Skip to main content

Author: Omid Zad, MD

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention at Centers With and Without On-Site Surgical Backup: An Updated Meta-Analysis of 23 Studies

BACKGROUND

Emergency coronary artery bypass grafting for unsuccessful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is now rare. We aimed to evaluate the current safety and outcomes of primary PCI and nonprimary PCI at centers with and without on-site surgical backup.

METHODS and RESULTS

We performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis by using mixed-effects models. We included 23 high-quality studies that compared clinical outcomes and complication rates of 1 101 123 patients after PCI at centers with or without on-site surgery. For primary PCI for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (133 574 patients), all-cause mortality (without on-site surgery versus with on-site surgery: observed rates, 4.8% versus 7.2%; pooled odds ratio [OR], 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.91-1.07; P=0.729; I(2)=3.4%) or emergency coronary artery bypass grafting rates (observed rates, 1.5% versus 2.4%; pooled OR, 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.56-1.01; P=0.062; I(2)=42.5%) did not differ by presence of on-site surgery. For nonprimary PCI (967 549 patients), all-cause mortality (observed rates, 1.6% versus 2.1%; pooled OR, 1.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.94-1.41; P=0.172; I(2)=67.5%) and emergency coronary artery bypass grafting rates (observed rates, 0.5% versus 0.8%; pooled OR, 1.14; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-2.13; P=0.669; I(2)=81.7%) were not significantly different. PCI complication rates (cardiogenic shock, stroke, aortic dissection, tamponade, recurrent infarction) also did not differ by on-site surgical capability. Cumulative meta-analysis of nonprimary PCI showed a temporal decrease of the effect size (OR) for all-cause mortality after 2007.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical outcomes and complication rates of PCI at centers without on-site surgery did not differ from those with on-site surgery, for both primary and nonprimary PCI. Temporal trends indicated improving clinical outcomes in nonprimary PCI at centers without on-site surgery.

Pulmonary artery pulsatility index predicts right ventricular failure after left ventricular assist device implantation

BACKGROUND

Right ventricular failure (RVF) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. The pulmonary artery pulsatility index (PAPi) is a novel hemodynamic index that predicts RVF in the setting of myocardial infarction, although it has not been shown to predict RVF after LVAD implantation.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective, single-center analysis to examine the utility of the PAPi in predicting RVF and RV assist device (RVAD) implantation in 85 continuous-flow LVAD recipients. We performed a multivariate logistic regression analysis incorporating previously identified predictors of RVF after LVAD placement, including clinical and echocardiographic variables, to determine the independent effect of PAPi in predicting RVF or RVAD after LVAD placement.

RESULTS

In this cohort, the mean PAPi was 3.4 with a standard deviation of 2.9. RVF occurred in 33% of patients, and 11% required a RVAD. Multivariate analysis, adjusting for age, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), and Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support profile, revealed that higher PAPi was independently associated with a reduced risk of RVAD placement (odds ratio [OR], 0.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07-0.89). This relationship did not change significantly when echocardiographic measures were added to the analysis. Stratifying the analysis by the presence of inotropes during catheterization revealed that PAPi was more predictive of RVAD requirement when measured on inotropes (OR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.02-0.97) than without (OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.01-1.94). Furthermore, time from catheterization to LVAD did not significantly affect the predictive value of the PAPi (maximum time, 6 months). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed that optimal sensitivity and specificity were achieved using a PAPi threshold of 2.0.

CONCLUSIONS

In LVAD recipients, the PAPi is an independent predictor of RVF and the need for RVAD support after LVAD implantation. This index appears more predictive in patients receiving inotropes and was not affected by time from catheterization to LVAD in our cohort.

A Practical Approach to Mechanical Circulatory Support in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: An Interventional Perspective

ABSTRACT

Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support has been used to stabilize patients in cardiogenic shock and providehemodynamic support during high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions for several decades. The goal of this paper is to provide a practical approach to percutaneous mechanical circulatory support in patients undergoing percutaneous coronaryintervention with cardiogenic shock and/or high risk features to aid in decision making for interventional cardiologists.

Intraaortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock

BACKGROUND

Ischemic heart disease is a major cause of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. The role of immediate coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the treatment of patients who have been successfully resuscitated after cardiac arrest in the absence of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remains uncertain.

METHODS

In this multicenter trial, we randomly assigned 552 patients who had cardiac arrest without signs of STEMI to undergo immediate coronary angiography or coronary angiography that was delayed until after neurologic recovery. All patients underwent PCI if indicated. The primary end point was survival at 90 days. Secondary end points included survival at 90 days with good cerebral performance or mild or moderate disability, myocardial injury, duration of catecholamine support, markers of shock, recurrence of ventricular tachycardia, duration of mechanical ventilation, major bleeding, occurrence of acute kidney injury, need for renal-replacement therapy, time to target temperature, and neurologic status at discharge from the intensive care unit.

RESULTS

At 90 days, 176 of 273 patients (64.5%) in the immediate angiography group and 178 of 265 patients (67.2%) in the delayed angiography group were alive (odds ratio, 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62 to 1.27; P = 0.51). The median time to target temperature was 5.4 hours in the immediate angiography group and 4.7 hours in the delayed angiography group (ratio of geometric means, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.36). No significant differences between the groups were found in the remaining secondary end points.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients who had been successfully resuscitated after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and had no signs of STEMI, a strategy of immediate angiography was not found to be better than a strategy of delayed angiography with respect to overall survival at 90 days.

Risk Stratification for Patients in Cardiogenic Shock After Acute Myocardial Infarction

BACKGROUND

Mortality in cardiogenic shock (CS) remains high. Early risk stratification is crucial to make adequate treatment decisions.

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to develop an easy-to-use, readily available risk prediction score for short-term mortality in patients with CS, derived from the IABP-SHOCK II (Intraaortic Balloon Pump in Cardiogenic Shock) trial.

METHODS

The score was developed using a stepwise multivariable regression analysis.

RESULTS

Six variables emerged as independent predictors for 30-day mortality and were used as score parameters: age >73 years, prior stroke, glucose at admission >10.6 mmol/l (191 mg/dl), creatinine at admission >132.6 μmol/l (1.5 mg/dl), Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction flow grade <3 after percutaneous coronary intervention, and arterial blood lactate at admission >5 mmol/l. Either 1 or 2 points were attributed to each variable, leading to a score in 3 risk categories: low (0 to 2), intermediate (3 or 4), and high (5 to 9). The observed 30-day mortality rates were 23.8%, 49.2%, and 76.6%, respectively (p < 0.0001). Validation in the IABP-SHOCK II registry population showed good discrimination with an area under the curve of 0.79. External validation in the CardShock trial population (n = 137) showed short-term mortality rates of 28.0% (score 0 to 2), 42.9% (score 3 to 4), and 77.3% (score 5 to 9; p < 0.001) and an area under the curve of 0.73. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed a stepwise increase in mortality between the different score categories (0 to 2 vs. 3 to 4: p = 0.04; 0 to 2 vs. 5 to 9: p = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

The IABP-SHOCK II risk score can be easily calculated in daily clinical practice and strongly correlated with mortality in patients with infarct-related CS. It may help stratify patient risk for short-term mortality and might, thus, facilitate clinical decision making.

Contemporary Management of Cardiogenic Shock: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

ABSTRACT:

Cardiogenic shock is a high-acuity, potentially complex, and hemodynamically diverse state of end-organ hypoperfusion that is frequently associated with multisystem organ failure. Despite improving survival in recent years, patient morbidity and mortality remain high, and there are few evidence-based therapeutic interventions known to clearly improve patient outcomes. This scientific statement on cardiogenic shock summarizes the epidemiology, pathophysiology, causes, and outcomes of cardiogenic shock; reviews contemporary best medical, surgical, mechanical circulatory support, and palliative care practices; advocates for the development of regionalized systems of care; and outlines future research priorities.