1 Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, USA.
2 Department of Surgery, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, USA.
Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. 2018 Dec;7(8):755-765. doi: 10.1177/2048872617740834. Epub 2017 Nov 2.
: Cardiogenic shock following acute myocardial infarction (AMI-CS) portends a poor prognosis. Short-term mechanical circulatory support devices (MCSDs) provide hemodynamic support for patients with cardiogenic shock but predictors of survival and the ability to wean from short-term MCSDs remain largely unknown.
: All patients > 18 years old treated at our institution with extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation or short-term surgical ventricular assist device for AMI-CS were studied. We collected acute myocardial infarction details with demographic and hemodynamic variables. Primary outcomes were survival to discharge and recovery from MCSD (i.e. survival without heart replacement therapy including durable ventricular assist device or heart transplant).
: One hundred and twenty-four patients received extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation or short-term surgical ventricular assist device following acute myocardial infarction from 2007 to 2016; 89 received extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation and 35 short-term ventricular assist device. Fifty-five (44.4%) died in the hospital and 69 (55.6%) survived to discharge. Twenty-six (37.7%) required heart replacement therapy (four transplant, 22 durable ventricular assist device) and 43 (62.3%) were discharged without heart replacement therapy. Age and cardiac index at MCSD implantation were predictors of survival to discharge; patients over 60 years with cardiac index <1.5 l/min per m had a low likelihood of survival. The angiographic result after revascularization predicted recovery from MCSD (odds ratio 9.00, 95% confidence interval 2.45-32.99, p=0.001), but 50% of those optimally revascularized still required heart replacement therapy. Cardiac index predicted recovery from MCSD among this group (odds ratio 4.06, 95% confidence interval 1.45-11.55, p=0.009).
: Among AMI-CS patients requiring short-term MCSDs, age and cardiac index predict survival to discharge. Angiographic result and cardiac index predict ventricular recovery but 50% of those optimally revascularized still required heart replacement therapy.
急性心肌梗死后心源性休克(AMI-CS)预示着预后不良。短期机械循环支持设备(MCSD)为心源性休克患者提供血液动力学支持,但生存率和脱离短期 MCSD 的能力仍然很大程度上未知。
研究了我院收治的 124 例因 AMI-CS 接受体外膜氧合或短期外科心室辅助装置治疗的>18 岁患者。我们收集了急性心肌梗死的详细信息,包括人口统计学和血液动力学变量。主要结局是出院时的生存率和 MCSD 恢复(即无心脏替代治疗的生存率,包括持久心室辅助装置或心脏移植)。
2007 年至 2016 年期间,124 例患者因急性心肌梗死接受体外膜氧合或短期外科心室辅助装置治疗;89 例接受体外膜氧合,35 例接受短期心室辅助装置。55 例(44.4%)在医院死亡,69 例(55.6%)出院。26 例(37.7%)需要心脏替代治疗(4 例移植,22 例持久心室辅助装置),43 例(62.3%)无心脏替代治疗出院。MCSD 植入时的年龄和心指数是出院生存率的预测因素;年龄>60 岁且心指数<1.5 l/min/m 的患者生存率较低。血管造影结果预测 MCSD 恢复(优势比 9.00,95%置信区间 2.45-32.99,p=0.001),但血管造影优化再血管化的患者仍有 50%需要心脏替代治疗。心指数预测了这组患者的 MCSD 恢复(优势比 4.06,95%置信区间 1.45-11.55,p=0.009)。
在需要短期 MCSD 的 AMI-CS 患者中,年龄和心指数预测出院生存率。血管造影结果和心指数预测心室恢复,但血管造影优化再血管化的患者仍有 50%需要心脏替代治疗。