Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Versus Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump in Cardiogenic Shock After Acute Myocardial Infarction

Journal of the American College of Cardiology

Volumn 69, Issue 3, 2017, Pages 278-287

  Ouweneel, Dagmar M ^a   Eriksen, Erlend ^b   Sjauw, Krischan D ^a   van Dongen, Ivo M ^a   Hirsch, Alexander ^a   Packer, Erik J S ^b   Vis, M Marije ^a   Wykrzykowska, Joanna J ^a   Koch, Karel T ^a   Baan, Jan ^a   de Winter, Robbert J ^a   Piek, Jan J ^a   Lagrand, Wim K ^a   de Mol, Bas A J M ^a   Tijssen, Jan G P ^a   Henriques, José P S ^a  

^a ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b HAUKELAND UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

Author keywords

acute myocardial infarction; cardiogenic shock; intra aortic balloon pump; mechanical circulatory support; randomized controlled trial

Indexed keywords

ACUTE HEART INFARCTION; ADULT; APPLICATION SITE BLEEDING; ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL VENTILATION; ASSISTED CIRCULATION; BRAIN ISCHEMIA; CARDIOGENIC SHOCK; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE; CAUSE OF DEATH; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; GASTROINTESTINAL HEMORRHAGE; HEART REINFARCTION; HEMOLYSIS; HUMAN; INTRAAORTIC BALLOON PUMP; LEFT VENTRICULAR ASSIST DEVICE; MALE; MORTALITY RATE; MULTICENTER STUDY; OPEN STUDY; PERCUTANEOUS MECHANICAL CIRCULATORY SUPPORT; POSTOPERATIVE HEMORRHAGE; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RETROPERITONEAL HEMORRHAGE; SYSTOLIC BLOOD PRESSURE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPLICATION; HEART ASSIST DEVICE; HEART INFARCTION; MIDDLE AGED; MORTALITY; SHOCK, CARDIOGENIC; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

FEMALE; HEART-ASSIST DEVICES; HUMANS; INTRA-AORTIC BALLOON PUMPING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SHOCK, CARDIOGENIC; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 85010015292     PISSN: 07351097     EISSN: 15583597     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2016.10.022     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. 1 Hochman, J.S., Sleeper, L.A., Webb, J.G., et al., from the SHOCK Investigators. 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.
2. 2 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.
3. 3 Goldberg, R.J., Spencer, F.A., Gore, J.M., Lessard, D., Yarzebski, J., Thirty-year trends (1975 to 2005) in the magnitude of, management of, and hospital death rates associated with cardiogenic shock in patients with acute myocardial infarction: a population-based perspective. Circulation 119 (2009), 1211–1219.
4. 4 Thiele, H., Zeymer, U., Neumann, F.J., et al. Intraaortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med 367 (2012), 1287–1296.
5. 5 Stretch, R., Sauer, C.M., Yuh, D.D., Bonde, P., National trends in the utilization of short-term mechanical circulatory support: incidence, outcomes, and cost analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 64 (2014), 1407–1415.
6. 6 Sjauw, K.D., Engstrom, A.E., Vis, M.M., et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of intra-aortic balloon pump therapy in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: should we change the guidelines?. Eur Heart J 30 (2009), 459–468.
7. 7 Thiele, H., Zeymer, U., Neumann, F.J., et al. Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (IABP-SHOCK II): final 12 month results of a randomised, open-label trial. Lancet 382 (2013), 1638–1645.
8. 8 Wijns, W., Kolh, P., Danchin, N., et al. Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J 31 (2010), 2501–2555.
9. 9 Levine, G.N., Bates, E.R., Blankenship, J.C., et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI guidelines for percutaneous coronary intervention: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions. J Am Coll Cardiol 58 (2011), e44–e122.
10. 10 Windecker, S., Kolh, P., Alfonso, F., et al. 2014 ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularization: the Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur Heart J 35 (2014), 2541–2619.
11. 11 O'Gara, P.T., Kushner, F.G., Ascheim, D.D., et al. 2013 ACCF/AHA guidelines for the management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 61 (2013), e78–e140.
12. 12 Ouweneel, D.M., Henriques, J.P., Percutaneous cardiac support devices for cardiogenic shock: current indications and recommendations. Heart 98 (2012), 1246–1254.
13. 13 Sjauw, K.D., Remmelink, M., Baan, J. Jr., et al. Left ventricular unloading in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients is safe and feasible and provides acute and sustained left ventricular recovery. J Am Coll Cardiol 51 (2008), 1044–1046.
14. 14 Engstrom, A.E., Cocchieri, R., Driessen, A.H., et al. The Impella 2.5 and 5.0 devices for ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients presenting with severe and profound cardiogenic shock: the Academic Medical Center intensive care unit experience. Crit Care Med 39 (2011), 2072–2079.
15. 15 Seyfarth, M., Sibbing, D., Bauer, I., et al. A randomized clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a percutaneous left ventricular assist device versus intra-aortic balloon pumping for treatment of cardiogenic shock caused by myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 52 (2008), 1584–1588.
16. 16 Ouweneel, D.M., Engstrom, A.E., Sjauw, K.D., et al. Experience from a randomized controlled trial with Impella 2.5 versus IABP in STEMI patients with cardiogenic pre-shock. Lessons learned from the IMPRESS in STEMI trial. Int J Cardiol 202 (2016), 894–896.
17. 17 18th World Medical Association General Assembly. WMA Declaration of Helsinki—ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. Available at: http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/b3/. Accessed September 15, 2016.
18. 18 Thiele, H., Sick, P., Boudriot, E., et al. Randomized comparison of intra-aortic balloon support with a percutaneous left ventricular assist device in patients with revascularized acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. Eur Heart J 26 (2005), 1276–1283.
19. 19 Burkhoff, D., Cohen, H., Brunckhorst, C., et al. A randomized multicenter clinical study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the TandemHeart percutaneous ventricular assist device versus conventional therapy with intraaortic balloon pumping for treatment of cardiogenic shock. Am Heart J 152 (2006), 469.e1–469.e8.
20. 20 Manzo-Silberman, S., Fichet, J., Mathonnet, A., et al. Percutaneous left ventricular assistance in post cardiac arrest shock: comparison of intra-aortic blood pump and IMPELLA Recover LP2.5. Resuscitation 84 (2013), 609–615.
21. 21 Lauten, A., Engstrom, A.E., Jung, C., et al. Percutaneous left-ventricular support with the Impella-2.5-assist device in acute cardiogenic shock: results of the Impella-EUROSHOCK-registry. Circ Heart Fail 6 (2013), 23–30.
22. 22 O'Neill, W.W., Schreiber, T., Wohns, D.H., et al. The current use of Impella 2.5 in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: results from the USpella Registry. J Interv Cardiol 27 (2014), 1–11.
23. 23 U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Summary of safety and effectiveness data (SSED). Available at: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf14/P140003S004B.pdf. Accessed September 6, 2016.