Intraaortic balloon counterpulsation with and without reperfusion for myocardial infarction shock.

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Forty patients were treated for cardiogenic shock secondary to acute myocardial infarction. Twenty-one (group 1) were treated with intraaortic balloon counterpulsation and 19 (group 2) were treated with counterpulsation and coronary artery bypass grafting. The groups were similar in age, incidence of previous infarction, initial hemodynamics and coronary anatomy. The in-hospital mortality between group 1 (52.4%) and group 2 (42.1%) was not significantly different. The difference in long-term mortality between group 1 and group 2 was substantially different (71.4% vs 47.3%). The subset of group 2 (n = 12) that underwent reperfusion and counterpulsation within 16 hours from the onset of symptoms of infarction had a lower mortality (25.0%) than the subset (n = 7) that underwent operation more than 18 hours after the onset of symptoms (71.4%). The long-term mortality in the subset of group 2 patients operated on within 16 hours after the onset of infarction was significantly different from that in group 1 (25.0% vs 71.4%, p less than 0.03). The data suggest that reperfusion with counterpulsation is more effective when carried out early. Patients who develop shock more than 18 hours after the onset of symptoms of infarction appear to benefit most if treated with counterpulsation alone.