scholarly journals Central Venous Pressure and Clinical Outcomes During Left-Sided Mechanical Support for Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evan H. Whitehead ◽  
Katherine L. Thayer ◽  
Daniel Burkhoff ◽  
Nir Uriel ◽  
E. Magnus Ohman ◽  
...  
The Lancet ◽  
1971 ◽  
Vol 297 (7695) ◽  
pp. 373-375 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.V. Collins ◽  
T.R. Evans ◽  
T.J.H. Clark ◽  
M.A. Riaz

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hao Yang ◽  
Chuyi Han ◽  
Xiaoling Guo ◽  
Hongliang Wang ◽  
Yanda Wu ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: To investigate the effect of early protective lung ventilation (EPLV) on mortality and hemodynamic parameters in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated with cardiogenic shock (CS) and pulmonary edema undergoing emergency percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).Methods: From January 2015 to June 2017, patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated with CS and pulmonary edema were admitted to the Tianjin chest Hospital. Based on the use of a mechanical ventilator, patients were divided into the EPLV and Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) groups. Hemodynamic indexes and in-hospital mortality of patients between the two groups was analyzed.Results: The EPLV group consisted of 51 patients and the NIV group consisted of 38 patients. The difference in mortality rates was statistically significant between the EPLV and NIV groups (P=0.01). Central venous pressure, pulmonary artery pressure, and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure after emergency PCI in the EPLV group were lower compared to patients in the NIV group ((P<0.05). Man arterial pressure in patients in the EPLV group was higher compared to NIV patients (P<0.05). Logistic regression analysis showed that EPLV did not increase the risk of mortality (P=0.37, OR=2.16, 95% CI (0.31, 9.52)).Conclusion: EPLV resulted in lower mortality and improved hemodynamic function in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated with CS and pulmonary edema undergoing emergency PCI.


Author(s):  
Ali İhsan Hasde ◽  
Mehmet Cahit Sarıcaoğlu ◽  
Nur Dikmen Yaman ◽  
Çağdaş Baran ◽  
Evren Özçınar ◽  
...  

Abstract OBJECTIVES Our goal was to compare the haemodynamic effects of different mechanical left ventricular (LV) unloading strategies and clinical outcomes in patients with refractory cardiogenic shock supported with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). METHODS A total of 448 patients supported with VA-ECMO for refractory cardiogenic shock between 1 March 2015 and 31 January 2020 were included and analysed in a single-centre, retrospective case–control study. Fifty-three patients (11.8%) on VA-ECMO required LV unloading. Percutaneous balloon atrial septostomy (PBAS), intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) and transapical LV vent (TALVV) strategies were compared with regards to the composite rate of death, procedure-related complications and neurological complications. The secondary outcomes were reduced pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, pulmonary artery pressure, central venous pressure, left atrial diameter and resolution of pulmonary oedema on a chest X-ray within 48 h. RESULTS No death related to the LV unloading procedure was detected. Reduction in pulmonary capillary wedge pressure was highest with the TALVV technique (17.2 ± 2.1 mmHg; P &lt; 0.001) and was higher in the PBAS than in the IABP group; the difference was significant (9.6 ± 2.5 and 3.9 ± 1.3, respectively; P = 0.001). Reduction in central venous pressure with TALVV was highest with the other procedures (7.4 ± 1.1 mmHg; P &lt; 0.001). However, procedure-related complications were significantly higher with TALVV compared to the PBAS and IABP groups (50% vs 17.6% and 10%, respectively; P = 0.015). We observed no significant differences in mortality or neurological complications between the groups. CONCLUSIONS Our results suggest that TALVV was the most effective method for LV unloading compared with PBAS and IABP for VA-ECMO support but was associated with complications. Efficient LV unloading may not improve survival.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Behnam Tehrani ◽  
Alexander Truesdell ◽  
Ramesh Singh ◽  
Charles Murphy ◽  
Patricia Saulino

BACKGROUND The development and implementation of a Cardiogenic Shock initiative focused on increased disease awareness, early multidisciplinary team activation, rapid initiation of mechanical circulatory support, and hemodynamic-guided management and improvement of outcomes in cardiogenic shock. OBJECTIVE The objectives of this study are (1) to collect retrospective clinical outcomes for acute decompensated heart failure cardiogenic shock and acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock, and compare current versus historical survival rates and clinical outcomes; (2) to evaluate Inova Heart and Vascular Institute site specific outcomes before and after initiation of the Cardiogenic Shock team on January 1, 2017; (3) to compare outcomes related to early implementation of mechanical circulatory support and hemodynamic-guided management versus historical controls; (4) to assess survival to discharge rate in patients receiving intervention from the designated shock team and (5) create a clinical archive of Cardiogenic Shock patient characteristics for future analysis and the support of translational research studies. METHODS This is an observational, retrospective, single center study. Retrospective and prospective data will be collected in patients treated at the Inova Heart and Vascular Institute with documented cardiogenic shock as a result of acute decompensated heart failure or acute myocardial infarction. This registry will include data from patients prior to and after the initiation of the multidisciplinary Cardiogenic Shock team on January 1, 2017. Clinical outcomes associated with early multidisciplinary team intervention will be analyzed. In the study group, all patients evaluated for documented cardiogenic shock (acute decompensated heart failure cardiogenic shock, acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock) treated at the Inova Heart and Vascular Institute by the Cardiogenic Shock team will be included. An additional historical Inova Heart and Vascular Institute control group will be analyzed as a comparator. Means with standard deviations will be reported for outcomes. For categorical variables, frequencies and percentages will be presented. For continuous variables, the number of subjects, mean, standard deviation, minimum, 25th percentile, median, 75th percentile and maximum will be reported. Reported differences will include standard errors and 95% CI. RESULTS Preliminary data analysis for the year 2017 has been completed. Compared to a baseline 2016 survival rate of 47.0%, from 2017 to 2018, CS survival rates were increased to 57.9% (58/110) and 81.3% (81/140), respectively (P=.01 for both). Study data will continue to be collected until December 31, 2018. CONCLUSIONS The preliminary results of this study demonstrate that the INOVA SHOCK team approach to the treatment of Cardiogenic Shock with early team activation, rapid initiation of mechanical circulatory support, hemodynamic-guided management, and strict protocol adherence is associated with superior clinical outcomes: survival to discharge and overall survival when compared to 2015 and 2016 outcomes prior to Shock team initiation. What may limit the generalization of these results of this study to other populations are site specific; expertise of the team, strict algorithm adherence based on the INOVA SHOCK protocol, and staff commitment to timely team activation. Retrospective clinical outcomes (acute decompensated heart failure cardiogenic shock, acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock) demonstrated an increase in current survival rates when compared to pre-Cardiogenic Shock team initiation, rapid team activation and diagnosis and timely utilization of mechanical circulatory support. CLINICALTRIAL ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03378739; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03378739 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/701vstDGd)


2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 170-177
Author(s):  
Adrian Corneliu Iancu ◽  
Mihaela Ioana Dregoesc ◽  
Aurelia Solomoneanu ◽  
Theodora Benedek

Abstract Patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated with cardiogenic shock (CS) present one of the highest mortality rates recorded in critical care. Mortality rate in this setting is reported around 45-50% even in the most experienced and well-equipped medical centers. The continuous development of ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (STEMI) networks has led not only to a dramatic decrease in STEMI-related mortality, but also to an increase in the frequency of severely complicated cases who survive to be transferred to tertiary centers for life-saving treatments. The reduced effectiveness of vasoactive drugs on a severely altered hemodynamic status led to the development of new devices dedicated to advanced cardiac support. What’s more, efforts are being made to reduce time from first medical contact to initiation of mechanical support in this particular clinical context. This review aims to summarize the most recent advances in mechanical support devices, in the setting of CS-complicated AMI. At the same time, the review presents several modern concepts in the organization of complex CS centers. These specialized hubs could improve survival in this critical condition.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document