Title of article :
Role of Prophylactic Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump in High-Risk Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
Author/Authors :
Mishra، نويسنده , , Sundeep and Chu، نويسنده , , William W. and Torguson، نويسنده , , Rebecca and Wolfram، نويسنده , , Roswitha and Deible، نويسنده , , Regina and Suddath، نويسنده , , William O. and Pichard، نويسنده , , Augusto D. and Satler، نويسنده , , Lowell F. and Kent، نويسنده , , Kenneth M. and Waksman، نويسنده , , Ron، نويسنده ,
Issue Information :
روزنامه با شماره پیاپی سال 2006
Pages :
5
From page :
608
To page :
612
Abstract :
Intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) has been shown to support patients who are at high risk for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) or becoming hemodynamically unstable during PCI, but the longer term outcomes of these strategies are unknown. This study investigated the outcomes of high-risk patients who received a prophylactic IABP (P-IABP) versus patients who required rescue IABP (R-IABP) because of intraprocedural complications. Clinical outcomes of 68 consecutive patients (69 procedures) who underwent high-risk PCI with P-IABP support were compared with those of 46 patients who required R-IABP. Patients who presented with cardiogenic shock or acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, and those who were on mechanical ventilators were excluded. Clinical baseline characteristics were similar between groups except for more diabetics and patients with hypercholesterolemia in the P-IABP group. The procedural success was higher in the P-IABP group, with lower in-hospital mortality and major complications, than in the R-IABP group. At 6 months, the mortality and major adverse cardiac event rates were lower in the P-IABP group (8% vs 29%, p <0.01, and 12% vs 32%, p = 0.02, respectively). Multivariate analysis showed that prophylactic insertion of an IABP is the only independent predictor of survival at 6 months. The incidence of vascular complications was low and comparable except for more major bleeding (15% vs 3%, p = 0.03) in the R-IABP group. In conclusion, patients who undergo high-risk PCI and then receive P-IABP support have favorable outcomes compared with those who require R-IABP for intraprocedural complications. Therefore, in high-risk patients undergoing PCI, liberal use of a P-IABP should be considered.
Journal title :
American Journal of Cardiology
Serial Year :
2006
Journal title :
American Journal of Cardiology
Record number :
1901339
Link To Document :
بازگشت