image dons

je fais un don

Clinical Outcomes According to ECG Presentations in Infarct-Related Cardiogenic Shock in the Culprit Lesion Only PCI vs Multivessel PCI in Cardiogenic Shock Trial

Colloquium "Rythme et conduction" (23 avril 2024)
Programme et inscription, c'est ici !

Bourses ACTION 2024 - Prix de Recherche JP Collet et Y Grosgogeat - PHRA 2024
M2, thèse de sciences, mobilité et soins infirmiers : deadline 15 mars - PHRA : deadline 30 mars

La Grande Journée du Coeur - Rendez-vous dans un cadre exceptionnel : l'Eglise Saint-Louis de la Pitié-Salpêtrière le jeudi 27 juin 2024
A vos agendas !

Chest 2021 Apr;159(4):1415-1425


Article disponible en consultant le site

Auteurs

Zeitouni M, Akin I, Desch S, Barthélémy O, Brugier D, Collet JP, de Waha-Thiele S, Greenwood JP, Guedeney P, Hage G, Hauguel-Moreau M, Huber K, Kerneis M, Noc M, Oldroyd KG, Piek JJ, Rouanet S, Savonitto S, Serpytis P, Silvain J, Stepinska J, Vicaut E, Vrints CJM, Windecker S, Zeymer U, Thiele H, Montalescot G; CULPRIT-SHOCK Trial Investigators.

Abstract

Background

The impact of ECG presentations of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in cardiogenic shock is unknown.

Aims

In myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock, is there a difference in the outcomes and effect of revascularization strategies between non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and left bundle branch block myocardial infarction (LBBBMI) vs ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) ?

Methods

Cardiogenic shock patients from the CULPRIT-SHOCK trial with NSTEMI or LBBBMI were compared with STEMI patients for 30-day and 1-year all-cause mortality. The interaction between ECG presentation and the effect of revascularization strategies on outcomes was evaluated.

Results

Of 665 cardiogenic shock patients analyzed, 55.9% demonstrated STEMI, 29.3% demonstrated NSTEMI, and 14.7% demonstrated LBBBMI. Patients differed in mean age (68.0 years in STEMI patients, 71.0 years in NSTEMI patients, and 73.5 years in LBBBMI patients; P = .015), cardiovascular risk factors, and angiographic severity. No difference was found in the 30-day risk of death between NSTEMI and STEMI patients (48.7% vs 43.0%; adjusted OR [aOR], 1.05; 95% CI, 0.66-1.67; P = .85), nor between LBBBMI and STEMI patients (59.2% vs 43.0%; aOR, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.73-2.34; P = .36). Although the univariate risk of death by 1 year was higher in NSTEMI and LBBBMI patients compared with STEMI patients, ECG presentation was not an independent risk factor of mortality after adjustment (NSTEMI vs STEMI: 56.4% vs 46.8%; aOR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.76-1.92; P = .42; LBBBMI vs STEMI: 69.4% vs 46.8%; aOR, 1.59; 95% CI, 0.89-2.84; P = .12). ECG presentation did not modify the effect of the revascularization strategy on 30-day and 1-year mortality (P = .91 and P = .97 for interaction).

Conclusions

In patients with cardiogenic shock, NSTEMI and LBBBMI presentations reflect higher-risk profiles than STEMI presentations, but are not independent risk factors of mortality. ECG presentations did not modify the treatment effect, supporting culprit-lesion-only percutaneous coronary intervention as the preferred strategy across the AMI spectrum.

Autres actualités

+

01/10/2023


Rationale and design of the ARAMIS trial: Anakinra versus pl...

Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2023 Oct;116(10):460-466
+

01/09/2023


Comparison of three echo-guidance techniques in percutaneous...

Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2023 Sep 29:S1875-2136(23)00171-7