Intraaortic Balloon Support for Myocardial Infarction with Cardiogenic Shock
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 4 October 2012
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Massachusetts Medical Society in New England Journal of Medicine
- Vol. 367 (14) , 1287-1296
- https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa1208410
Abstract
In current international guidelines, intraaortic balloon counterpulsation is considered to be a class I treatment for cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. However, evidence is based mainly on registry data, and there is a paucity of randomized clinical trials. In this randomized, prospective, open-label, multicenter trial, we randomly assigned 600 patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction to intraaortic balloon counterpulsation (IABP group, 301 patients) or no intraaortic balloon counterpulsation (control group, 299 patients). All patients were expected to undergo early revascularization (by means of percutaneous coronary intervention or bypass surgery) and to receive the best available medical therapy. The primary efficacy end point was 30-day all-cause mortality. Safety assessments included major bleeding, peripheral ischemic complications, sepsis, and stroke. A total of 300 patients in the IABP group and 298 in the control group were included in the analysis of the primary end point. At 30 days, 119 patients in the IABP group (39.7%) and 123 patients in the control group (41.3%) had died (relative risk with IABP, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.79 to 1.17; P=0.69). There were no significant differences in secondary end points or in process-of-care measures, including the time to hemodynamic stabilization, the length of stay in the intensive care unit, serum lactate levels, the dose and duration of catecholamine therapy, and renal function. The IABP group and the control group did not differ significantly with respect to the rates of major bleeding (3.3% and 4.4%, respectively; P=0.51), peripheral ischemic complications (4.3% and 3.4%, P=0.53), sepsis (15.7% and 20.5%, P=0.15), and stroke (0.7% and 1.7%, P=0.28). The use of intraaortic balloon counterpulsation did not significantly reduce 30-day mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction for whom an early revascularization strategy was planned. (Funded by the German Research Foundation and others; IABP-SHOCK II ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00491036.)Keywords
This publication has 27 references indexed in Scilit:
- Guidelines on myocardial revascularization: The Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)European Heart Journal, 2010
- Shock in acute myocardial infarction: the Cape Horn for trials?European Heart Journal, 2010
- Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: The prospective, randomized IABP SHOCK Trial for attenuation of multiorgan dysfunction syndrome*Critical Care Medicine, 2010
- Thirty-Year Trends (1975 to 2005) in the Magnitude of, Management of, and Hospital Death Rates Associated With Cardiogenic Shock in Patients With Acute Myocardial InfarctionCirculation, 2009
- Management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with persistent ST-segment elevationEuropean Heart Journal, 2008
- Ten-Year Trends in the Incidence and Treatment of Cardiogenic ShockAnnals of Internal Medicine, 2008
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of intra-aortic balloon pump therapy in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: should we change the guidelines?European Heart Journal, 2008
- Trends in Management and Outcomes of Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic ShockJAMA, 2005
- ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management of Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction—Executive SummaryCirculation, 2004
- Early Revascularization in Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic ShockNew England Journal of Medicine, 1999