Does intra-aortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock improve outcome?

11Citations
Citations of this article
65Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: In the current international guidelines, intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) counterpulsation is considered a class I treatment for acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. However, evidence is based mainly on registry data, and there is a paucity of randomized clinical trials.Methods: Results: 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 endpoints 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.Conclusions: The use of IABP counterpulsation did not significantly reduce 30-day mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock for whom an early revascularization strategy was planned. © 2013 BioMed Central Ltd.

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Khashan, M. Y., & Pinsky, M. R. (2013, March 6). Does intra-aortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock improve outcome? Critical Care. https://doi.org/10.1186/cc12520

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 20

49%

Professor / Associate Prof. 10

24%

Researcher 8

20%

Lecturer / Post doc 3

7%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 42

84%

Nursing and Health Professions 5

10%

Engineering 2

4%

Neuroscience 1

2%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Social Media
Shares, Likes & Comments: 2

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free