Key result
Cardiogenic shock at admission for unprotected left main-related STEMI treated with primary PCI was associated with higher in-hospital mortality compared to no shock.
Why the study?
Very little is known regarding the outcomes following primary percutaneous coronary intervention for unprotected left main-related STEMI in hospitals without on-site surgical back-up.
What are the outcomes of primary percutaneous coronary intervention for unprotected left main-related ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction in a hospital without on-site surgical back-up?
Cohort (n=34)
No
What are the outcomes of primary percutaneous coronary intervention for unprotected left main-related ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction in a hospital without on-site surgical back-up?
PPCI for ULM-related STEMI in a center without on-site surgical back-up is feasible, though in-hospital mortality is significantly driven by the presence of cardiogenic shock at admission.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Shock signals high in-hospital mortality risk in unprotected left main STEMI; leaves open optimal adjunctive strategies.
INTRODUCTION: Unprotected left main (ULM) related ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is a severe event, often leading to circulatory failure and/or sudden cardiac death. Although high-risk ULM thrombosis populations treated by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) have been previously described, very little is known regarding the outcomes following PPCI for ULM-related STEMI in a hospital without on-site surgical back-up. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was performed on all consecutive patients who underwent PPCI for ULM-related STEMI in a single center. The primary end-point was to assess in-hospital mortality in the overall population and according to the presence/absence of cardiogenic shock at admission. RESULTS: Between October 2006 and December 2012, 1094 patients underwent PPCI for STEMI. PPCI for ULM-related STEMI was performed in 34 (3.1%) patients. Among these, 22 (64.7%) were in cardiogenic shock at admission. Baseline mean ejection fraction was lower (P = 0.008), whereas the prevalence of patients with pre-procedural cardiac arrest and Killip Class III-IV was significantly higher in the cardiogenic shock (P = 0.05 and P < 0.001, respectively) compared with non-cardiogenic shock group. Furthermore, patients with cardiogenic shock had a higher prevalence of pre-procedural thrombolysis in myocardial infarction flow 0-1 (P = 0.05) and associated other vessel chronic total occlusion (P = 0.05) compared with non-cardiogenic shock group. Procedural success rate was lower in the cardiogenic shock compared with non-cardiogenic shock group (77.3 vs. 100%, P = 0.09), whereas in-hospital mortality rate was significantly higher in the cardiogenic shock compared with non-cardiogenic shock group (36.4 vs. 0%, P = 0.02). No deaths were reported among survivors of the acute phase at mid-term follow-up, whereas target lesion revascularization rate was 7.6%. CONCLUSIONS: PPCI for ULM-related STEMI in a hospital without on-site surgical back-up was technically feasible in most of the cases. Although the procedural success and in-hospital mortality rates were influenced by cardiogenic shock at admission, an excellent mid-term outcome among patients who survived the hospitalization was reported independently by the severity of clinical presentation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ielasi et al. (2014) conducted a cohort in Unprotected left main-related ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (n=34). Cardiogenic shock at admission vs. Absence of cardiogenic shock was evaluated on In-hospital mortality (p=0.02). Cardiogenic shock at admission for unprotected left main-related STEMI treated with primary PCI was associated with higher in-hospital mortality compared to no shock.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: