Huang Raymond, Sacks Jerome, Thai Hoang, Goldman Steven, Morrison Douglass A, Barbiere Charles, Ohm Janet
Cardiovascular Disease Sections, Southern Arizona Veterans Affairs Healthcare System and University of Arizona Sarver Heart Center, 3601 S. Sixth Avenue, Tucson, AZ 85723, USA.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2005 May;65(1):25-33. doi: 10.1002/ccd.20334.
This retrospective observational review compares patient characteristics and in-hospital and long-term outcomes of cohorts of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction (MI) prior to the use of stents (as well as glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor and dual-antiplatelet therapy) with PCI in the stent era. Cardiogenic shock remains the leading cause of hospital mortality from acute MI. This is a report of consecutive patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute MI, without mechanical complication, referred for emergency catheterization to a single operator at two consecutive Veterans Affairs medical centers over a 15-year period (1988 to August 2003). PCI was attempted in all 93 cases: 44 consecutive patients in the present era and 49 consecutive patients in the stent era. Patients with comparable extent of coronary disease, more ST elevation myocardial infarction, multiple areas of infarction, and greater comorbidity underwent PCI in the stent era. Nevertheless, PCI in the stent era was associated with higher rates of acute success and improved in-hospital survival. Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank testing showed highly significant improvement in overall survival (P < 0.0001). Logistic regression of in-hospital survival demonstrated that stent use (colinear with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa use and dual-antiplatelet therapy) was significantly associated with survival in a model adjusting for extent of coronary disease and comorbidities (P = 0.007). Stents and abciximab have been associated with improved acute angiographic and procedural success of PCI for cardiogenic shock, leading to improved survival.
本回顾性观察性综述比较了在使用支架(以及糖蛋白IIb/IIIa抑制剂和双联抗血小板治疗)之前与支架时代接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)以治疗并发急性心肌梗死(MI)的心源性休克患者队列的患者特征、住院期间及长期预后。心源性休克仍然是急性心肌梗死导致医院死亡的主要原因。本文报告了在15年期间(1988年至2003年8月),两所连续的退伍军人事务医疗中心将并发急性心肌梗死的心源性休克且无机械并发症的连续患者转诊给同一操作者进行急诊导管插入术的情况。所有93例患者均尝试进行PCI:当代44例连续患者,支架时代49例连续患者。在支架时代,冠状动脉疾病程度相当、ST段抬高型心肌梗死更多、梗死区域更多以及合并症更多的患者接受了PCI。尽管如此,支架时代的PCI与更高的急性成功率和改善的住院生存率相关。Kaplan-Meier曲线和对数秩检验显示总体生存率有高度显著改善(P<0.0001)。住院生存率的逻辑回归表明,在调整冠状动脉疾病程度和合并症的模型中,使用支架(与使用糖蛋白IIb/IIIa和双联抗血小板治疗共线)与生存率显著相关(P = 0.007)。支架和阿昔单抗与改善心源性休克PCI的急性血管造影和手术成功率相关,从而提高了生存率。