Ten Berg Sanne, Bogerd Margriet, Peters Elma J, Timmermans Marijke J C, Lagrand Wim K, Otterspoor Luuk C, Vlaar Alexander P J, Engström Annemarie E, Henriques José P S
Department of Cardiology, Amsterdam, UMC, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Netherlands Heart Registration, Moreelsepark 1, 3511 EP, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Clin Res Cardiol. 2025 Sep 3. doi: 10.1007/s00392-025-02742-0.
Vasopressors and inotropes remain the cornerstone in treatment of acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS). Milrinone and dobutamine are both commonly used, yet the optimal inotrope remains unclear. We aimed to identify factors associated with milrinone and dobutamine treatment and assess their effects on 30-day mortality in a large real-world cohort of AMI-CS patients. The Netherlands Heart Registration prospectively records data for percutaneous coronary intervention patients. Between 2017 and 2021, additional retrospective data on CS patients were collected by fourteen Dutch hospitals. Patients who were treated with either milrinone or dobutamine were selected; those treated with both were excluded. Missing data were imputed (30 ×) using multiple imputation, and propensity matched score analysis (PSM) was performed to evaluate the association between milrinone or dobutamine treatment and 30-day mortality.
In total, 739 patients were included (milrinone n = 247, dobutamine n = 492). Prior to matching, milrinone-treated patients exhibited more severely ill baseline and treatment characteristics, and higher 30-day mortality (50.6% vs. 41.5%, p = 0.018). After PSM, 198 patients remained in each group for analysis. Baseline characteristics were well balanced and 30-day mortality rates were similar (46.5% vs. 41.9%, p = 0.362).
In this real-world propensity-matched cohort of AMI-CS patients, no significant difference in 30-day mortality was observed between patients treated with milrinone and dobutamine. Importantly, milrinone patients were more severely ill at baseline, indicating that the choice of inotrope may be influenced by illness severity. This comprehensive study suggests that the selection of inotrope may continue to be guided by individual patient characteristics.
血管升压药和正性肌力药仍然是治疗急性心肌梗死相关心源性休克(AMI-CS)的基石。米力农和多巴酚丁胺都常用,但最佳的正性肌力药仍不明确。我们旨在确定与米力农和多巴酚丁胺治疗相关的因素,并评估它们对一大群真实世界的AMI-CS患者30天死亡率的影响。荷兰心脏注册前瞻性记录经皮冠状动脉介入治疗患者的数据。2017年至2021年期间;荷兰14家医院收集了CS患者的额外回顾性数据。选择接受米力农或多巴酚丁胺治疗的患者;排除接受两者治疗的患者。使用多重填补法填补缺失数据(30次),并进行倾向匹配评分分析(PSM)以评估米力农或多巴酚丁胺治疗与30天死亡率之间的关联。
总共纳入739例患者(米力农组n = 247,多巴酚丁胺组n = 492)。匹配前,接受米力农治疗的患者基线和治疗特征病情更严重,30天死亡率更高(50.6%对41.5%,p = 0.018)。PSM后,每组各有198例患者留作分析。基线特征平衡良好,30天死亡率相似(46.5%对41.9%,p = 0.362)。
在这个真实世界的AMI-CS患者倾向匹配队列中,接受米力农和多巴酚丁胺治疗的患者30天死亡率无显著差异。重要的是,米力农组患者基线病情更严重,这表明正性肌力药的选择可能受病情严重程度影响。这项全面研究表明,正性肌力药的选择可能继续以个体患者特征为指导。