Nevzorov Roman, Daum Aner, Jafari Jamal, Yosefy Chaim, Gallego-Colon Enrique
Cardiology Department, Barzilai University Medical Center, Ashkelon, Israel.
Cardiology Department, Barzilai University Medical Center, Ashkelon, Israel.
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2020 Jan;21(1):46-51. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2019.09.014. Epub 2019 Oct 22.
Intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) counterpulsation provides mechanical support for patients with cardiogenic shock. The aim of the study is to evaluate the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock receiving IABP before and after the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) downgraded the use of IABP from a class I to a class IIb in 2012.
Data was obtained from the Acute Coronary Syndrome Israeli Survey (ACSIS) registry, a prospective observational national survey conducted once every two years. From a total of 15,200 patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), 524 patients were identified with acute myocardial infarction (AMI)-complicated with cardiogenic shock. The groups were further subdivided based on whether the IABP was implanted before or after the change in guideline recommendation.
The study indicates a 24% reduction in IABP use since 2002. Until 2012, a reduction in clinical outcomes including 7-days, 30-days and in-hospital mortality, was observed in patients with IABP compared to the patients with conventional therapy. Conversely, after the ESC changed the guidelines, the clinical outcomes were not improved by IABP treatment. Additionally, the conventional therapy group presented with higher baseline ejection fraction, received less effective treatment, reperfusion and/or pharmacological therapy than patients with IABP.
The use of IABP as management for cardiogenic shock has diminished over time since the guidelines were modified. After the change in guidelines, the use of IABP is restricted to high-risk, severely compromised and hemodynamically deteriorated patients hence limiting beneficial outcomes.
主动脉内球囊反搏(IABP)可为心源性休克患者提供机械支持。本研究旨在评估在2012年欧洲心脏病学会(ESC)将IABP的使用从I类降为IIb类之前和之后,接受IABP治疗的心源性休克患者的临床特征和结局。
数据来自以色列急性冠状动脉综合征调查(ACSIS)注册中心,这是一项每两年进行一次的前瞻性观察性全国性调查。在总共15200例急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)患者中,确定了524例并发心源性休克的急性心肌梗死(AMI)患者。根据IABP是否在指南推荐改变之前或之后植入,将这些组进一步细分。
研究表明,自2002年以来IABP的使用减少了24%。直到2012年,与接受传统治疗的患者相比,接受IABP治疗的患者在7天、30天和住院死亡率等临床结局方面有所改善。相反,在ESC更改指南后,IABP治疗并未改善临床结局。此外,传统治疗组的基线射血分数较高,与接受IABP治疗的患者相比,接受的有效治疗、再灌注和/或药物治疗较少。
自指南修改以来,IABP作为心源性休克治疗方法的使用随着时间的推移而减少。指南更改后,IABP的使用仅限于高危、严重受损和血流动力学恶化的患者,因此有益结局有限。