Cardiac shock care center — the next stage in the treatment of cardiogenic shock
https://doi.org/10.15829/1560-4071-2019-11-173-181
Abstract
The key step in achieving a significant reduction in mortality in patients with myocardial infarction (MI) was the organization of a wide network of specialized PCI-centers that provide care for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) on the 24/7 mode in accordance to clear protocols. However, currently in-hospital mortality of MI patients, complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS), remains extremely high and averages 50 %. The formation of a system of highly specialized centers seems to be the most promising opportunity to improve the prognosis of patients with CS. The article discusses the world scientific and clinical experience in organizing cardiac shock care centers, the features of their internal structure, as well as the administrative and logistical aspects of entire system operation.
Keywords
cardiogenic shock,
myocardial infarction,
mechanical circulatory support,
cardiac shock care center,
Impella,
ECMO
Supporting agencies: The authors are grateful to the residents of the emergency cardiology department of the National Medical Research Center of Cardiology: Merkulova I. A., Avetisyan E. A.
About the Authors
S. A. Boytsov
National Medical Research Center of Cardiology
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Moscow.
R. S. Akchurin
National Medical Research Center of Cardiology
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Moscow.
D. V. Pevzner
National Medical Research Center of Cardiology
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Moscow.
R. M. Shakhnovich
National Medical Research Center of Cardiology
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Moscow.
M. Ya. Ruda
National Medical Research Center of Cardiology
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Moscow.
References
1. Anderson ML, Peterson ED, Peng SA, et al. Differences in the Profile, Treatment, and Prognosis of Patients With Cardiogenic Shock by Myocardial Infarction Classification. A Report From NCDR. Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes. 2013;6:708-15. doi:10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.113.000262.
2. Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Godfrey E, et al. SHould We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic ShocK: An international randomized trial of emergency PTCA/ CABG–trial design. American Heart Journal. 1999;137(2):313-21. doi:10.1053/hj.1999.v137.95352.
3. Thiele H, Zeymer U, Neumann F‐J, et al. Intraaortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:1287-96. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1208410.
4. Ouweneel DM, Eriksen E, Sjauw KD, et al. Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Versus Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump in Cardiogenic Shock After Acute Myocardial Infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;69(3):278-87. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2016.10.022.
5. Seyfarth M, Sibbing D, Bauer I, et al. A Randomized Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of a Percutaneous Left Ventricular Assist Device Versus Intra-Aortic Balloon Pumping for Treatment of Cardiogenic Shock Caused by Myocardial Infarction. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2008;52(19):1584-8. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2008.05.065.
6. Masoudi FA, Ponirakis A, de Lemos JA, et al. Trends in U.S. cardiovascular care. 2016 report from 4 ACC National Cardiovascular Data Registries. Journal of American College of Cardiology. 2017;69:1427-50. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2016.12.005.
7. Basir MB, Schreiber T, Dixon S, et al. Feasibility of early mechanical circulatory support in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: The Detroit cardiogenic shock initiative. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions. 2017;91(3):454-61. doi:10.1002/ccd.27427.
8. O’Neill WW, Grines C, Schreiber T, et al. Analysis of outcomes for 15,259 US patients with acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock (AMICS) supported with the Impella® device. American Heart Journal. 2018;202:33-8. doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2018.03.024.
9. O’Neil WW, Schreiber T, Wohns DHW, et al. The Current Use of Impella® 2.5 in Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock: Results from the USpella Registry. Journal of Interventional Cardiology. 2013;27(1):1-11. doi:10.1111/joic.12080.
10. Basir MB, Schreiber TL, Grines CL, et al. Effect of Early Initiation of Mechanical Circulatory Support on Survival in Cardiogenic Shock. The American Journal of Cardiology. 2017;119(6):845-51. doi:10.1016/j.amjcard.2016.11.037.
11. Shaefi S, O’Gara B, Kociol RD, et al. Effect of Cardiogenic Shock Hospital Volume on Mortality in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock. Journal of the American Heart Association. 2015;4(1):1462-2. doi:10.1161/jaha.114.001462.
12. Scholz KH, Maier SKG, Maier LS, et al. Impact of treatment delay on mortality in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients presenting with and without haemodynamic instability: results from the German prospective, multicentre FITT-STEMI trial. European Heart Journal. 2018;39(13):1065-74. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehy004.
13. Kontos MC, Wang Y, Chaudhry SI, et al. Lower Hospital Volume Is Associated With Higher In-Hospital Mortality in Patients Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Report From the NCDR. Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes. 2013;6(6):659-67. doi:10.1161/circoutcomes.113.000233.
14. Kutty RS, Jones N, Moorjani N. Mechanical Complications of Acute Myocardial Infarction. Cardiology Clinics. 2013;31(4);519-31. doi:10.1016/j.ccl.2013.07.004.
15. Jones BM, Kapadia SR, Smedira NG, et al. Ventricular septal rupture complicating acute myocardial infarction: a contemporary review. European Heart Journal. 2014;Aug 14;35(31):2060-8. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehu248.
16. Bonnefoy-Cudraz E, Bueno H, Casella G, et al. Editor’s Choice — Acute Cardiovascular Care Association Position Paper on Intensive Cardiovascular Care Units: An update on their definition, structure, organisation and function. European Heart Journal: Acute Cardiovascular Care. 2018;7(1):80-95. doi:10.1177/2048872617724269.
17. Mebazaa A, Combes A, van Diepen S, et al. Management of cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction. 2018;44(6):760-73. doi:10.1007/s00134-018-5214-9.
18. Lauridsen MD, Gammelager H, Schmidt M, et al. Acute kidney injury treated with renal replacement therapy and 5-year mortality after myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock: a nationwide population-based cohort study. 2015;19:452. doi:10.1186/s13054-015-1170-8.
19. Thiele H, Akin I, Sandri M, et al. PCI Strategies in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock. 2017;377(25):2419-32. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1710261.
20. Basir MB, Kapur NK, Patel K, et al. Improved Outcomes Associated with the use of Shock Protocols: Updates from the National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions. 2019;93(7):1173-83. doi:10.1002/ccd.28307.
21. Tehrani B, Truesdell A, Singh R, et al. Implementation of a Cardiogenic Shock Team and Clinical Outcomes (INOVA-SHOCK Registry): Observational and Retrospective Study. JMIR Res Protoc. 2018;7(6):e160. doi:10.2196/resprot.9761.
22. Truesdell AG, Tehrani B, Singh R, et al. ‘Combat’ Approach to Cardiogenic Shock. Interv Cardiol. 2018;13(2):81-6. doi:10.15420/icr.2017:35:3.
23. Rab T, Ratanapo S, Kern KB, et al. Cardiac Shock Care Centers. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2018;72(16):1972-80. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2018.07.074.
24. Ibanez B, James S, Agewall S, et al. ESC Scientific Document Group, 2017 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation: The Task Force for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). European Heart Journal. 2018;39(2):119-77. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehx393.
25. Tehrani B, Truesdell AG, Sherwood MW, et al. Standardized Team-Based Care for Cardiogenic Shock. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2019;72(13):1659-69. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2018.12.084.
Review
For citations:
Boytsov S.A., Akchurin R.S., Pevzner D.V., Shakhnovich R.M., Ruda M.Ya. Cardiac shock care center — the next stage in the treatment of cardiogenic shock. Russian Journal of Cardiology. 2019;(11):173-181. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15829/1560-4071-2019-11-173-181
Views:
1041
Email this article 