Dataset Information

Predictors of intra-aortic balloon pump hemodynamic failure in non-acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:To characterize patient profile and hemodynamic profile of those undergoing intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) for cardiogenic shock and define predictors of hemodynamic failure of IABP support. BACKGROUND:Clinical characteristics of IABP support in cardiogenic shock not related to acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remain poorly characterized. METHODS:We retrospectively studied a cohort of 74 patients from 2010 to 2015 who underwent IABP insertion for cardiogenic shock complicating acute decompensated heart failure not due to AMI. RESULTS:In the overall cohort, which consisted primarily of patients with chronic systolic heart failure (89%), IABP significantly augmented cardiac index and lowered systemic vascular resistance (P<.05). Despite this improvement, 28% of these patients died (24%) or require urgent escalation in mechanical circulatory support (MCS) (4%). Multivariable regression revealed that baseline left ventricular cardiac power index (LVCPI), a measure of LV power output derived from cardiac index and mean arterial pressure (P=.01), and history of ischemic cardiomyopathy (P=.003) were significantly associated with the composite adverse-event endpoint of death or urgent MCS escalation. An IABP Failure risk score using baseline LVCPI <0.28 W/m2 and ischemic history predicted 28-day adverse events with excellent discrimination. CONCLUSION:Despite hemodynamic improvements with IABP support, patients with non-AMI cardiogenic shock still suffer poor outcomes. Patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and low LVPCI fared significantly worse. These patients may warrant closer observation or earlier consideration of more advanced hemodynamic support.

SUBMITTER: Hsu S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5955398 | biostudies-literature | 2018 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Predictors of intra-aortic balloon pump hemodynamic failure in non-acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock.

Hsu Steven S Thiruvengadam Swetha Kambhampati SK Sciortino Christopher M CM Russell Stuart D SD Schulman Steven P SP

American heart journal 20171213

<h4>Objectives</h4>To characterize patient profile and hemodynamic profile of those undergoing intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) for cardiogenic shock and define predictors of hemodynamic failure of IABP support.<h4>Background</h4>Clinical characteristics of IABP support in cardiogenic shock not related to acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remain poorly characterized.<h4>Methods</h4>We retrospectively studied a cohort of 74 patients from 2010 to 2015 who underwent IABP insertion for cardiogenic s ...[more]

PMID: 29754660

Similar Datasets

Project description:Thiele H, Zeymer U, Neumann FJ, Ferenc M, Olbrich HG, Hausleiter J, Richardt G, Hennersdorf M, Empen K, Fuernau G, Desch S, Eitel I, Hambrecht R, Fuhrmann J, Böhm M, Ebelt H, Schneider S, Schuler G, Werdan K; IABP-SHOCK II Trial Investigators: Intraaortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med 2012, 367:1287-1296.In the current international guidelines, intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) counterpulsation is considered a class I treatment for acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. However, evidence is based mainly on registry data, and there is a paucity of randomized clinical trials.To test the hypothesis that IABP counterpulsation, as compared with the best available medical therapy alone, results in a reduction in mortality among patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock for whom early revascularization is planned.Randomized, prospective, open-label, multicenter trial.Thirty-seven centers in Germany.All adults had acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock and were expected to undergo early revascularization (by means of percutaneous coronary intervention or bypass surgery).After enrollment, 600 patients were randomly assigned to intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation (IABP group, 301 patients) or no IABP counterpulsation (control group, 299 patients).The primary efficacy endpoint is 30-day all-cause mortality.At 30 days, 119 patients in the IABP group (39.7%) and 123 patients in the control group (41.3%) had died (relative risk with IABP, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.79 to 1.17; P=0.69). There were no significant differences in secondary endpoints or in process-of-care measures, including the time to hemodynamic stabilization, the length of stay in the intensive care unit, serum lactate levels, the dose and duration of catecholamine therapy, and renal function.The use of IABP counterpulsation did not significantly reduce 30-day mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock for whom an early revascularization strategy was planned.

Dataset Information

Predictors of intra-aortic balloon pump hemodynamic failure in non-acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock.

Publications

Predictors of intra-aortic balloon pump hemodynamic failure in non-acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets