Cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction and outcome following percutaneous coronary intervention

References

• Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Webb JG, Sanborn TA, White HD, Talley JD, et al. Early revascularization in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. SHOCK Investigators. Should we emergently revascularize occluded coronaries for cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med. 1999; 341: 625–34
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barron HV, Every NR, Parsons LS, Angeja B, Goldberg RJ, Gore JM, et al. The use of intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: data from the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction 2. Am Heart J. 2001; 141: 933–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webb JG, Sanborn TA, Sleeper LA, Carere RG, Buller CE, Slater JN, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention for cardiogenic shock in the SHOCK Trial Registry. Am Heart J. 2001; 141: 964–70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hochman JS, Boland J, Sleeper LA, Porway M, Brinker J, Col J, et al. Current spectrum of cardiogenic shock and effect of early revascularization on mortality. Results of an international registry. SHOCK Registry Investigators. Circulation 1995; 91: 873–81
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hochman JS, Buller CE, Sleeper LA, Boland J, Dzavik V, Sanborn TA, et al. Cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction—etiologies, management and outcome: a report from the SHOCK Trial Registry. Should we emergently revascularize occluded coronaries for cardiogenic shock?. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000; 36(Suppl A)1063–70
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Urban P, Stauffer JC, Bleed D, Khatchatrian N, Amann W, Bertel O, et al. A randomized evaluation of early revascularization to treat shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. The (Swiss) multicenter trial of angioplasty for shock-(S)MASH. Eur Heart J. 1999; 20: 1030–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, White HD, Dzavik V, Wong SC, Menon V, et al. One-year survival following early revascularization for cardiogenic shock. JAMA 2001; 285: 190–2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dzavik V, Sleeper LA, Picard MH, Sanborn TA, Lowe AM, Gin K, et al. Outcome of patients aged > or = 75 years in the should we emergently revascularize occluded coronaries in cardiogenic shock (SHOCK) trial: do elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock respond differently to emergent revascularization?. Am Heart J. 2005; 149: 1128–34
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Webb JG, Dzavik V, Buller CE, Aylward P, et al. Early revascularization and long-term survival in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. JAMA 2006; 295: 2511–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeger RV, Tseng CH, Hochman JS, Bates ER. Interhospital transfer for early revascularization in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock – a report from the should we revascularize occluded coronaries for cardiogenic shock? (SHOCK) trial and registry. Am Heart J. 2006; 152: 686–92
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jeger RV, Harkness SM, Ramanathan K, Buller CE, Pfisterer ME, Sleeper LA, et al. Emergency revascularization in patients with cardiogenic shock on admission: a report from the SHOCK trial and registry. Eur Heart J. 2006; 27: 664–70
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hasdai D, Topol EJ, Califf RM, Berger PB, Holmes DR, Jr. Cardiogenic shock complicating acute coronary syndromes. Lancet 2000; 356: 749–56
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Webb JG, Lowe AM, Sanborn TA, White HD, Sleeper LA, Carere RG, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention for cardiogenic shock in the SHOCK trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003; 42: 1380–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holzer R, Balzer D, Amin Z, Ruiz CE, Feinstein J, Bass J, et al. Transcatheter closure of postinfarction ventricular septal defects using the new Amplatzer muscular VSD occluder: Results of a U.S. Registry. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2004; 61: 196–201
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs AK, Leopold JA, Bates E, Mendes LA, Sleeper LA, White H, et al. Cardiogenic shock caused by right ventricular infarction: a report from the SHOCK registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003; 41: 1273–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brodie BR, Stuckey TD, Hansen C, Bradshaw BH, Downey WE, Pulsipher MW. Comparison of late survival in patients with cardiogenic shock due to right ventricular infarction versus left ventricular pump failure following primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 2007; 99: 431–5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jacobs AK, French JK, Col J, Sleeper LA, Slater JN, Carnendran L, et al. Cardiogenic shock with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a report from the SHOCK Trial Registry. Should we emergently revascularize occluded coronaries for cardiogenic shock?. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000; 36(Suppl A): 1091–6
   Google Scholar
• Holmes DR, Jr, Berger PB, Hochman JS, Granger CB, Thompson TD, Califf RM, et al. Cardiogenic shock in patients with acute ischemic syndromes with and without ST-segment elevation. Circulation 1999; 100: 2067–73
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• White HD, Assmann SF, Sanborn TA, Jacobs AK, Webb JG, Sleeper LA, et al. Comparison of percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting after acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: results from the should we emergently revascularize occluded coronaries for cardiogenic shock (SHOCK) trial. Circulation 2005; 112: 1992–2001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waksman R, Weiss AT, Gotsman MS, Hasin Y, King SB, Smith SC, III, Jr, et al. Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation improves survival in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction 2007 focused update of the ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 guideline update for percutaneous coronary intervention: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines: 2007 writing group to review new evidence and update the ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 guideline update for percutaneous coronary intervention, writing on behalf of the 2005 writing committee. Eur Heart J. 1993; 14: 71–4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anwar A, Mooney MR, Stertzer SH, Mooney JF, Shaw RE, Madison JD, et al. Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation support for elective coronary angioplasty in the setting of poor left ventricular function: a two center experience. J Invasive Cardiol. 1990; 2: 175–80
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Garatti A, Russo C, Lanfranconi M, Colombo T, Bruschi G, Trunfio S, et al. Mechanical circulatory support for cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: an experimental and clinical review. ASAIO J. 2007; 53: 278–87
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tayara W, Starling RC, Yamani MH, Wazni O, Jubran F, Smedira N. Improved survival after acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock with circulatory support and transplantation: comparing aggressive intervention with conservative treatment. J Heart Lung Transplant 2006; 25: 504–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sjauw KD, Engstrom AE, Henriques JP. Percutaneous mechanical cardiac assist in myocardial infarction. Where are we now, where are we going? Acute Card Care 2007;9(4):222–30.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Windecker S. Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices for treatment of patients with cardiogenic shock. Curr Opin Crit Care 2007; 13: 521–7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lee MS , Makkar RR . Percutaneous left ventricular support devices. Cardiol Clin. 2006;24:265–75, vii.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Burkhoff D, Cohen H, Brunckhorst C, O'Neill WW. A randomized multicenter clinical study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the TandemHeart percutaneous ventricular assist device versus conventional therapy with intraaortic balloon pumping for treatment of cardiogenic shock. Am Heart J. 2006; 152: 469–8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Thiele H, Sick P, Boudriot E, Diederich KW, Hambrecht R, Niebauer J, et al. Randomized comparison of intra-aortic balloon support with a percutaneous left ventricular assist device in patients with revascularized acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. Eur Heart J. 2005; 26: 1276–83
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henriques JP, Remmelink M, Baan J, Jr, van der Schaaf RJ, Vis MM, Koch KT, et al. Safety and feasibility of elective high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention procedures with left ventricular support of the Impella Recover LP 2.5. Am J Cardiol. 2006; 97: 990–2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine GN, Hochman JS. Thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. J Thromb Thrombolysis 1995; 2: 11–20
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sanborn TA, Sleeper LA, Bates ER, Jacobs AK, Boland J, French JK, et al. Impact of thrombolysis, intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation, and their combination in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: a report from the SHOCK Trial Registry. Should we emergently revascularize occluded coronaries for cardiogenic shock?. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000; 36(Suppl A): 1123–9
   Google Scholar
• Bates ER, Stomel RJ, Hochman JS, Ohman EM. The use of intraaortic balloon counterpulsation as an adjunct to reperfusion therapy in cardiogenic shock. Int J Cardiol. 1998; 65(Suppl 1)S37–42
   Google Scholar
• French JK, Feldman HA, Assmann SF, Sanborn T, Palmeri ST, Miller D, et al. Influence of thrombolytic therapy, with or without intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation, on 12-month survival in the SHOCK trial. Am Heart J. 2003; 146: 804–10
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ajani AE, Maruff P, Warren R, Eccleston D, Dick R, MacIsaac A, et al. Impact of early percutaneous coronary intervention on short- and long-term outcomes in patients with cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 2001; 87: 633–10
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Silber S, Albertsson P, Aviles FF, Camici PG, Colombo A, Hamm C, et al. Guidelines for percutaneous coronary interventions. The task force for percutaneous coronary interventions of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 2005; 26: 804–47
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King SB, III, Smith SC, Jr, Hirshfeld JW, Jr, Jacobs AK, Morrison DA, Williams DO, et al. 2007 focused update of the ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 guideline update for percutaneous coronary intervention: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines: 2007 writing group to review new evidence and update the ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 guideline update for percutaneous coronary intervention, writing on behalf of the 2005 writing committee. Circulation 2008; 117: 261–95
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qarawani D, Nahir M, Abboud M, Hazanov Y, Hasin Y. Culprit only versus complete coronary revascularization during primary PCI. Int J Cardiol. 2008; 123: 288–92
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Di Mario C, Mara S, Flavio A, Imad S, Antonio M, Anna P, et al. Single vs multivessel treatment during primary angioplasty: results of the multicentre randomised hepacoat for culprit or multivessel stenting for acute myocardial infarction (HELP AMI) Study. Int J Cardiovasc Intervent. 2004; 6: 128–33
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Disler L, Haitas B, Benjamin J, Steingo L, McKibbin J. Cardiogenic shock in evolving myocardial infarction: treatment by angioplasty and streptokinase. Heart Lung 1987; 16: 649–52
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lee L, Bates ER, Pitt B, Walton JA, Laufer N, O'Neill WW. Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty improves survival in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. Circulation 1988; 78: 1345–51
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verna E, Repetto S, Boscarini M, Ghezzi I, Binaghi G. Emergency coronary angioplasty in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction or cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J. 1989; 10: 958–66
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shawl FA, Domanski MJ, Hernandez TJ, Punja S. Emergency percutaneous cardiopulmonary bypass support in cardiogenic shock from acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 1989; 64: 967–70
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Meyer P, Blanc P, Baudouy M, Morand P. Treatment of primary cardiogenic shock by coronary transluminal angioplasty during the acute phase of myocardial infarction]. Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss. 1990; 83: 329–34
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lee L, Erbel R, Brown TM, Laufer N, Meyer J, O'Neill WW. Multicenter registry of angioplasty therapy of cardiogenic shock: initial and long-term survival. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1991; 17: 599–603
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O'Neill WW. Angioplasty therapy of cardiogenic shock: are randomized trials necessary?. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1992; 19: 915–7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bengtson JR, Kaplan AJ, Pieper KS, Wildermann NM, Mark DB, Pryor DB, et al. Prognosis in cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction in the interventional era. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1992; 20: 1482–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gacioch GM, Ellis SG, Lee L, Bates ER, Kirsh M, Walton JA, et al. Cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: the use of coronary angioplasty and the integration of the new support devices into patient management. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1992; 19: 647–53
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hibbard MD, Holmes DR, Jr, Bailey KR, Reeder GS, Bresnahan JF, Gersh BJ. Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in patients with cardiogenic shock. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1992; 19: 639–46
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yamamoto H, Hayashi Y, Oka Y, Sumii K, Taniguchi C, Maeda Y, et al. Efficacy of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. Jpn Circ J. 1992; 56: 815–21
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Seydoux C, Goy JJ, Beuret P, Stauffer JC, Vogt P, Schaller MD, et al. Effectiveness of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in cardiogenic shock during acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 1992; 69: 968–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Himbert D, Juliard JM, Steg PG, Karrillon GJ, Aumont MC, Gourgon R. Limits of reperfusion therapy for immediate cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 1994; 74: 492–4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Morrison D, Crowley ST, Bies R, Barbiere CC. Systolic blood pressure response to percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty for cardiogenic shock. Am J Cardiol. 1995; 76: 313–4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Eltchaninoff H, Simpfendorfer C, Franco I, Raymond RE, Casale PN, Whitlow PL. Early and 1-year survival rates in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: a retrospective study comparing coronary angioplasty with medical treatment. Am Heart J. 1995; 130: 459–64
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Berger PB, Holmes DR, Jr, Stebbins AL, Bates ER, Califf RM, Topol EJ. Impact of an aggressive invasive catheterization and revascularization strategy on mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock in the global utilization of streptokinase and tissue plasminogen activator for occluded coronary arteries (GUSTO-I) trial. An observational study. Circulation 1997; 96: 122–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmes DR, Jr, Califf RM, Van de WF, Berger PB, Bates ER, Simoons ML, et al. Difference in countries' use of resources and clinical outcome for patients with cardiogenic shock after myocardial infarction: results from the GUSTO trial. Lancet 1997; 349: 75–8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Antoniucci D, Valenti R, Santoro GM, Bolognese L, Trapani M, Moschi G, et al. Systematic direct angioplasty and stent-supported direct angioplasty therapy for cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: in-hospital and long-term survival. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998; 31: 294–300
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Calton R, Jaison TM, David T. Primary angioplasty for cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. Indian Heart J. 1999; 51: 47–54
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Perez-Castellano N, Garcia E, Serrano JA, Elizaga J, Soriano J, Abeytua M, et al. Efficacy of invasive strategy for the management of acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. Am J Cardiol. 1999; 83: 989–93
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chan AW, Chew DP, Bhatt DL, Moliterno DJ, Topol EJ, Ellis SG. Long-term mortality benefit with the combination of stents and abciximab for cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 2002; 89: 132–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ammann P, Straumann E, Naegeli B, Schuiki E, Frielingsdorf J, Gerber A, et al. Long-term results after acute percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock. Int J Cardiol. 2002; 82: 127–31
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dauerman HL, Goldberg RJ, White K, Gore JM, Sadiq I, Gurfinkel E, et al. Revascularization, stenting, and outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. Am J Cardiol. 2002; 90: 838–42
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dauerman HL, Ryan TJ, Jr, Piper WD, Kellett MA, Shubrooks SJ, Robb JF, et al. Outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention among elderly patients in cardiogenic shock: a multicenter, decade-long experience. J Invasive Cardiol. 2003; 15: 380–4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zeymer U, Vogt A, Zahn R, Weber MA, Tebbe U, Gottwik M, et al. Predictors of in-hospital mortality in 1333 patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI); Results of the primary PCI registry of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Leitende Kardiologische Krankenhausarzte (ALKK). Eur Heart J. 2004; 25: 322–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein LW, Shaw RE, Krone RJ, Brindis RG, Anderson HV, Block PC, et al. Mortality after emergent percutaneous coronary intervention in cardiogenic shock secondary to acute myocardial infarction and usefulness of a mortality prediction model. Am J Cardiol. 2005; 96: 35–41
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chodek A, Angioi M, Fajraoui M, Moulin F, Chouihed T, Maurer P, et al. Mortality prognostic factors of cardiogenic shock complicating an acute myocardial infarction and treated by percutaneous coronary intervention. Ann Cardiol Angeiol. 2005; 54: 74–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Assali AR, Iakobishvili Z, Zafrir N, Solodky A, Teplitsky I, Rechavia E, et al. Characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction treated by emergent coronary angioplasty. Int J Cardiovasc Intervent. 2005; 7: 193–8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Migliorini A, Moschi G, Valenti R, Parodi G, Dovellini EV, Carrabba N, et al. Routine percutaneous coronary intervention in elderly patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. Am Heart J. 2006; 152: 903–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ortolani P, Marzocchi A, Marrozzini C, Palmerini T, Saia F, Baldazzi F, et al. Usefulness of prehospital triage in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating ST-elevation myocardial infarction treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol. 2007; 100: 787–92
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brodie BR, Stuckey TD, Hansen C, Bradshaw BH, Downey WE, Pulsipher MW. Comparison of late survival in patients with cardiogenic shock due to right ventricular infarction versus left ventricular pump failure following primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 2007; 99: 431–5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kunadian B, Vijayalakshmi K, Dunning J, Thornley AR, Sutton AG, Muir DF, et al. Should patients in cardiogenic shock undergo rescue angioplasty after failed fibrinolysis: comparison of primary versus rescue angioplasty in cardiogenic shock patients. J Invasive Cardiol. 2007; 19: 217–23
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hochman JS. Cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: expanding the paradigm. Circulation 2003; 107: 2998–3002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar