Jones Haile A, Kalisetti Deepika R, Gaba Mahender, McCormick Daniel J, Goldberg Sheldon
Cardiology Consultants of Philadelphia, Hahnemann University Hospital, 230 North Broad MS108, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19102, USA.
J Invasive Cardiol. 2012 Oct;24(10):544-50.
As percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is being applied to higher-risk patients, ie, those with unprotected left main, multi-vessel disease, last remaining vessel, compromised left ventricular function, and ongoing ischemia, interventional cardiologists have used different percutaneous assist devices in an attempt to reduce procedure risk. The definition of high risk has varied among trials. There is no definitive evidence for superiority of the more invasive devices over the intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP); furthermore, a prophylactic strategy of IABP insertion has not proven superior to a provisional strategy. The purpose of this report is to review the physiologic mechanism of action of the devices and discuss indications, limitations, and clinical outcomes during high-risk PCI.
随着经皮冠状动脉介入治疗（PCI）应用于更高风险的患者，即那些患有无保护左主干、多支血管病变、最后剩余血管、左心室功能受损以及持续性心肌缺血的患者，介入心脏病学家使用了不同的经皮辅助装置，试图降低手术风险。不同试验中对高风险的定义有所不同。尚无确凿证据表明侵入性更强的装置优于主动脉内球囊反搏（IABP）；此外，IABP置入的预防性策略尚未被证明优于临时策略。本报告的目的是回顾这些装置的生理作用机制，并讨论高危PCI期间的适应证、局限性和临床结果。
