the SHOCK trial and registry. Eur Heart J 27 (2006) 664-670
14. Brodie B.R., Stuckey T.D., Muncy D.B., et al. Importance of time-to-reperfusion in patients with acute myocardial infarction with and without cardiogenic shock treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Am Heart J 145 (2003) 708-715
15. Steg P.G., Bonnefoy E., Chabaud S., et al. Impact of time to treatment on mortality after prehospital fibrinolysis or primary angioplasty: data from the CAPTIM randomized clinical trial. Circulation 108 (2003) 2851-2856
16. Bonnefoy E., Lapostolle F., Leizorovicz A., et al. Primary angioplasty versus prehospital fibrinolysis in acute myocardial infarction: a randomised study. Lancet 360 (2002) 825-829
17. Hochman J.S., Sleeper L.A., Webb J.G., et al. Early revascularization in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock. N Engl J Med 341 (1999) 625-634
18. French J.K., Feldman H.A., Assmann S.F., et al. Influence of thrombolytic therapy, with or without intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation, on 12-month survival in the SHOCK trial. Am Heart J 146 (2003) 804-810
19. Webb J.G., Lowe A.M., Sanborn T.A., et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention for cardiogenic shock in the SHOCK trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 42 (2003) 1380-1386
20. Kern M.J., Aguirre F.V., Tatineni S., et al. Enhanced coronary blood flow velocity during intraaortic balloon counterpulsation in critically ill patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 21 (1993) 359-368
21. Gu S., Ducas J., Patton J.N., et al. Coronary thrombolysis. Comparative effects of intracoronary administration of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator and urokinase. Chest 101 (1992) 1684-1690
22. Gurbel P.A., Anderson R.D., MacCord C.S., et al. Arterial diastolic pressure augmentation by intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation enhances the onset of coronary artery reperfusion by thrombolytic therapy. Circulation 89 (1994) 361-365
23. Prewitt R.M., Gu S., Schick U., et al. Intraaortic balloon counterpulsation enhances coronary thrombolysis induced by intravenous administration of a thrombolytic agent. J Am Coll Cardiol 23 (1994) 794-798
24. Anderson R.D., Ohman E.M., Holmes Jr. D.R., et al. Use of intraaortic balloon counterpulsation in patients presenting with cardiogenic shock: observations from the GUSTO-I Study. Global Utilization of Streptokinase and TPA for Occluded Coronary Arteries. J Am Coll Cardiol 30 (1997) 708-715
25. Barron H.V., Every N.R., Parsons L.S., et al. The use of intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: data from the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction 2. Am Heart J 141 (2001) 933-939
26. Sanborn T.A., Sleeper L.A., Bates E.R., et al. Impact of thrombolysis, intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation, and their combination in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: a report from the SHOCK Trial Registry. SHould we emergently revascularize Occluded Coronaries for cardiogenic shocK?. J Am Coll Cardiol 36 3 Suppl A (2000) 1123-1129