Primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction in 1,000 consecutive patients: Results in an unselected population and high-risk subgroups

Primary angtoplasty (direct angioplasty without antecedent thrombolytic therapy) has remained an exclusive and consistent method of infarct intervention at our institution over the past 13 years. A total of 1,000 consecutive patients were prospectively enrolled in our primary angioplasty database. Of patients presenting to our group with an acute myocardial infarction, 96% of those eligible received immediate angioplasty. Cardiogenic shock was noted in 79 patients (7.9%). The mean time from pain onset to reperfusion was 5.4 ± 4.0 hours. Infarct-vessel recanalizatton was accomplished in 94% of patients. Recanalization rates were similar among the 3 native epicardial coronary systems but were lower in bypass grafts (86%; p < 0.0001). Overall in-hospital mortality was 7.8%; mortality with cardiogenic shock was 44%. Global ejection fraction increased from 49.7% preangloplasty to 57.4% at the time of dismissal. The amount of myocardial salvage was highly dependent on the size of the initial infarction (the largest infarctions benefiting the most). Patients reperfused in <2 hours experienced a very low mortality (4%) and impressive myocardial salvage. Complications included stroke in 0.5%, significant bleeding in 2.8%, and early reocclusion of the infarct vessel in 13%. Primary angioplasty is broadly applicable to patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction and results in a very high rate of infarct vessel recanalization, with a mortality rate of 7.8%. This strategy may be uniquely effective in patients presenting with cardiogenic shock, large infarctions, contraindications to thrombolytic therapy, and prior bypass surgery.     

Primary angioplasty for cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction.

To evaluate the role of primary percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in cardiogenic shock, 53 patients admitted with the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock were studied. Thirty-five (66.0%) patients received intravenous thrombolytic therapy (streptokinase 15 lac units) and 18 (34.0%) underwent primary percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. There was no significant difference in the mean age, risk factor profile, presence of prior myocardial infarction, site of myocardial infarction and cardiac enzyme levels at presentation between the two groups. More male patients were present in the group undergoing primary percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (94.44% vs 68.57%; p = 0.04). The time delay between the onset of symptoms and presentation to the hospital did not differ significantly between the two groups (318.9 vs 320.0 minutes; p = NS). In the primary percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty group, 17 patients had a single infarct-related artery and one had both left anterior descending and right coronary artery occlusion. Thus in 18 patients, 19 vessels were attempted. Angiographic success (< 50% residual stenosis) was achieved in 15 (78.94%) vessels of which TIMI III flow was achieved in 10 (52.63%) vessels and TIMI II flow in five (26.31%). Intra-aortic balloon pump was needed in five (27.77%) patients undergoing coronary angioplasty. In-hospital mortality was 27.77 percent in patients undergoing primary percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty and 57.14 percent in patients receiving intravenous thrombolytic therapy (p = 0.04). In the thrombolytic therapy group, mortality was higher (85.91%) in patients presenting six hours or later after the onset of symptoms as compared to those presenting in less than six hours of the onset of symptoms (50%). In primary percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty group, mortality was 21.42 percent in patients with successful and 50 percent in patients with failed angioplasty. Thus, in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock, an aggressive invasive strategy with primary percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty, as compared to intravenous thrombolytic therapy, is helpful in reducing in-hospital mortality.     

Thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock

The adverse impact of the development of cardiogenic shock in the setting of acute myocardial infarction was first described by Killip and Kimball in 1967. While the inhospital mortality rate in patients with myocardial infarction and no evidence of heart failure was only 6%, the mortality rate in those patients who developed cardiogenic shock was 81%. Despite advances in cardiovascular care and therapy since that initial report, including universal institution of cardiac care units, advances in hemodynamic monitoring, new inotropic and vasodilating agents, and even increasing utilization of thrornbolytic therapy, the mortality from acute myocardial infarction, when complicated by cardiogenic shock, remains disturbingly high, and cardiogenic shock remains the leading cause of death of hospitalized patients following acute myocardial infarction.The grave prognosis associated with this condition has resulted in increased interest in potential therapeutic interventions, particularly in the area of reperfusion therapy. Several studies suggest that, in contrast to the beneficial effects of thrombolytic therapy in most patient populations suffering acute myocardial infarction, mortality rates are not decreased in those patients with cardiogenic shock at the time of lytic administration. Thrombolytic administration does, however, appear to lead to a modest reduction in the percent of patients with myocardial infarction who will subsequently develop cardiogenic shock during hospitalization.Reperfusion rates with lytic therapy in patients with cardiogenic shock are disappointingly low, in the range of 42–48%, significantly lower than those achieved in patients without cardiogenic shock. These low perfusion rates may, in part, be explained by decreased coronary blood flow and perfusion pressure in patients with left ventricular pump failure.Although promising as adjunctive therapy, it is unclear whether institution of balloon counterpulsation has any long-term benefit in patients with cardiogenic shock treated with thrombolytic therapy. Whether other or additional interventions, such as coronary angioplasty and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), decrease mortality rates in patients with cardiogenic shock remains to be determined.     

Timing,mode, and predictors of death after direct angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction

The timing and mechanisms of early (30 day) mortality in 330 consecutive patients treated with direct angioplasty less than 12 hr after onset of myocardial infarction without antecedent thrombolysis were studied. There were 38 deaths (11.5% of pts), with a majority being due to cardiogenic shock (76%). Other causes included acute closure (11 %), death after emergency bypass surgery (5%), ventricular arrhythmias (5%), and respiratory failure (3%). No deaths from stroke or cardiac rupture were seen, in contrast to trials of thrombolytic agents. Most deaths were seen early, with 47% occurring within 1 day, 35% from days 2–7, and 18% from days 8–30. Death from cardiogenic shock was the most common cause of death throughout this period: 83% of deaths in days 0–3, 88% of deaths in days 4–6, and 43% of deaths in days 8–30. Significant predictors of early death included older age (P <.0001), multi-vessel disease (P <.05), direct angioplasty failure (P <.05), reduced ejection fraction (P <.0001), and anterior myocardial infarction (P <.0005). Gender, prior myocardial infarction, and prior bypass surgery did not affect mortality. Cardiogenic shock is the most common cause of early death after direct angioplasty for myocardial infarction. Patients with one or more risk factors for early death may benefit from additional myocardial salvage or revascularization efforts in the early postinfarct period. Certain causes of death after direct angioplasty (cardiac, rupture, stroke) appear to be less common than data reported for lytic therapy for myocardial infarction. © 1995 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Cardiogenic shock.

PURPOSE: To review the cause, epidemiology, pathophysiology, and treatment of cardiogenic shock. DATA SOURCES: A MEDLINE search of the English-language reports published between 1976 and 1998 and a manual search of bibliographies of relevant papers. STUDY SELECTION: Experimental, clinical, and basic research studies related to cardiogenic shock. DATA EXTRACTION: Data in selected articles were reviewed, and relevant clinical information was extracted. DATA SYNTHESIS: Cardiogenic shock is a state of inadequate tissue perfusion due to cardiac dysfunction, most commonly caused by acute myocardial infarction. Mortality rates for patients with cardiogenic shock remain frustratingly high, ranging from 50% to 80%. The pathophysiology of cardiogenic shock involves a downward spiral: Ischemia causes myocardial dysfunction, which, in turn, worsens ischemia. Areas of nonfunctional but viable (stunned or hibernating) myocardium can also contribute to the development of cardiogenic shock. The key to achieving a good outcome is an organized approach that includes rapid diagnosis and prompt initiation of therapy to maintain blood pressure and cardiac output. Expeditious coronary revascularization is crucial. When available, emergency cardiac catheterization and angioplasty seem to improve survival. More recent developments, such as placement of coronary stents and use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa antagonists, are promising but have not yet been well studied in patients with cardiogenic shock. In hospitals without direct angioplasty capability, stabilization with intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation and thrombolysis followed by transfer to a tertiary care facility may be the best option. CONCLUSIONS: Improved understanding of the pathophysiology of shock and myocardial infarction has led to improved treatment. If cardiogenic shock is managed with rapid evaluation and prompt initiation of supportive measures and definitive therapy, outcomes can be improved.     

Timing and Mechanism of Death Determined Clinically After Primary Angioplasty for Acute Myocardial Infarction

We reviewed the timing and mechanism of death in 1,184 consecutive patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) treated with primary angioplasty from 1984 to 1995. Of 98 deaths, 48 (49%) occurred early on day 0 or 1. The mechanisms of death were pump failure in 60 patients (61%), reinfarction in 7 patients (7.1%), left ventricular rupture in 5 patients (5.1%), arrhythmia in 3 patients (3.1%), other cardiac causes in 5 patients (5.1%), stroke in 6 patients (6.1%), anoxic encephalopathy in 7 patients (7.1%), and procedure-related deaths in 5 patients (5.1%). The strongest predictors of mortality were cardiogenic shock and unsuccessful reperfusion. Our data indicate that mortality after primary angioplasty, like thrombolytic therapy, is highest in the early hours and is usually due to pump failure. In contrast to thrombolytic therapy, the incidence of death from myocardial rupture and bleeding complications is low. Future treatment strategies will need to focus on the large number of patients with early death due to pump failure, especially patients with cardiogenic shock.

Mortality after primary angioplasty, like thrombolytic therapy, is highest in the early hours after infarction and is usually due to pump failure; unlike thrombolytic therapy, the incidence of death from myocardial rupture and bleeding complications is relatively low. Future treatment strategies will need to focus on the large number of patients with early death due to pump failure, especially patients presenting with cardiogenic shock.     

Survival and cardiac event rates in the first year after emergency coronary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction

One year survival and event-free survival rates were analyzed in 342 patients with acute myocardial infarction who were consecutively enrolled in a treatment protocol of early intravenous thrombolytic therapy followed by emergency coronary angioplasty. Ninety-four percent of the patients achieved successful reperfusion, including 4% with failed angioplasty whose perfusion was maintained by means of a reperfusion catheter before emergency bypass surgery. The procedural mortality rate was 1.2% and the total in-hospital mortality rate was 11%. Ninety-two percent of surviving nonsurgical patients who underwent repeat cardiac catheterization were discharged from the hospital with an open infarct-related artery. The related cumulative 1 year survival rate for all patients managed with this treatment strategy was 87%, and the cardiac event-free survival rate was 84%. The 1 year survival for hospital survivors was 98% and the infarct-free survival rate was 94%. Multivariable analysis identified the following factors as independent predictors of subsequent cardiovascular death: cardiogenic shock, greater age, lower ejection fraction, female gender and a closed infarct-related vessel on the initial coronary angiogram. Among patients with cardiogenic shock, despite a 42% in-hospital mortality rate, only 4% died during the first year after hospital discharge. Similarly, the in-hospital and 1 year postdischarge mortality rates were 19 and 4%, respectively, for patients with an initial ejection fraction less than 40, and 25 and 3%, respectively, for patients greater than 65 years. An aggressive treatment strategy including early thrombolytic therapy, emergency cardiac catheterization, coronary angioplasty and, when necessary, bypass surgery resulted in a high rate of infarct vessel patency.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Myocardial revascularization at the acute phase of myocardial infarction in the octogenarian

Elderly patients are at high risk of complications in acute myocardial infarction (AMI). In this population, myocardial reperfusion at the acute phase improves the prognostic. The mortality rate is above 50% in the absence of reperfusion strategy, and decreases at less than 20% in case of such treatment. The thrombolytic use is limited in those patients, coronary angioplasty is taking an important place in this reperfusion therapy, but is not well evaluated in patients older than 80 years. Prospective registry of patients older than 80 years admitted in H?pital Bichat for acute myocardial infarction within the first 6 hours (n = 92), between 1990 january to 1999 december. Eight patients (10%) received a thrombolytic therapy. Coronary angiogram was achieved in eighty patients (87%). In 58 (63%) patients a coronary angioplasty was performed. The success rate of the coronary angioplasty was 86%. In-hospital mortality rate was 26% (death in 24 patients), 20% in the absence of cardiogenic shock and 62% when this complication was noted. Two patients (2%) were treated by emergent coronary artery bypass surgery. The results comparison between the periods of 1990 to 95 and 1955 to 99 showed, a real trend of decrease mortality rate (28 to 13% in the absence of cardiogenic shock, p = 0.10), an increase of the proportion of patients treated by angioplasty. These results are more and more encouraging. Coronary reperfusion by primary angioplasty in possible in patients older than 80 years with a low rate of complications. Technical progress such as stents and GpIIb/IIIa inhibitors must be evaluated in this population.     

Coronary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction

PURPOSE: To critically review the role of coronary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. DATA IDENTIFICATION: Studies published from January 1982 to June 1988 were identified through a search of the English-language literature using MEDLINE and thorough extensive hand searching of bibliographies of identified articles. STUDY SELECTION: All consecutive patient series and randomized trials of coronary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. DATA EXTRACTION: Demographic characteristics, technical results, clinical outcomes, and left ventricular function results were collated. RESULTS of DATA SYNTHESIS: Three randomized trials have compared immediate and deferred coronary angioplasty after intravenous tissue plasminogen activator. Immediate angioplasty was associated with increased mortality, increased need for emergency bypass surgery, higher transfusion requirement, and no benefit in terms of left ventricular functional recovery. CONCLUSIONS: The role of coronary angioplasty for myocardial infarction has thus far been established as adjunctive, in a delayed time frame after thrombolytic therapy. Coronary angioplasty has not been shown to reduce in-hospital mortality or improve resting left ventricular function. A deferred strategy has improved exercise left ventricular performance, and several follow-up studies suggest a favorable long-term prognosis.     

Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in patients with cardiogenic shock.

In cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction, percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty has been reported to significantly improve the modest survival benefits afforded by emergency surgical revascularization and thrombolytic therapy. The records of all patients who underwent angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock were retrospectively reviewed to determine whether coronary angioplasty improves survival. Of the 45 patients, 28 (group 1, 62%) had successful dilation of the infarct-related artery and 17 (group 2, 38%) had unsuccessful angioplasty. The groups were similar in extent of coronary artery disease, infarct location, incidence of multivessel disease and hemodynamic variables. The overall hospital survival rate was 56% (71% in group 1 and 29% in group 2). Group 1 patients had more left main coronary artery disease, and group 2 patients were older and had a higher incidence of prior myocardial infarction. Multivariate analysis showed that the survival advantage in patients with successful angioplasty was statistically significant (p = 0.014) when these factors were taken into account. At a mean follow-up interval of 2.3 years (range 1 month to 5.6 years), there were five deaths (four cardiac and one noncardiac), for a 2.3-year survival rate of 80% in patients surviving to hospital discharge. During the follow-up period, 36% of hospital survivors had repeat hospitalization for cardiac evaluation, 8% had myocardial infarction, 8% had coronary artery bypass surgery and 24% had angina.     

The use of intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: data from the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction 2

BACKGROUND: Cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains the leading cause of death in patients hospitalized with AMI. Although several studies have demonstrated the importance of establishing and maintaining a patent infarct-related artery, it remains unclear as to whether intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation (IABP) provides incremental benefit to reperfusion therapy. The purpose of this study was to determine whether IABP use is associated with lower in-hospital mortality rates in patients with AMI complicated by cardiogenic shock in a large AMI registry. METHODS: We evaluated patients participating in the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction 2 who had cardiogenic shock at initial examination or in whom cardiogenic shock developed during hospitalization (n = 23,180). RESULTS: The mean age of patients in the study was 72 years, 54% were men, and the majority were white. The overall mortality rate in all patients who had cardiogenic shock or in whom cardiogenic shock developed was 70%. IABP was used in 7268 (31%) patients. IABP use was associated with a significant reduction in mortality rates in patients who received thrombolytic therapy (67% vs 49%) but was not associated with any benefit in patients treated with primary angioplasty (45% vs 47%). In a multivariate model, the use of IABP in conjunction with thrombolytic therapy decreased the odds of death by 18% (odds ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.72 to 0.93). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with AMI complicated by cardiogenic shock may have substantial benefit from IABP when used in combination with thrombolytic therapy.     

急性心肌梗死患者的直接经皮腔内冠状动脉成形术与溶栓治疗疗效比较

为探讨急性心肌梗死直接经皮腔内冠状动脉成形术的安全性及临床疗效 ,选择 6 2例未经静脉和冠状动脉内溶栓治疗的急性心肌梗死患者 ,在紧急冠状动脉造影后即行直接经皮腔内冠状动脉成形术 ;另外选择 5 9例急性心肌梗死患者 ,采用溶栓治疗 ,溶栓治疗后不再接受介入治疗和外科冠状动脉搭桥 ,然后比较直接经皮腔内冠状动脉成形术和溶栓治疗的疗效、安全性及预后。结果发现 ,直接经皮腔内冠状动脉成形术组 6 0例再灌注成功 ,成功率为 96 .7% ,其中 4例合并心源性休克的患者均再灌注成功 ,血压回升 ,急性上消化道出血 1例 ,死亡率为 0 ;溶栓治疗组 38例再灌注成功 ,成功率为 6 4 .4 % ,住院期间死亡 5例 ,出院 6月内死亡 2例 ,急性上消化道出血 1例 ,血尿 1例 ,溶栓治疗后心源性休克 5例 ,死亡率为 1 1 .9%。直接经皮腔内冠状动脉成形术再灌注成功率明显高于溶栓治疗 ,死亡率和主要心脏事件的发生率明显低于溶栓治疗 (P <0 .0 1 )。结果提示 ,急性心肌梗死的直接经皮腔内冠状动脉成形术治疗安全有效 ,再灌注成功率明显高于溶栓治疗 ,疗效及预后优于溶栓治疗     

Cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: the use of coronary angioplasty and the integration of the new support devices into patient management.

Conventional therapy for cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction continues to be associated with a high in-hospital mortality rate. Hemodynamic support with new mechanical devices and emergency coronary revascularization may alter the long-term prognosis for patients with this complication. Between July 1985 and March 1990, 68 patients presented to the University of Michigan with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock. Interventions performed included thrombolytic therapy (46%), intraaortic balloon pump counterpulsation (70%), cardiac catheterization (86%), coronary angioplasty (73%), emergency coronary artery bypass grafting/ventricular septal defect repair (15%), Hemopump insertion (11%), percutaneous cardiopulmonary support (4%) and ventricular assist device (3%). The 30-day survival rate was significantly better in patients who had successful angioplasty of the infarct-related artery than in patients with failed angioplasty (61% vs. 7%, p = 0.002) or no attempt at angioplasty (61% vs. 14%, p = 0.003). This difference was maintained over the 1-year follow-up period. The only clinical variable that predicted survival was age less than 65 years. The early use of the new support devices in 10 patients was associated with death in 8 (80%), but this poor outcome may reflect a selection bias for an especially high risk population. Collectively, these recent data continue to suggest that emergency revascularization with angioplasty may reduce the mortality rate, but further study is required to define optimal utilization and integration of new support devices.     

Management of myocardial infarction shock: current status

Major advances have occurred over the last two decades in the management of myocardial infarction shock, increasing the overall in-hospital survival rate from approximately 15% to more than 50% at the present time with aggressive methods of interventional cardiology. The widespread use of intravenous thrombolytic therapy during the early hours of myocardial infarction has resulted in a decreasing incidence of shock with first myocardial infarctions. Three mechanisms bring about cardiogenic shock: (1) extensive aggregate systolic left ventricular dysfunction, (2) extensive right ventricular infarction, and (3) mechanical defects of the left and/or right ventricles attendant to ischemic dysfunction or rupture. To permit survival in cardiogenic shock, even with maximally aggressive therapy, diagnostic evaluation must be carried out concurrently with clinical stabilization of the patient. IABC is the mainstay for supporting the patient in shock during further efforts at diagnosis and definitive therapy. Definitive therapy for cardiogenic shock may include percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty, emergent bypass surgery, or repair of a mechanical defect. This report details the current status of knowledge with respect to pathogenesis, recognition, and definitive treatment of myocardial infarction shock.     

Short- and long-term mortality for patients undergoing primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction

OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to learn more about the risk factors and short- and long-term outcomes for primary angioplasty. BACKGROUND: Primary angioplasty (direct angioplasty without antecedent thrombolytic therapy) has been an effective alternative to thrombolytic therapy for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). However, most reported studies have been compromised by small sample sizes and short observation times. METHODS: New York's coronary angioplasty registry was used to identify New York patients undergoing angioplasty within 6 h of AMI between January 1, 1993 and December 31, 1996. Statistical models were used to identify significant risk factors for in-patient and long-term survival and to estimate long-term survival for all patients as well as various subsets of patients undergoing primary angioplasty. RESULTS: The in-hospital mortality rate for all primary angioplasty patients was 5.81%. When patients in preprocedural shock (who had a mortality rate of 45%) were excluded, the in-hospital mortality rate dropped to 2.60%. Mortality rates for all primary angioplasty patients at one year, two years and three years were 9.3%, 11.3% and 12.6%, respectively. Patients treated with stent placement did not have significantly lower risk-adjusted in-patient or two-year mortality rates. CONCLUSIONS: Primary angioplasty is a highly effective option for AMI.     

Primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock on admission.

AIM: To evaluate primary angioplasty results for the treatment of acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock on admission. POPULATION AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 11 consecutive patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (defined as systolic blood pressure below 80 mmHg and signs of hypoperfusion, despite volume expanders and/or vasopressors infusion) treated with primary angioplasty. Clinical characteristics, angiographic data, hospital outcome and follow-up were analysed. RESULTS: There were ten males (90.9%) with a mean age of 66 years. Eight patients had anterior wall myocardial infarction and three patients had inferior wall myocardial infarction, two of which with extension to the right ventricle. The mean time between symptom onset and angioplasty was 3.5 hours. Three patients had left main coronary artery occlusion; three patients had single vessel disease and five patients had multivessel disease. The angiographic success rate (open infarct-related artery and TIMI III flow) was 90.9% (ten patients). Stent implantation was performed in five patients. Abciximab was given in five patients. In-hospital mortality rate was 36.4% (four patients). The surviving patients had a mean ejection fraction of 43.1% on discharge. In a mean follow-up of 16.2 months, one patient had coronary artery bypass graft and one had stroke. CONCLUSION: Based on published data, our experience with this short series of cases shows that primary angiography should be regarded as a positive option for the treatment of acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock.     

Implications for patient triage from survival and left ventricular functional recovery analyses in 500 patients treated with coronary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction

The in-hospital course of 500 consecutive patients treated with coronary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction was reviewed in relation to their clinical and angiographic presentation and angioplasty outcome to determine which patients benefit most from successful angioplasty in this setting. Patient age was 56 +/- 11 years (mean +/- SD) and 78% were men; 46% had anterior myocardial infarction, 49% received concomitant intravenous thrombolytic therapy, left ventricular ejection fraction was 47 +/- 11% and median time to angioplasty was 4.7 h (range 1 to 24). Angioplasty was successful in 78% of patients and partially successful in 7% of patients; the overall in-hospital mortality rate was 10.2%. Multivariate analysis found six independent correlates (p less than 0.05) of in-hospital mortality: left ventricular ejection fraction less than or equal to 30%, lack of postangioplasty infarct artery patency, age greater than 65 years, recurrent ischemia after successful angioplasty, emergency bypass surgery and arterial pressure on admission to the catheterization laboratory less than 100 mm Hg. After consideration of these predictors of survival in multivariate analyses, angioplasty success still was independently correlated with improved in-hospital survival for patients with cardiogenic shock (p = 0.002) and anterior myocardial infarction (p = 0.007). A trend toward an independent beneficial effect of successful angioplasty on survival was also noted in patients with inferior wall infarction and precordial ST segment depression (p = 0.063) and for all patients who were hypotensive on admission to the catheterization laboratory, regardless of the infarct site (p = 0.057).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty improves survival in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock

Modest survival benefits have been reported in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock who were treated with early surgical revascularization or thrombolytic therapy. To determine whether coronary angioplasty improves survival, 87 patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, from 1975 to 1985 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients in group 1 (n = 59) were treated with conventional therapy; patients in group 2 (n = 24) were treated with conventional therapy and angioplasty. Extent of coronary artery disease, infarct location, and incidence of multivessel disease were similar between groups. Hemodynamic variables including cardiac index, mean arterial pressure, and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure were also similar. The 30-day survival was significantly improved for group 2 patients (50% vs. 17%, p = 0.006). Survival in group 2 patients with successful angioplasty was 77% (10 of 13 patients) versus 18% (two of 11 patients) in patients with unsuccessful angioplasty, (p = 0.006). The findings suggest that angioplasty improves survival in cardiogenic shock compared with conventional therapy with survival contingent upon successful reperfusion of the infarct-related artery.     

Primary coronary angioplasty in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: prediction of the thirty-day mortality risk in an unselected population of patients.

BACKGROUND: The 30-day mortality in catheter-based reperfusion therapy in patients with acute myocardial infarction varies widely in the literature and only some factors, such as cardiogenic shock, are clearly associated with the risk. This non-randomized, single center study investigates the potential factors influencing the 30-day mortality in 586 consecutive patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction, treated with primary coronary angioplasty (PTCA). METHODS: In the whole series and in two subgroups (with and without cardiogenic shock) the clinical, angiographic and procedural variables were used to develop multivariate statistical models for the prediction of the endpoint. RESULTS: The overall 30-day mortality was 7.3%: 35.8 and 4.5% in patients with and without cardiogenic shock, respectively (p < 0.001). Independent predictors of the 30-day mortality included: a) in the entire series: shock, PTCA angiographic success, time to treatment, age, and coronary artery disease extension; b) in patients with cardiogenic shock: PTCA angiographic success, time to treatment, coronary artery disease extension, and use of abciximab; c) in patients without cardiogenic shock: time to treatment, age, and coronary artery disease extension. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction submitted to primary PTCA, the 30-day mortality rate is a highly predictable endpoint. The role of abciximab therapy and of other independent predictors varies according to the presence or otherwise of cardiogenic shock.     

Coronary angioplasty in emergency treatment of myocardial infarction in a community-hospital setting

From July 1986 through June 1988, 135 consecutive patients with myocardial infarction, including 23 in cardiogenic shock, were treated with percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in a community-hospital setting. In 109 (81%) of the cases, angioplasty was successful, resulting in brisk anterograde flow and in residual stenosis of less than 50%. The success rate was 88% (99/112) for patients not in cardiogenic shock and 43% (10/23) for those in shock. During the term of hospitalization, clinically evident total reocclusion occurred in 5 (4%) patients not in shock on presentation (2 of these experienced anterior infarction, and 3 inferior infarction); repeat angioplasty was performed successfully in all 5. No clinical reocclusion was detected in the smaller group of patients admitted in shock. Eleven patients (8%) underwent emergency coronary artery bypass grafting following the coronary angioplasty procedure: 4 for failed angioplasty in the infarct-related artery, and the other 7 for severe triple-vessel disease. Hospital mortality was 0.9% (1/112) for patients not in cardiogenic shock and 52% (12/23) for those admitted in shock, for an overall rate of 10% (13/135). Among patients whose balloon angioplasty was successful, hospital mortality was 0% for those not in shock and 30% (3/10) for those in shock. Among patients whose angioplasty failed, however, mortality was 8% (1/13) for those not in shock and 69% (9/13) for those admitted in shock.