Acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: role of mechanical circulatory support

References

• Rosamond W, Flegal K, Furie K et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics – 2008 update: a report from the American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. Circulation117(4), E25–E146 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gheorghiade M, Zannod F, Sopko G et al. Acute heart failure syndromes: current state and framework for future research. Circulation112, 3958–3968 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American Heart Association. Heart disease and stroke statistics – 2008 Update. American Heart Association, Dallas, TX, USA (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Hands ME, Rutherford JD, Muller JE et al. The in-hospital development of cardiogenic shock after myocardial infarction: incidence, predictors of occurrence, outcome and prognostic factors. The MILIS Study Group. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.14(1), 40–46; discussion 47–48 (1989).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmes DR Jr. Cardiogenic shock: a lethal complication of acute myocardial infarction. Rev. Cardiovasc Med.4(3), 131–135 (2003).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• White HD, Assmann SF, Sanborn TA 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. Circulation112(13), 1992–2001 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pae WE, Pierce WS. Temporary left ventricular assistance in acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock. Chest79, 692–695 (1981).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pennington DG, McBride LR, Kanter KR et al. Effect of postoperative myocardial infarction on survival of postcardiotomy patients supported with ventricular-assist devices. Circulation78(Suppl. 3), 110–115 (1988).
   Google Scholar
• Noda H, Takano H, Taenaka Y. Treatment of acute myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock using left ventricular assist device. Int. J. Artif. Organs12, 75–79 (1989).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Leshnower BG, Gleason TG, O’Hara ML et al. Safety and efficacy of left ventricular assist device support in postmyocardial infarction cardiogenic shock. Ann. Thorac. Surg.81, 1365–1371 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Webb JG et al. Early revasculariztion in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. N. Engl. J. Med.341, 625–634 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Millane T, Jackson G, Gibbs CR, Lip GYH. ABC of heart failure: acute and chronic management strategies. Br. Med. J.320, 559–562 (2000).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Reynolds HR, Hochman JS. Cardiogenic shock: current concepts and improving outcomes. Circulation117(5), 686–697 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menon V, White H, LeJemtel T et al. The clinical profile of patients with suspected cardiogenic shock due to predominant left ventricular failure: a report from the SHOCK Trial Registry. Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.36(3 Suppl. A), 1071–1076 (2000).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Killip T. Cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.14, 47–48 (1989).
   Google Scholar
• Allonso D, Scheidt S, Post M, Killip T. Pathophysiology of cardiogenic shock: quantification of myocardial necrosis, clinical, pathologic and electrocardiographic correlations. Circulation48, 588–596 (1973).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hasdai D, Topol EJ, Califf RM, Berger PB, Holmes DR Jr. Cardiogenic shock complicating acute coronary syndromes. Lancet356(9231), 749–756 (2000).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Webb JG, Sleeper LA, Buller CE et al. Implications of the timing of onset of cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction: a report from the SHOCK Trial Registry. Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.36(3 Suppl. A), 1084–1090 (2000).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jeger RV, Harkness SM, Ramanathan K et al. Emergency revascularization in patients with cardiogenic shock on admission: a report from the SHOCK trial and registry. Eur. Heart J.27(6), 664–670 (2006).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Antman EM, Hand M, Armstrong PW et al. 2007 focused update of the ACC/AHA 2004 guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines: developed in collaboration with the Canadian Cardiovascular Society endorsed by the American Academy of Family Physicians: 2007 Writing Group to Review New Evidence and Update the ACC/AHA 2004 Guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction, writing on behalf of the 2004 Writing Committee. Circulation117(2), 296–329 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webb JG, Lowe AM, Sanborn TA et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention for cardiogenic shock in the SHOCK trial. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.42(8), 1380–1386 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tayara W, Starling RC, Yamani MH et al. 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.25(5), 504–509 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webb JG, Sanborn TA, Sleeper LA et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention for cardiogenic shock in the SHOCK Trial Registry. Am. Heart J.141(6), 964–970 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antman EM, Hand M, Armstrong PW et al. 2007 Focused update of the ACC/AHA 2004 guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.51(2), 210–247 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanborn TA, Sleeper LA, Bates ER 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.36(3 Suppl. A), 1123–1129 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nieminen M, Bohn M, Cowie MR et al. Executive summary of the guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of acute heart failure. The task force on acute heart failure of the european society of cardiology. Eur. Heart J.26, 384–416 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferguson JJ 3rd, Cohen M, Freedman RJ Jr et al. The current practice of intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation: results from the Benchmark Registry. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.38(5), 1456–1462 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Briguori C, Sarais C, Pagnotta P et al. Elective versus provisional intra-aortic balloon pumping in high-risk percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Am. Heart J.145(4), 700–707 (2003).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Christenson JT, Simonet F, Badel P, Schmuziger M. The effect of preoperative intra-aortic balloon pump support in patients with coronary artery disease, poor left-ventricular function (LVEF < 40%), and hypertensive LV hypertrophy. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg.45(2), 60–64 (1997).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Christenson JT, Simonet F, Badel P, Schmuziger M. Optimal timing of preoperative intraaortic balloon pump support in high-risk coronary patients. Ann. Thorac. Surg.68(3), 934–939 (1999).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Barron HV, Every NR, Parsons LS 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.141(6), 933–939 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garatti A, Russo C, Lanfranconi M et al. Mechanical circulatory support for cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: an experimental and clinical review. ASAIO J.53(3), 278–287 (2007).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Myers TJ, Khan T, Frazier OH. Infectious complications associated with ventricular assist systems. ASAIO J.46(6), S28–36 (2000).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pennington DG, Reedy JE, Swartz MT et al. Univentricular versus biventricular assist device support. J. Heart Lung Transplant.10(2), 258–263 (1991).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Slaughter MS, Tsui SS, El-Banayosy A et al. Results of a multicenter clinical trial with the Thoratec Implantable Ventricular Assist Device. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg.133(6), 1573–1580 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McBride LR, Naunheim KS, Fiore AC, Moroney DA, Swartz MT. Clinical experience with 111 Thoratec ventricular assist devices. Ann. Thorac. Surg.67(5), 1233–1238; Discussion 1238–1239 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hendry PJ, Masters RG, Mussivand TV et al. Circulatory support for cardiogenic shock due to acute myocardial infarction: a Canadian experience. Can. J. Cardiol.15(10), 1090–1094 (1999).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Farrar DJ, Holman WR, McBride LR et al. Long-term follow-up of Thoratec ventricular assist device bridge-to-recovery patients successfully removed from support after recovery of ventricular function. J. Heart Lung Transplant.21(5), 516–521 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray LA Jr, Champsaur GG. The BVS 5000 biventricular assist device. The worldwide registry experience. ASAIO J.40(3), M460–M464 (1994).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Entwistle JW 3rd, Bolno PB, Holmes E, Samuels LE. Improved survival with ventricular assist device support in cardiogenic shock after myocardial infarction. Heart Surg. Forum.6(5), 316–319 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castells E, Calbet JM, Saura E et al. Acute myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock: treatment with mechanical circulatory assistance and heart transplantation. Transplant. Proc.35(5), 1940–1941 (2003).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Anderson M, Madani M, Raess D, Samuels L, Sun B. Can ventricular assist devices be considered as part of recovery therapy in acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock: a US multicenter study. J. Card. Fail.12(6), S27 (2006).
   Google Scholar
• Anderson MB, Gratz E, Wong RK, Benali K, Kung RT. Improving outcomes in patients with ventricular assist devices transferred from outlying to tertiary care hospitals. J. Extra Corpor. Technol.39(1), 43–48 (2007).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hill JD, O’Brien TG, Murray JJ et al. Prolonged extracorporeal oxygenation for acute post-traumatic respiratory failure (shock–lung syndrome). Use of the Bramson membrane lung. N. Engl. J. Med.286(12), 629–634 (1972).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patel H, Pagani FD. Extracorporeal mechanical circulatory assist. Cardiol. Clin.21(1), 29–41 (2003).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Smedira NG, Moazami N, Golding CM et al. Clinical experience with 202 adults receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for cardiac failure: survival at five years. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg.122(1), 92–102 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartlett RH, Roloff, DW, Custer JR et al. Extracorporeal life support: the University of Michigan experience. JAMA283, 904–908 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hsu RB, Chien CY, Wang SS, Chu SH. Survival after early surgical revascularization in patients with both acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock. J. Formos. Med. Assoc.100(11), 725–728 (2001).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hoefer D, Ruttmann E, Poelzl G et al. Outcome evaluation of the bridge-to-bridge concept in patients with cardiogenic shock. Ann. Thorac. Surg.82(1), 28–33 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Magovern GJ Jr, Simpson KA. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for adult cardiac support: the Allegheny experience. Ann. Thorac. Surg.68(2), 655–661 (1999).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Noon GP, Lafuente JA, Irwin S. Acute and temporary ventricular support with BioMedicus centrifugal pump. Ann. Thorac. Surg.68(2), 650–654 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weitkemper HH, El-Banayosy A, Arusoglu L, Sarnowski P, Korfer R. Mechanical circulatory support: reality and dreams experience of a single center. J. Extra Corpor. Technol.36(2), 169–173 (2004).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• El-Banayosy A, Posival H, Minami K et al. Seven years of experience with the centrifugal pump in patients with cardiogenic shock. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg.43(6), 347–351 (1995).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shuhaiber JH, Jenkins D, Berman M et al. The Papworth experience with the Levitronix CentriMag ventricular assist device. J. Heart Lung Transplant.27(2), 158–164 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• John R, Liao K, Lietz K et al. Experience with the Levitronix CentriMag circulatory support system as a bridge to decision in patients with refractory acute cardiogenic shock and multisystem organ failure. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg.134(2), 351–358 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burkhoff D, O’Neill W, Brunckhorst C et al. Feasibility study of the use of the TandemHeart percutaneous ventricular assist device for treatment of cardiogenic shock. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv.68(2), 211–217 (2006).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Loyalka P, Idelchik GM, Kar B. Percutaneous left ventricular assist device complicated by a patent foramen ovale: importance of identification and management. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv.70(3), 383–386 (2007).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Aragon J, Lee MS, Kar S, Makkar RR. Percutaneous left ventricular assist device: ‘TandemHeart’ for high-risk coronary intervention. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv.65(3), 346–352 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kar B, Forrester M, Gemmato C et al. Use of the TandemHeart percutaneous ventricular assist device to support patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention. J. Invasive Cardiol.18(4), A6 (2006).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Giombolini C, Notaristefano S, Santucci S et al. Percutaneous left ventricular assist device, TandemHeart, for high-risk percutaneous coronary revascularization. A single centre experience. Acute Card. Care8(1), 35–40 (2006).
   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.152(3), 469 E461–E468 (2006).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Valgimigli M, Steendijk P, Sianos G, Onderwater E, Serruys PW. Left ventricular unloading and concomitant total cardiac output increase by the use of percutaneous Impella Recover LP 2.5 assist device during high-risk coronary intervention. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv.65(2), 263–267 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyns B, Dens J, Sergeant P et al. Initial experiences with the Impella device in patients with cardiogenic shock – Impella support for cardiogenic shock. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg.51(6), 312–317 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyns B, Stolinski J, Leunens V, Verbeken E, Flameng W. Left ventricular support by catheter-mounted axial flow pump reduces infarct size. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.41(7), 1087–1095 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hugenholtz PG. Acute coronary artery obstruction in myocardial infarction: overview of thrombolytic therapy. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.9(6), 1375–1384 (1987).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Smalling RW. Transvalvular left ventricular assistance in acute myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock and high risk angioplasty: experimental and clinical results with the Hemopump. J. Interv. Cardiol.8(3), 265–273 (1995).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wouters PF, Sukehiro S, Mollhoff T et al. Left ventricular assistance using a catheter-mounted coaxial flow pump (Hemopump) in a canine model of regional myocardial ischaemia. Eur. Heart J.14(4), 567–575 (1993).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Smalling RW, Cassidy DB, Barrett R et al. Improved regional myocardial blood flow, left ventricular unloading, and infarct salvage using an axial-flow, transvalvular left ventricular assist device. A comparison with intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation and reperfusion alone in a canine infarction model. Circulation85(3), 1152–1159 (1992).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar