Key result
Isoproterenol achieved adequate arterial pressure in only 7.7% of patients compared to 100% with levarterenol in shock due to acute myocardial infarction.
Why the study?
Does isoproterenol improve clinical and hemodynamic outcomes compared to levarterenol in patients with shock due to acute myocardial infarction?
Population
13 patients with shock due to acute myocardial infarction
Comparison
Isoproterenol hydrochloride infusion vs Levarterenol (norepinephrine) bitartrate infusion
Design
Case_series
Authors
Loading...
Supports norepinephrine over isoproterenol for pressor support in AMI shock; extends early RCT evidence on vasopressor selection.
Does isoproterenol improve clinical and hemodynamic outcomes compared to levarterenol in patients with shock due to acute myocardial infarction?
Absolute Event Rate: 7.7% vs 100%
In patients with cardiogenic shock due to acute myocardial infarction, levarterenol (norepinephrine) is superior to isoproterenol for maintaining adequate arterial perfusion pressure.
Rolf M. Gunnar (1967) studied Shock due to acute myocardial infarction (n=13). Isoproterenol hydrochloride vs. Levarterenol (norepinephrine) bitartrate was evaluated on Adequate arterial pressure. Isoproterenol achieved adequate arterial pressure in only 7.7% of patients compared to 100% with levarterenol in shock due to acute myocardial infarction.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: