Suppr超能文献

急性心肌梗死合并心源性休克患者使用机械循环支持装置的情况

Use of Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices Among Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock.

作者信息

Dhruva Sanket S, Ross Joseph S, Mortazavi Bobak J, Hurley Nathan C, Krumholz Harlan M, Curtis Jeptha P, Berkowitz Alyssa P, Masoudi Frederick A, Messenger John C, Parzynski Craig S, Ngufor Che G, Girotra Saket, Amin Amit P, Shah Nilay D, Desai Nihar R

机构信息

University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco.

Section of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, California.

出版信息

JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Feb 1;4(2):e2037748. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.37748.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE

Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices, including intravascular microaxial left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) and intra-aortic balloon pumps (IABPs), are used in patients who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock despite limited evidence of their clinical benefit.

OBJECTIVE

To examine trends in the use of MCS devices among patients who underwent PCI for AMI with cardiogenic shock, hospital-level use variation, and factors associated with use.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional study used the CathPCI and Chest Pain-MI Registries of the American College of Cardiology National Cardiovascular Data Registry. Patients who underwent PCI for AMI complicated by cardiogenic shock between October 1, 2015, and December 31, 2017, were identified from both registries. Data were analyzed from October 2018 to August 2020.

EXPOSURES

Therapies to provide hemodynamic support were categorized as intravascular microaxial LVAD, IABP, TandemHeart, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, LVAD, other devices, combined IABP and intravascular microaxial LVAD, combined IABP and other device (defined as TandemHeart, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, LVAD, or another MCS device), or medical therapy only.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Use of MCS devices overall and specific MCS devices, including intravascular microaxial LVAD, at both patient and hospital levels and variables associated with use.

RESULTS

Among the 28 304 patients included in the study, the mean (SD) age was 65.4 (12.6) years and 18 968 were men (67.0%). The overall MCS device use was constant from the fourth quarter of 2015 to the fourth quarter of 2017, although use of intravascular microaxial LVADs significantly increased (from 4.1% to 9.8%; P < .001), whereas use of IABPs significantly decreased (from 34.8% to 30.0%; P < .001). A significant hospital-level variation in MCS device use was found. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) proportion of patients who received MCS devices was 42% (30%-54%), and the median proportion of patients who received intravascular microaxial LVADs was 1% (0%-10%). In multivariable analyses, cardiac arrest at first medical contact or during hospitalization (odds ratio [OR], 1.82; 95% CI, 1.58-2.09) and severe left main and/or proximal left anterior descending coronary artery stenosis (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.20-1.54) were patient characteristics that were associated with higher odds of receiving intravascular microaxial LVADs only compared with IABPs only.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study found that, among patients who underwent PCI for AMI complicated by cardiogenic shock, overall use of MCS devices was constant, and a 2.5-fold increase in intravascular microaxial LVAD use was found along with a corresponding decrease in IABP use and a significant hospital-level variation in MCS device use. These trends were observed despite limited clinical trial evidence of improved outcomes associated with device use.

摘要

重要性

机械循环支持(MCS)设备,包括血管内微轴左心室辅助设备(LVAD)和主动脉内球囊泵(IABP),被用于接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的急性心肌梗死(AMI)合并心源性休克的患者,尽管其临床益处的证据有限。

目的

研究接受PCI治疗的AMI合并心源性休克患者中MCS设备的使用趋势、医院层面的使用差异以及与使用相关的因素。

设计、设置和参与者:这项横断面研究使用了美国心脏病学会国家心血管数据注册中心的CathPCI和胸痛-心肌梗死注册库。从这两个注册库中识别出2015年10月1日至2017年12月31日期间接受PCI治疗的AMI合并心源性休克的患者。数据于2018年10月至2020年8月进行分析。

暴露因素

提供血流动力学支持的治疗方法分为血管内微轴LVAD、IABP、TandemHeart、体外膜肺氧合、LVAD、其他设备、IABP与血管内微轴LVAD联合使用、IABP与其他设备联合使用(定义为TandemHeart、体外膜肺氧合、LVAD或其他MCS设备)或仅药物治疗。

主要结局和测量指标

患者和医院层面MCS设备的总体使用情况以及特定MCS设备(包括血管内微轴LVAD)的使用情况,以及与使用相关的变量。

结果

在纳入研究的28304例患者中,平均(标准差)年龄为65.4(12.6)岁,男性18968例(67.0%)。从2015年第四季度到2017年第四季度,MCS设备的总体使用情况保持不变,尽管血管内微轴LVAD的使用显著增加(从4.1%增至9.8%;P<0.001),而IABP的使用显著减少(从34.8%降至30.0%;P<0.001)。发现MCS设备的使用在医院层面存在显著差异。接受MCS设备治疗的患者比例中位数(四分位间距[IQR])为42%(30%-54%),接受血管内微轴LVAD治疗的患者比例中位数为1%(0%-10%)。在多变量分析中,首次医疗接触时或住院期间发生心脏骤停(比值比[OR],1.82;95%可信区间[CI],1.58-2.09)和严重左主干和/或左前降支近端冠状动脉狭窄(OR,1.36;95%CI,1.20-1.54)是与仅接受血管内微轴LVAD治疗相比仅接受IABP治疗可能性更高相关的患者特征。

结论与相关性

本研究发现,在接受PCI治疗的AMI合并心源性休克患者中,MCS设备的总体使用情况保持不变,血管内微轴LVAD的使用增加了2.5倍,同时IABP的使用相应减少,且MCS设备的使用在医院层面存在显著差异。尽管关于设备使用改善结局的临床试验证据有限,但仍观察到了这些趋势。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cac1/7900859/17514c434c8f/jamanetwopen-e2037748-g001.jpg

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

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验