Emergency Coronary Bypass for Cardiogenic Shock

Guyton, Robert A.; Arcidi, Joseph M.; Langford, Dale J.; Morris, Denise; Liberman, Henry; Hatcher, Charles R.

doi:10.1097/00132586-198810000-00024

Cited by 10 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…3,4 Nonrandomized studies report markedly lower mortality rates among patients who have undergone revascularization for shock. [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] However, selection bias is evident. 17,18 In small series of patients undergoing early primary angioplasty for cardiogenic shock, in-hospital mortality rates ranged from 26 percent to 72 percent.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The trial was designed in the early 1990s in the context of a high mortality rate among patients with cardiogenic shock, as well as reported reductions in mortality of 30 percent or more among patients undergoing angioplasty or coronary-artery surgery in nonrandomized series. [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15] These large reductions clearly reflected bias related to selection for treatment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Early Revascularization in Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock

et al. 1999

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early Revascularization in Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock

et al. 1999

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Thrombolysis is now the cornerstone of modern myocardial infarction care and its use in women has been recently reviewed [91]. From the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) trial, it appears that in an uncomplicated infarction, there is no advan tage of routine predischarge cardiac cathe terization with or without percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty, and in fact this approach may be hazardous [92,93], Should cardiogenic shock develop, new approaches such as emergent PTCA [94], or coronary bypass graft surgery [95], have demonstrated improved survival.…”

Section: Therapymentioning

confidence: 99%

Myocardial Infarction in Women

Hendel¹

1990

Cardiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of mortality in the United States regardless of gender. Women infrequently present with myocardial infarction as the initial presentation of coronary heart disease and have unrecognized infarctions more frequently than men. Myocardial infarction in women has a similar clinical presentation as in men, with the exception of an increased incidence of non-Q wave myocardial infarctions. Complications of acute infarction in women are probably similar although the majority of data has been drawn from studies involving predominantly men. Women do however experience more strokes and have less postinfarction pericarditis than their male counterparts. Left ventricular function remains the key prognostic determinant in both sexes. Recurrent infarction is increased in women with resultant elevated mortality rates. However, complex ventricular ectopy following myocardial infarction is not predictive of cardiovascular mortality in women. Early and late survival is decreased in women, an effect probably related to the increase in mean age of women as compared with men. Overall, gender distinctions are not usually made in the majority of studies involving myocardial infarction. As epidemiologic, pathophysiologic and clinical factors may be different regarding heart disease in women, further research in this important area is warranted.

show abstract

“…Indeed, in large fibrinolytic trials patients presenting with cardiogenic shock had in-hospital survival rates as low as 20% to 50% [27][28][29]. Subsequent nonrandomized studies, although subject to selection bias, suggested improved survival for patients with MI and cardiogenic shock who underwent mechanical reperfusion (PCI or coronary artery bypass graft [CABG]) [30][31][32]. However, data from multiple MI registries suggest that the majority of patients presenting with shock are not urgently revascularized due to difficulties with transportation, lack of data about the efficacy of this approach, and concern about subjecting critically ill patients to an invasive procedure [26,33].…”

Section: Cardiogenic Shockmentioning

confidence: 99%

Heart failure and shock complicating acute coronary syndromes

Spencer

Meyer²

2005

Curr Cardiol Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Heart failure (HF) complicating acute coronary syndromes (ACS) is a heterogeneous clinical syndrome characterized by varying degrees of pulmonary congestion, and in its severest form, by profound organ hypoperfusion (cardiogenic shock). The occurrence of HF in patients with ACS has long been recognized as a strong predictor of increased morbidity and mortality. As such, there is increased interest in better understanding the epidemiology and management of this common clinical syndrome. This manuscript reviews recent insights from work in this area, including recent important trials evaluating the impact of renin-angiotensin system inhibition, early beta-blockade, and aggressive reperfusion strategies.

show abstract

Emergency Coronary Bypass for Cardiogenic Shock

Cited by 10 publications

References 0 publications

Early Revascularization in Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock

Early Revascularization in Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock

Myocardial Infarction in Women

Heart failure and shock complicating acute coronary syndromes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About