Suppr超能文献

心源性休克患者在溶栓治疗失败后是否应接受补救性血管成形术:心源性休克患者直接血管成形术与补救性血管成形术的比较

Should patients in cardiogenic shock undergo rescue angioplasty after failed fibrinolysis: comparison of primary versus rescue angioplasty in cardiogenic shock patients.

作者信息

Kunadian Babu, Vijayalakshmi Kunadian, Dunning Joel, Thornley Andrew R, Sutton Andrew G C, Muir Douglas F, Wright Robert A, Hall James A, de Belder Mark A

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, The James Cook University Hospital, Marton Road, Middlesbrough, United Kingdom.

出版信息

J Invasive Cardiol. 2007 May;19(5):217-23.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Trials of rescue angioplasty (rPCI) following failed fibrinolysis have excluded patients with cardiogenic shock and the benefit of rPCI in this setting is unknown. We compared the clinical, angiographic characteristics, 30-day and 1-year outcomes of cardiogenic shock patients undergoing rPCI with those undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI).

METHODS

Of the 171 patients undergoing PCI for cardiogenic shock between 1994 and 2005 at our institution, the indication was for PPCI in 65 and rPCI in 59 patients. Clinical, procedural, 30- day and 1-year mortality data were compared.

RESULTS

There were no differences between the cohorts with regard to clinical and pre-PCI angiographic variables, except that patients who underwent rPCI were more likely to be interhospital transfers (64% vs. 43%; p = 0.02) and had a longer door-to-balloon time (median 298 [IQR 395 to 180] minutes in the rPCI group vs. 131 [IQR 215 to 90] minutes in the PPCI group; p <0.01). Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors were used less often (20% vs. 42%; p = 0.01), but use of stents was similar in both groups. Patients undergoing rPCI had a lower rate of final TIMI 3 flow grade (56% vs. 74%; p = 0.04) and a higher 1-year mortality (71% vs. 49%; p = 0.01). In the patients with final TIMI flow 3, 1-year mortality was higher in the rPCI group (61% vs. 37%; p = 0.04). In patients with successful procedures (survived procedure, no emergency CABG, TIMI 3 flow), 1-year mortality was higher in the rPCI group (59% vs. 33%; p = 0.02). One-year mortality was 85% in both groups if the procedure was unsuccessful. One-year mortality in patients >70 years old with cardiogenic shock undergoing rPCI was 100% (n = 15) and 70% (n = 14) with PPCI. Rescue angioplasty, anterior myocardial infarction, multivessel disease and postprocedure TIMI flow grade <3 were found to be independent predictors of mortality at 30 days.

CONCLUSIONS

In the setting of cardiogenic shock, rPCI patients were treated later than those undergoing PPCI. They had a lower final TIMI 3 flow and higher 1-year mortality. Even patients with a successful rPCI procedure had a higher 1-year mortality than those with a successful PPCI. Rescue angioplasty in the setting of cardiogenic shock was found be an independent predictor of mortality. Rescue angioplasty in elderly patients in cardiogenic shock (>75 years) may be a futile treatment. Efforts should be made to improve reperfusion and survival in these patients, possibly by either adopting PPCI for all patients presenting with ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction or, if this is not logistically possible, adopting PPCI for selected high-risk patients or early referral for rPCI in high-risk groups receiving fibrinolysis.

摘要

背景

溶栓失败后进行补救性血管成形术(rPCI)的试验排除了心源性休克患者,rPCI在此情况下的获益尚不清楚。我们比较了接受rPCI的心源性休克患者与接受直接经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PPCI)的心源性休克患者的临床、血管造影特征、30天和1年的结局。

方法

1994年至2005年在我们机构接受PCI治疗的心源性休克患者共171例,其中65例的适应证为PPCI,59例为rPCI。比较了临床、手术、30天和1年的死亡率数据。

结果

两组在临床和PCI术前血管造影变量方面无差异,但接受rPCI的患者更可能是院间转运患者(64%对43%;p = 0.02),且从就诊到球囊扩张的时间更长(rPCI组中位数为298[四分位间距395至180]分钟,PPCI组为131[四分位间距215至90]分钟;p <0.01)。糖蛋白IIb/IIIa抑制剂的使用频率较低(20%对42%;p = 0.01),但两组支架的使用情况相似。接受rPCI的患者最终TIMI 3级血流的比例较低(56%对74%;p = 0.04),1年死亡率较高(71%对49%;p = 0.01)。在最终TIMI血流为3级的患者中,rPCI组的1年死亡率更高(61%对37%;p = 0.04)。在手术成功的患者(手术存活、未行急诊冠状动脉旁路移植术、TIMI 3级血流)中,rPCI组的1年死亡率更高(59%对33%;p = 0.02)。如果手术不成功,两组的1年死亡率均为85%。年龄>70岁的心源性休克患者接受rPCI的1年死亡率为100%(n = 15),接受PPCI的为70%(n = 14)。补救性血管成形术、前壁心肌梗死、多支血管病变和术后TIMI血流分级<3被发现是30天死亡率的独立预测因素。

结论

在心源性休克的情况下,接受rPCI的患者比接受PPCI的患者治疗时间更晚。他们最终的TIMI 3级血流更低,1年死亡率更高。即使rPCI手术成功的患者,其1年死亡率也高于PPCI手术成功的患者。在心源性休克情况下的补救性血管成形术被发现是死亡率的独立预测因素。老年(>75岁)心源性休克患者的补救性血管成形术可能是无效治疗。应努力改善这些患者的再灌注和生存率,可能的方法是对所有ST段抬高型急性心肌梗死患者采用PPCI,或者如果在后勤上不可行,则对选定的高危患者采用PPCI,或在接受溶栓治疗的高危组中尽早转诊进行rPCI。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验