机械循环支持在心源休克中的应用。

Mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock.

机构信息

Department of Internal Medicine III, Heart Center, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, University Hospital Halle/Saale, Ernst-Grube-Str. 40, Halle/Saale 06120, Germany.

出版信息

Eur Heart J. 2014 Jan;35(3):156-67. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/eht248. Epub 2013 Sep 7.

Abstract

Despite advances in coronary revascularization and widespread use of primary percutaneous interventions, cardiogenic shock complicating an acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (CSMI) remains a clinical challenge with high mortality rates. Conservative management with catecholamines is associated with serious limitations, including arrhythmias, increased myocardial oxygen consumption, and inadequate circulatory support. Clinicians have therefore turned to mechanical means of circulatory support. Circulatory assist systems for CSMI can be distinguished by the method of placement (i.e. percutaneous vs. surgical), the type of circulatory support (i.e. left ventricular, right ventricular, or biventricular pressure and/or volume unloading), and whether they are combined with extracorporal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). The percutaneous assist systems most commonly used in CSMI are the intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), venoarterial ECMO, the Impella pump, and the TandemHeart. Decades of clinical studies and experience demonstrated haemodynamic improvement, including elevation of diastolic perfusion pressure and cardiac output. Recently, the large randomized IABP-Shock II Trial did not show a significant reduction in 30-day mortality in CSMI with IABP insertion. There are no randomized study data available for ECMO use in CSMI. Both the Impella pump and the TandemHeart did not reduce 30-day mortality when compared with IABP in small randomized controlled trials (RCTs). In conclusion, despite the need for effective mechanical circulatory support in CSMI, current devices, as tested, have not been demonstrated to improve short- or long-term survival rates. RCTs testing the optimal timing of device therapy and optimal device design are needed to improve outcomes in CSMI.

摘要

尽管在冠状动脉血运重建和广泛应用经皮介入治疗方面取得了进展,但急性 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)并发心原性休克仍然是一个具有高死亡率的临床挑战。儿茶酚胺的保守治疗存在严重的局限性,包括心律失常、心肌耗氧量增加和循环支持不足。因此,临床医生转而寻求机械循环支持方法。心原性休克的循环辅助系统可通过放置方法(即经皮与手术)、循环支持类型(即左心室、右心室或双心室压力和/或容积卸载)以及是否与体外膜肺氧合(ECMO)相结合来区分。在 STEMI 中最常使用的经皮辅助系统是主动脉内球囊泵(IABP)、静脉动脉 ECMO、Impella 泵和 TandemHeart。几十年来的临床研究和经验表明,这些系统可改善血液动力学,包括舒张期灌注压和心输出量的升高。最近,大型随机 IABP-Shock II 试验显示,在 STEMI 中插入 IABP 并没有显著降低 30 天死亡率。在 STEMI 中使用 ECMO 的随机研究数据尚无报道。在小型随机对照试验(RCT)中,与 IABP 相比,Impella 泵和 TandemHeart 均未降低 30 天死亡率。总之,尽管 STEMI 患者需要有效的机械循环支持,但目前的装置在测试中并未证明可提高短期或长期生存率。需要进行 RCT 测试以确定最佳的装置治疗时机和最佳的装置设计,以改善 STEMI 的预后。

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