• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

经皮左心室辅助装置与主动脉内球囊反搏在急性心肌梗死合并心原性休克中的并发症比较。

Complications from percutaneous-left ventricular assist devices versus intra-aortic balloon pump in acute myocardial infarction-cardiogenic shock.

机构信息

Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States of America.

Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States of America.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2020 Aug 24;15(8):e0238046. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0238046. eCollection 2020.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0238046
PMID:32833995
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7444810/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

There are limited data on the complications with a percutaneous left ventricular assist device (pLVAD) vs. intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) in acute myocardial infarction-cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS).

OBJECTIVE

To assess the trends, rates and predictors of complications.

METHODS

Using a 17-year AMI-CS population from the National Inpatient Sample, AMI-CS admissions receiving pLVAD and IABP support were evaluated for vascular, lower limb amputation, hematologic, neurologic and acute kidney injury (AKI) complications. In-hospital mortality, hospitalization costs and length of stay in pLVAD and IABP cohorts with complications was studied.

RESULTS

Of 168,645 admissions, 7,855 (4.7%) receiving pLVAD support. The pLVAD cohort had higher comorbidity, cardiac arrest (36.1% vs. 29.7%) and non-cardiac organ failure (74.7% vs. 56.9%) rates. Complications were higher in pLVAD compared to IABP cohort-overall 69.0% vs. 54.7%; vascular 3.8% vs. 2.1%; lower limb amputation 0.3% vs. 0.3%; hematologic 36.0% vs. 27.7%; neurologic 4.9% vs. 3.5% and AKI 55.4% vs. 39.1% (all p<0.001 except for amputation). Non-White race, higher comorbidity, organ failure, and extracorporeal membrane oxygen use were predictors of complications for both cohorts. The pLVAD cohort with complications had higher in-hospital mortality (45.5% vs. 33.1%; adjusted odds ratio 1.65 [95% confidence interval 1.55-1.75]), shorter duration of hospital stay, and higher hospitalization costs compared to the IABP cohort with complications (all p<0.001). These results were consistent in propensity-matched pairs.

CONCLUSIONS

AMI-CS admissions receiving pLVAD had higher rates of complications compared to the IABP, with worse in-hospital outcomes in the cohort with complications.

摘要

背景

在急性心肌梗死合并心源性休克(AMI-CS)患者中,经皮左心室辅助装置(pLVAD)与主动脉内球囊泵(IABP)相关并发症的数据有限。

目的

评估并发症的趋势、发生率和预测因素。

方法

利用全国住院患者样本中 17 年 AMI-CS 人群,评估接受 pLVAD 和 IABP 支持的 AMI-CS 患者的血管、下肢截肢、血液、神经和急性肾损伤(AKI)并发症。研究 pLVAD 和 IABP 并发症患者的住院死亡率、住院费用和住院时间。

结果

在 168645 例住院患者中,有 7855 例(4.7%)接受了 pLVAD 支持。pLVAD 组的合并症、心脏骤停(36.1% vs. 29.7%)和非心脏器官衰竭(74.7% vs. 56.9%)发生率更高。与 IABP 组相比,pLVAD 组的并发症发生率更高——总体并发症发生率为 69.0% vs. 54.7%;血管并发症发生率为 3.8% vs. 2.1%;下肢截肢发生率为 0.3% vs. 0.3%;血液并发症发生率为 36.0% vs. 27.7%;神经并发症发生率为 4.9% vs. 3.5%;AKI 发生率为 55.4% vs. 39.1%(除了截肢,均为 p<0.001)。非白种人、更高的合并症、器官衰竭和体外膜肺氧合的使用是两个队列并发症的预测因素。与 IABP 组相比,pLVAD 组的并发症患者的住院死亡率更高(45.5% vs. 33.1%;调整后的优势比为 1.65 [95%置信区间为 1.55-1.75]),住院时间更短,住院费用更高(所有 p<0.001)。在倾向匹配的对中,结果一致。

结论

与 IABP 相比,接受 pLVAD 的 AMI-CS 患者的并发症发生率更高,且并发症患者的住院结局更差。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7e41/7444810/d3a1b73c9e38/pone.0238046.g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7e41/7444810/fcc15885df6c/pone.0238046.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7e41/7444810/a8a30971e5b5/pone.0238046.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7e41/7444810/06a6a233c12f/pone.0238046.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7e41/7444810/d3a1b73c9e38/pone.0238046.g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7e41/7444810/fcc15885df6c/pone.0238046.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7e41/7444810/a8a30971e5b5/pone.0238046.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7e41/7444810/06a6a233c12f/pone.0238046.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7e41/7444810/d3a1b73c9e38/pone.0238046.g004.jpg

相似文献

1
Complications from percutaneous-left ventricular assist devices versus intra-aortic balloon pump in acute myocardial infarction-cardiogenic shock.经皮左心室辅助装置与主动脉内球囊反搏在急性心肌梗死合并心原性休克中的并发症比较。
PLoS One. 2020 Aug 24;15(8):e0238046. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0238046. eCollection 2020.
2
Association of Use of an Intravascular Microaxial Left Ventricular Assist Device vs Intra-aortic Balloon Pump With In-Hospital Mortality and Major Bleeding Among Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock.血管内微型轴流左心室辅助装置与主动脉内球囊泵在急性心肌梗死合并心源性休克患者中的应用与院内死亡率和大出血的关系。
JAMA. 2020 Feb 25;323(8):734-745. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.0254.
3
Escalation strategies, management, and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction-cardiogenic shock patients receiving percutaneous left ventricular support.接受经皮左心室辅助的急性心肌梗死合并心原性休克患者的升级策略、管理和结局。
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2023 Sep;102(3):403-414. doi: 10.1002/ccd.30786. Epub 2023 Jul 20.
4
Ten-year trends, predictors and outcomes of mechanical circulatory support in percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗伴心原性休克的急性心肌梗死后十年机械循环支持的趋势、预测因素和结局。
EuroIntervention. 2021 Feb 5;16(15):e1254-e1261. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-19-00226.
5
Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Device vs. Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump for Hemodynamic Support in Acute Myocardial Infarction-Related Cardiogenic Shock and Coexistent Atrial Fibrillation: A Nationwide Propensity-Matched Analysis'.经皮心室辅助装置与主动脉内球囊反搏在急性心肌梗死相关心源性休克合并心房颤动中的血流动力学支持比较:全国倾向匹配分析。
Am J Med Sci. 2021 Jan;361(1):55-62. doi: 10.1016/j.amjms.2020.08.018. Epub 2020 Aug 12.
6
Mechanical circulatory support versus vasopressors alone in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.机械循环支持与单独使用血管加压素在接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的急性心肌梗死合并心原性休克患者中的比较。
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2024 Jan;103(1):30-41. doi: 10.1002/ccd.30913. Epub 2023 Nov 23.
7
Trends in mechanical circulatory support use and hospital mortality among patients with acute myocardial infarction and non-infarction related cardiogenic shock in the United States.美国急性心肌梗死合并非梗死相关心原性休克患者应用机械循环支持治疗的趋势和院内死亡率。
Clin Res Cardiol. 2018 Apr;107(4):287-303. doi: 10.1007/s00392-017-1182-2. Epub 2017 Nov 13.
8
A Comparison of In-Hospital Outcomes Between the Use of Impella and IABP in Acute Myocardial Infarction Cardiogenic Shock Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗中急性心肌梗死合并心原性休克应用 Impella 与 IABP 的院内转归比较。
J Invasive Cardiol. 2022 Feb;34(2):E98-E103. doi: 10.25270/jic/21.00096.
9
Clinical Outcomes and Cost Associated With an Intravascular Microaxial Left Ventricular Assist Device vs Intra-aortic Balloon Pump in Patients Presenting With Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock.临床结局和成本与血管内微轴左心室辅助装置与主动脉内球囊泵在急性心肌梗死合并心源性休克患者。
JAMA Intern Med. 2022 Sep 1;182(9):926-933. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2022.2735.
10
Impella Support for Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock.经皮 Impella 辅助治疗伴心原性休克的急性心肌梗死。
Circulation. 2019 Mar 5;139(10):1249-1258. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.036614.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparative Outcomes of Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump Versus Percutaneous Left Ventricular Assist Device in High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.主动脉内球囊反搏与经皮左心室辅助装置在高危经皮冠状动脉介入治疗中的比较结果:一项系统评价和荟萃分析
J Clin Med. 2025 Aug 1;14(15):5430. doi: 10.3390/jcm14155430.
2
Management of non-Cardiac Organ Failure in cardiogenic shock.心源性休克中非心脏器官衰竭的管理。
Am Heart J Plus. 2025 May 1;55:100549. doi: 10.1016/j.ahjo.2025.100549. eCollection 2025 Jul.
3
Impact of Socioeconomic Status on Mechanical Circulatory Device Utilization and Outcomes in Cardiogenic Shock.

本文引用的文献

1
Weekend Effect in the Management and Outcomes of Acute Myocardial Infarction in the United States, 2000-2016.2000 - 2016年美国急性心肌梗死管理与预后中的周末效应
Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes. 2020 Jun 12;4(4):362-372. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2020.02.004. eCollection 2020 Aug.
2
Incidence and clinical outcomes of bleeding complications and acute limb ischemia in STEMI and cardiogenic shock.ST段抬高型心肌梗死和心原性休克患者出血并发症和急性肢体缺血的发生率和临床结局。
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2021 May 1;97(6):1129-1138. doi: 10.1002/ccd.29003. Epub 2020 May 30.
3
Incidence and clinical outcomes of stroke in ST-elevation myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock.
社会经济地位对心源性休克中机械循环装置使用及结局的影响
J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2022 Apr 11;1(2):100027. doi: 10.1016/j.jscai.2022.100027. eCollection 2022 Mar-Apr.
4
Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices in Acute Myocardial Infarction-Cardiogenic Shock: Current Studies and Future Directions.急性心肌梗死所致心源性休克中的机械循环支持装置:当前研究与未来方向
J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2023 Mar 27;2(2):100586. doi: 10.1016/j.jscai.2023.100586. eCollection 2023 Mar-Apr.
5
Outcomes of Impella 5.0 and 5.5 for cardiogenic shock: A single-center 137 patient experience.Impella 5.0 和 5.5 治疗心原性休克的结果:单中心 137 例患者经验。
Artif Organs. 2024 Jul;48(7):771-780. doi: 10.1111/aor.14735. Epub 2024 Feb 23.
6
Management and Outcomes of Acute Myocardial Infarction-Cardiogenic Shock in Uninsured Compared With Privately Insured Individuals.未参保与有私人保险个体的急性心肌梗死合并心原性休克的管理和预后。
Circ Heart Fail. 2022 May;15(5):e008991. doi: 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.121.008991. Epub 2022 Mar 4.
7
A Clinical Update on Vasoactive Medication in the Management of Cardiogenic Shock.心源性休克管理中血管活性药物的临床最新进展
Clin Med Insights Cardiol. 2022 Feb 7;16:11795468221075064. doi: 10.1177/11795468221075064. eCollection 2022.
8
Trends and differences in management and outcomes of cardiac arrest in underweight and obese acute myocardial infarction hospitalizations.体重过轻和肥胖的急性心肌梗死住院患者心脏骤停的管理及结局的趋势与差异
Am J Cardiovasc Dis. 2021 Oct 25;11(5):576-586. eCollection 2021.
9
Contemporary Management of Cardiogenic Shock: A RAND Appropriateness Panel Approach.当代心原性休克的管理:一个 RAND 适宜性专家组方法。
Circ Heart Fail. 2021 Dec;14(12):e008635. doi: 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.121.008635. Epub 2021 Nov 22.
10
Impact of concomitant respiratory infections in the management and outcomes acute myocardial infarction-cardiogenic shock.合并呼吸道感染对急性心肌梗死合并心原性休克患者的管理和结局的影响。
Indian Heart J. 2021 Sep-Oct;73(5):565-571. doi: 10.1016/j.ihj.2021.07.004. Epub 2021 Jul 17.
ST 段抬高型心肌梗死和心原性休克患者的卒中发生率和临床结局。
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2021 Feb 1;97(2):217-225. doi: 10.1002/ccd.28919. Epub 2020 Apr 30.
4
Burden of Arrhythmias in Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock.心律失常负担在合并心原性休克的急性心肌梗死中的作用。
Am J Cardiol. 2020 Jun 15;125(12):1774-1781. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2020.03.015. Epub 2020 Apr 6.
5
Pulmonary artery catheter use in acute myocardial infarction-cardiogenic shock.肺动脉导管在急性心肌梗死合并心源性休克中的应用。
ESC Heart Fail. 2020 Jun;7(3):1234-1245. doi: 10.1002/ehf2.12652. Epub 2020 Apr 2.
6
Complications in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction Supported with Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.接受体外膜肺氧合支持的急性心肌梗死患者的并发症
J Clin Med. 2020 Mar 19;9(3):839. doi: 10.3390/jcm9030839.
7
Epidemiology of in-hospital cardiac arrest complicating non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction receiving early coronary angiography.非 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死患者行早期冠状动脉造影术后院内心搏骤停的流行病学。
Am Heart J. 2020 May;223:59-64. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2020.01.016. Epub 2020 Jan 29.
8
Cardiac Arrest Definition Using Administrative Codes and Outcomes in Acute Myocardial Infarction.使用行政代码和急性心肌梗死结局的心脏骤停定义
Mayo Clin Proc. 2020 Mar;95(3):611-613. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2019.12.007.
9
Regional Variation in the Management and Outcomes of Acute Myocardial Infarction With Cardiogenic Shock in the United States.美国伴心原性休克的急性心肌梗死的治疗和结局的地域差异。
Circ Heart Fail. 2020 Feb;13(2):e006661. doi: 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.119.006661. Epub 2020 Feb 14.
10
Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support for Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation: A Systematic Review.静脉动脉体外膜肺氧合支持下心室性心动过速消融术:系统评价。
ASAIO J. 2020 Sep/Oct;66(9):980-985. doi: 10.1097/MAT.0000000000001125.