Кардиогенный шок (КШ) – основная причина летального исхода у пациентов с острым инфарктом миокарда (ОИМ). Смертность от КШ остается высокой, несмотря на широкое использование реваскуляризации миокарда и применение современных препаратов. Устройства механической поддержки гемодинамики являются наиболее перспективным вариантом снижения летальности пациентов с КШ. Цель. Изучить эффективность и безопасность методов механической поддержки кровообращения (МПК) у пациентов с ОИМ и рефрактерным КШ. Материалы и методы. В исследование включили 47 пациентов с ОИМ и рефрактерным КШ, проходивших лечение в ГБУЗ «ГКБ им. И.В. Давыдовского» с 2019 по 2022 г. Из всех участников 32 использовали МПК (10 – внутриаортальную баллонную контрпульсацию – ВАБК, 32 – вено-артериальную экстракорпоральную мембранную оксигенацию – ВА-ЭКМО). Проанализирована летальность и внутригоспитальные осложнения у пациентов с рефрактерным КШ в зависимости от использования МПК и ее вида. Результаты. Пациенты с рефрактерным КШ, которым проводили МПК, характеризовались достоверно меньшей летальностью (59,0% vs 93,3%; p=0,02). Данный эффект достигнут преимущественно за счет подгруппы, в которой применяли ВА-ЭКМО (59,0% vs 93,0%; p=0,02), а не ВАБК (70,0% vs 93,3%; p=0,16). Заключение. У пациентов с ОИМ и рефрактерным КШ имплантация системы ВА-ЭКМО уменьшает летальность. Необходимы дальнейшие исследования для оптимизации алгоритма МПК у пациентов с КШ.
Cardiogenic shock (CS) is one of the main causes of death in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Mortality from CS remains high, despite the introduction of myocardial revascularization and the use of modern medication. The use of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is promising, it could reduce mortality in patients with AMI and CS. Aim. To define effectiveness and safety of MCS in patients with AMI and CS. Materials and methods. Our study includes 47 patients with AMI and refractory CS, who were treated at the University Clinic of Cardiology of the Yevdokimov Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry from 2019 to 2022. Mortality and various complications were analyzed in patients with refractory CS, patients who received and did not receive mechanical circulatory support (intra-aortic balloon pump – IABP, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation – ECMO). Results. Mortality among patients with refractory CS was significantly lower in the subgroup of patients who received mechanical circulatory support devices (59% vs 93%; p=0.02). Moreover, reliability is achieved mainly due to patients in whom were VA-ECMO implanted (p=0.02), not IABP (p=0.16). Conclusion. VA-ECMO associated with reduced mortality and should be considered in patients with AMI and refractory CS. Further research is needed to select the optimal method of mechanical circulatory support in patients with CS.
1. Thiele H, Akin I, Sandri M, et al. PCI Strategies in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(25):2419-32. DOI:10.1056/NEJMoa1710261
2. Olbrich H, Hausleiter J, Richardt G, et al. Intraaortic Balloon Support for Myocardial Infarction with Cardiogenic Shock. NEJM. 2012;367(14):1287-96. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1208410
3. Thygesen K, Alpert JS, Jaffe AS, et al. Executive Group on behalf of the Joint European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA)/World Heart Federation (WHF) Task Force for the Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction (2018). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;72(18):2231-64. DOI:10.1016/j.jacc.2018.08.1038
4. Ouweneel DM, Schotborgh JV, Limpens J, et al. Extracorporeal life support during cardiac arrest and cardiogenic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med. 2016;42(12):1922-34. DOI:10.1007/S00134-016-4536-8
5. Abdel-Wahab M, Saad M, Kynast J, et al. Comparison of hospital mortality with intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation insertion before versus after primary percutaneous coronary intervention for cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 2010;105(7):967-71. DOI:10.1016/J.AMJCARD.2009.11.021
6. Ramanathan K, Farkouh ME, Cosmi JE, et al. Rapid complete reversal of systemic hypoperfusion after intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation and survival in cardiogenic shock complicating an acute myocardial infarction. Am Heart J. 2011;162(2):268-75. DOI:10.1016/J.AHJ.2011.04.025
7. Thayer KL, Zweck E, Ayouty M, et al. Invasive Hemodynamic Assessment and Classification of In-Hospital Mortality Risk Among Patients With Cardiogenic Shock. Circ Heart Fail. 2020;13(9):e007099. DOI:10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.120.007099
8. Thiele H, Zeymer U, Neumann F-J, et al. Intraaortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(14):1287‑96. doi:10.1056/NEJMOA1208410
9. Thiele H, Ohman EM, de Waha-Thiele S, et al. Management of cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction: an update 2019. Eur Heart J. 2019;40(32):2671-83. DOI:10.1093/EURHEARTJ/EHZ363
10. Backhaus T, Fach A, Schmucker J, et al. Management and predictors of outcome in unselected patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: results from the Bremen STEMI Registry. Clin Res Cardiol. 2018;107(5):371-9. DOI:10.1007/S00392-017-1192-0
11. Becher PM, Schrage B, Sinning CR, et al. Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Cardiopulmonary Support. Circulation. 2018;138(20):2298-300. DOI:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.036691
12. Karagiannidis C, Brodie D, Strassmann S, et al. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: evolving epidemiology and mortality. Intensive Care Med. 2016;42(5):889-96. DOI:10.1007/S00134-016-4273-Z
13. Thiele H, de Waha-Thiele S, Freund A, et al. Management of cardiogenic shock. EuroIntervention. 2021;17(6):451-65. DOI:10.4244/EIJ-D-20-01296
14. Brunner S, Guenther SPW, Lackermair K, et al. Extracorporeal Life Support in Cardiogenic Shock Complicating Acute Myocardial Infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;73(18):2355-7. DOI:10.1016/J.JACC.2019.02.044
15. Sohail S, Fan E, Foroutan F, et al. Predictors of Mortality in Patients Treated with Veno-Arterial ECMO for Cardiogenic Shock Complicating Acute Myocardial Infarction: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Cardiovasc Transl Res. 2022;15(2):227-38. DOI:10.1007/S12265-021-10140-W
16. Thiele H, Freund A, Gimenez MR, et al. Extracorporeal life support in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock – Design and rationale of the ECLS-SHOCK trial. Am Heart J. 2021;234:1-11. DOI:10.1016/J.AHJ.2021.01.002
17. Banning AS, Adriaenssens T, Berry C, et al. Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in patients with cardiogenic shock: rationale and design of the randomised, multicentre, open-label EURO SHOCK trial. EuroIntervention. 2021;16(15):e1227-36. DOI:10.4244/EIJ-D-20-01076
18. Keebler ME, Haddad EV, Choi CW, et al. Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Cardiogenic Shock. JACC Heart Fail. 2018;6(6):503-16. DOI:10.1016/J.JCHF.2017.11.017
________________________________________________
1. Thiele H, Akin I, Sandri M, et al. PCI Strategies in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(25):2419-32. DOI:10.1056/NEJMoa1710261
2. Olbrich H, Hausleiter J, Richardt G, et al. Intraaortic Balloon Support for Myocardial Infarction with Cardiogenic Shock. NEJM. 2012;367(14):1287-96. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1208410
3. Thygesen K, Alpert JS, Jaffe AS, et al. Executive Group on behalf of the Joint European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA)/World Heart Federation (WHF) Task Force for the Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction (2018). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;72(18):2231-64. DOI:10.1016/j.jacc.2018.08.1038
4. Ouweneel DM, Schotborgh JV, Limpens J, et al. Extracorporeal life support during cardiac arrest and cardiogenic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med. 2016;42(12):1922-34. DOI:10.1007/S00134-016-4536-8
5. Abdel-Wahab M, Saad M, Kynast J, et al. Comparison of hospital mortality with intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation insertion before versus after primary percutaneous coronary intervention for cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 2010;105(7):967-71. DOI:10.1016/J.AMJCARD.2009.11.021
6. Ramanathan K, Farkouh ME, Cosmi JE, et al. Rapid complete reversal of systemic hypoperfusion after intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation and survival in cardiogenic shock complicating an acute myocardial infarction. Am Heart J. 2011;162(2):268-75. DOI:10.1016/J.AHJ.2011.04.025
7. Thayer KL, Zweck E, Ayouty M, et al. Invasive Hemodynamic Assessment and Classification of In-Hospital Mortality Risk Among Patients With Cardiogenic Shock. Circ Heart Fail. 2020;13(9):e007099. DOI:10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.120.007099
8. Thiele H, Zeymer U, Neumann F-J, et al. Intraaortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(14):1287‑96. doi:10.1056/NEJMOA1208410
9. Thiele H, Ohman EM, de Waha-Thiele S, et al. Management of cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction: an update 2019. Eur Heart J. 2019;40(32):2671-83. DOI:10.1093/EURHEARTJ/EHZ363
10. Backhaus T, Fach A, Schmucker J, et al. Management and predictors of outcome in unselected patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: results from the Bremen STEMI Registry. Clin Res Cardiol. 2018;107(5):371-9. DOI:10.1007/S00392-017-1192-0
11. Becher PM, Schrage B, Sinning CR, et al. Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Cardiopulmonary Support. Circulation. 2018;138(20):2298-300. DOI:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.036691
12. Karagiannidis C, Brodie D, Strassmann S, et al. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: evolving epidemiology and mortality. Intensive Care Med. 2016;42(5):889-96. DOI:10.1007/S00134-016-4273-Z
13. Thiele H, de Waha-Thiele S, Freund A, et al. Management of cardiogenic shock. EuroIntervention. 2021;17(6):451-65. DOI:10.4244/EIJ-D-20-01296
14. Brunner S, Guenther SPW, Lackermair K, et al. Extracorporeal Life Support in Cardiogenic Shock Complicating Acute Myocardial Infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;73(18):2355-7. DOI:10.1016/J.JACC.2019.02.044
15. Sohail S, Fan E, Foroutan F, et al. Predictors of Mortality in Patients Treated with Veno-Arterial ECMO for Cardiogenic Shock Complicating Acute Myocardial Infarction: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Cardiovasc Transl Res. 2022;15(2):227-38. DOI:10.1007/S12265-021-10140-W
16. Thiele H, Freund A, Gimenez MR, et al. Extracorporeal life support in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock – Design and rationale of the ECLS-SHOCK trial. Am Heart J. 2021;234:1-11. DOI:10.1016/J.AHJ.2021.01.002
17. Banning AS, Adriaenssens T, Berry C, et al. Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in patients with cardiogenic shock: rationale and design of the randomised, multicentre, open-label EURO SHOCK trial. EuroIntervention. 2021;16(15):e1227-36. DOI:10.4244/EIJ-D-20-01076
18. Keebler ME, Haddad EV, Choi CW, et al. Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Cardiogenic Shock. JACC Heart Fail. 2018;6(6):503-16. DOI:10.1016/J.JCHF.2017.11.017
1 ФГБОУ ВО «Московский государственный медико-стоматологический университет им. А.И. Евдокимова» Минздрава России, Москва, Россия;
2 ГБУЗ «Городская клиническая больница им. И.В. Давыдовского» Департамента здравоохранения г. Москвы, Москва, Россия
*psavvinova@yandex.ru
________________________________________________
Polina P. Savvinova*1,2, Vladimir N. Manchurov1,2, Boris L. Haes2, Dmitry V. Skrypnik1,2, Elena J. Vasilieva1,2, Alexander V. Shpektor1
1 Yevdokimov Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry, Moscow, Russia;
2 Davydovsky Moscow Clinical City Hospital, Moscow, Russia
*psavvinova@yandex.ru