Title of article :
Cardiogenic shock with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a report from the SHOCK Trial Registry
Author/Authors :
Alice K. Jacobs، نويسنده , , John K. French، نويسنده , , Jacques Col، نويسنده , , Lynn A. Sleeper، نويسنده , , James N. Slater، نويسنده , , Louis Carnendran، نويسنده , , Jean Boland، نويسنده , , Xianjiao Jiang، نويسنده , , Thierry LeJemtel، نويسنده , , Judith S. Hochman، نويسنده , , for the SHOCK Investigators، نويسنده ,
Issue Information :
روزنامه با شماره پیاپی سال 2000
Pages :
6
From page :
1091
To page :
1096
Abstract :
OBJECTIVES We sought to determine the outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) complicating non-ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (MI). BACKGROUND Such patients represent a high-risk (ST-segment depression) or low-risk (normal or nonspecific electrocardiographic findings) group for whom optimal therapy, particularly in the setting of shock, is unknown. METHODS We assessed characteristics and outcomes of 881 patients with CS due to predominant left ventricular (LV) dysfunction in the SHOCK Trial Registry. RESULTS Patients with non-ST-segment elevation MI (n = 152) were significantly older and had significantly more prior MI, heart failure, azotemia, bypass surgery, and peripheral vascular disease than patients with ST-elevation MI (n = 729). On average, the groups had similar in-hospital LV ejection fractions (not, vert, similar30%), but patients with non-ST-elevation MI had a lower highest creatine kinase and were more likely to have triple-vessel disease. Among patients selected for coronary angiography, the left circumflex artery was the culprit vessel in 34.6% of non-ST-elevation versus 13.4% of ST-elevation MI patients (p = 0.001). Despite having more recurrent ischemia (25.7% vs. 17.4%, p = 0.058), non-ST-elevation patients underwent angiography less often (52.6% vs. 64.1%, p = 0.010). The proportion undergoing revascularization was similar (36.8% for non-ST-elevation vs. 41.9% ST-elevation MI, p = 0.277). In-hospital mortality also was similar in the two groups (62.5% for non-ST-elevation vs. 60.4% ST-elevation MI). After adjustment, ST-segment elevation MI did not independently predict in-hospital mortality (odds ratio, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.83 to 2.02; p = 0.252). CONCLUSIONS Patients with CS and non-ST-segment elevation MI have a higher-risk profile than shock patients with ST-segment elevation, but similar in-hospital mortality. More recurrent ischemia and less angiography represent opportunities for earlier intervention, and early reperfusion therapy for circumflex artery occlusion should be considered when non-ST-elevation MI causes CS.
Keywords :
left bundle branch block , LV , MI , Left ventricle , myocardial infarction , Congestive heart failure , SHould we emergently revascularize Occluded Coronaries for cardiogenic shocK? , CK(-MB) , creatine kinase (-MB) , Cs , cardiogenic shock , ECG , electrocardiographic , Electrocardiogram , LBBB , CHF , Shock , Left ventricular
Journal title :
JACC (Journal of the American College of Cardiology)
Serial Year :
2000
Journal title :
JACC (Journal of the American College of Cardiology)
Record number :
596052
Link To Document :
بازگشت