Cardiogenic Shock. Carlos Cafri,, MD

Similar documents
Cardiogenic Shock in Acute MI

Intraaortic Balloon Counterpulsation- Supportive Data for a Role in Cardiogenic Shock ( Be Still My Friend )

How to do Primary Angioplasty. - Patients with Cardiogenic Shock

PHARMACOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT OF CARDIOGENIC SHOCK

Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock

Management of Cardiogenic shock. Prof. Christian JM Vrints

ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction & Cardiogenic Shock. - What Should We Do?

Management of Acute Shock and Right Ventricular Failure

TREATMENT OF HIGHER RISK PATIENTS INTRODUCTION TO PROTECTED PCI WITH IMPELLA. IMP v4

Οξύ στεφανιαίο σύνδρομο και καρδιογενής καταπληξία. Επεμβατική προσέγγιση. Σωτήριος Πατσιλινάκος Κωνσταντοπούλειο Γ.Ν. Ν. Ιωνίας

The development of cardiogenic shock portends an extremely poor prognosis. Cardiogenic Shock: A Lethal Complication of Acute Myocardial Infarction

Cardiogenic shock: Current management

IABP SHOCK II trial:

CARDIOGENIC SHOCK. Antonio Pesenti. Università degli Studi di Milano Bicocca Azienda Ospedaliera San Gerardo Monza (MI)

A case of post myocardial infarction ventricular septal rupture CHRISTOFOROS KOBOROZOS, MD

DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Cath Lab Essentials : LV Assist Devices for Hemodynamic Support (IABP, Impella, Tandem Heart, ECMO)

Rationale for Prophylactic Support During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Low cardiac output & Mechanical Support นายแพทย อรรถภ ม ส ศ ภอรรถ ศ ลยศาสตร ห วใจและทรวงอก โรงพยาบาล ราชว ถ

DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Definition. Low-cardiac-output state resulting in life threatening end-organ hypoperfusion. Criteria: MAP 30 mm Hg lower than baseline)

Can Angiographic Complete Revascularization Improve Outcomes for Patients with Decreased LV Function? NO!

PUMP FAILURE COMPLICATING AMI: ISCHAEMIC VSR

STEMI and Cardiogenic Shock. The rules and solution. Dave Kettles St Dominics and Frere Hospitals East London ZA

4/11/2017. Cardiomyopathy. John Steuter, MD Bryan Heart. Disclosures. No Conflicts. Cardiomyopathy. WHO Classification

Ted Feldman, M.D., MSCAI FACC FESC

Emergency surgery in acute coronary syndrome

Intravenous Inotropic Support an Overview

Acute Coronary Syndrome. Cindy Baker, MD FACC Director Peripheral Vascular Interventions Division of Cardiovascular Medicine

Complications of Acute Myocardial Infarction

Chest Pain: To Cath or Not? Part I

Acute Coronary Syndrome. Sonny Achtchi, DO

Bridging With Percutaneous Devices: Tandem Heart and Impella

Indications of Coronary Angiography Dr. Shaheer K. George, M.D Faculty of Medicine, Mansoura University 2014

Out-of-hospital Cardiac Arrest. Franz R. Eberli MD, FESC, FAHA Cardiology Triemli Hospital Zurich, Switzerland

Assist Devices in STEMI- Intra-aortic Balloon Pump

MANAGEMENT OF CARDIOGENIC SHOCK

Role of echocardiography in the assessment of ischemic heart disease 분당서울대학교병원윤연이

A Future for the IABP in Cardiogenic Shock? Holger Thiele Medical Clinic II (Cardiology/Angiology/Intensive Care) University of Lübeck, Germany

Rhondalyn C. McLean. 2 ND YEAR RESEARCH ELECTIVE RESIDENT S JOURNAL Volume VII, A. Study Purpose and Rationale

Treatment Options for Angina

Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support for Cardiogenic Shock. 24 th Annual San Diego Heart Failure Symposium Ryan R Reeves, MD FSCAI

Hemodynamic improvement upon levosimendan treatment in low cardiac output patients following coronary artery bypass graft

High Risk PCI for Heart Failure

Imaging ischemic heart disease: role of SPECT and PET. Focus on Patients with Known CAD

Approach to Multi Vessel disease with STEMI

Management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction Update 2009 Late comers: which options?

Medical Management of Acute Coronary Syndrome: The roles of a noncardiologist. Norbert Lingling D. Uy, MD Professor of Medicine UERMMMCI

STEMI AND MULTIVESSEL CORONARY DISEASE

Stable Angina: Indication for revascularization and best medical therapy

AllinaHealthSystem 1

Medical Management of Acute Heart Failure

Clinical Seminar. Which Diabetic Patient is a Candidate for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - European Perspective

Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices

Perioperative Cardiology Consultations for Noncardiac Surgery Ischemic Heart Disease

CHRONIC CAD DIAGNOSIS

Case year old female nursing home resident with a hx CAD, PUD, recent hip fracture Transferred to ED with decreased mental status BP in ED 80/50

APPENDIX F: CASE REPORT FORM

M/39 CC D. => peak CKMB (12 hr later) ng/ml T.chol/TG/HDL/LDL 180/150/48/102 mg/dl #

Cardiovascular Nursing Practice: A Comprehensive Resource Manual and Study Guide for Clinical Nurses 2 nd Edition

Rhythm Disorders 2017 TazKai LLC and NRSNG.com

Rationale for Left Ventricular Support During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Revascularization in Severe LV Dysfunction: The Role of Inducible Ischemia and Viability Testing

Risk Stratification of ACS Patients. Frans Van de Werf, MD, PhD University of Leuven, Belgium

Recovering Hearts. Saving Lives.

How to approach non-infarct related artery disease in patients with STEMI in a limited resource setting

Coronary Interventions Indications, Treatment Options and Outcomes

ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction

What is new in the Treatment of STEMI? Malcolm R. Bell, MBBS Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN

CHRONIC HEART FAILURE : WHAT ELSE COULD WE OFFER TO OUR PATIENTS? Cardiac Rehabilitation Society of Thailand

Coronary interventions

FFR-guided Complete vs. Culprit Only Revascularization in AMI Patients Ki Hong Choi, MD On Behalf of FRAME-AMI Investigators

presenters 2010 Sameh Sabet Ain Shams University

8th Emirates Cardiac Society Congress in collaboration with ACC Middle East Conference Dubai: October Acute Coronary Syndromes

Cardiac Viability Testing A Clinical Perspective Annual Cardiac Imaging Symposium. Lisa M Mielniczuk MD FRCPC University of Ottawa Heart Institute

'Coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with acute coronary syndromes: perioperative strategies to improve outcome'

Takotsubo syndrome. Ευτυχία Σμπαρούνη, FACC, FESC

ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction

Culprit PCI vs MultiVessel PCI for Acute Myocardial Infarction

Ramani GV et al. Mayo Clin Proc 2010;85:180-95

HOW TO PERFORM LEFT VENTRICULAR ASSISTANCE IN THE CATHLAB. Andreas Baumbach, MD FESC FRCP Bristol Heart Institute University Hospitals Bristol UK

Who is the high risk patient?

Ventricular tachycardia and ischemia. Martin Jan Schalij Department of Cardiology Leiden University Medical Center

Patient characteristics Intervention Comparison Length of followup

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

Counterpulsation. John N. Nanas, MD, PhD. Professor and Head, 3 rd Cardiology Dept, University of Athens, Athens, Greece

Cardiogenic Shock. Nick Tehrani, MD

Diagnosis of CAD S Richard Underwood

Imaging and heart failure

Safety of Single- Versus Multi-vessel Angioplasty for Patients with AMI and Multi-vessel CAD

Coronary Revascularization for Severe LV Dysfunction Is s. Is the concept of viability testing still viable?

Management of Cardiogenic Shock. Dr Stephen Pettit, Consultant Cardiologist

The Window for Fibrinolysis. Frans Van de Werf, MD, PhD Leuven, Belgium

What the Cardiologist needs to know from Medical Images

Acute Coronary Syndromes

2010 ACLS Guidelines. Primary goals of therapy for patients

Beta-blockers in Patients with Mid-range Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction after AMI Improved Clinical Outcomes

Cindy L. Grines MD FACC FSCAI

Angina Luis Tulloch, MD 03/27/2012

2017 AHA/ACC Clinical Performance and Quality Measures for Adults With ST-Elevation and Non ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction

Transcription:

Cardiogenic Shock Carlos Cafri,, MD

SHOCK= Inadequate Tissue Mechanisms: Perfusion Inadequate oxygen delivery Release of inflammatory mediators Further microvascular changes, compromised blood flow and further cellular hypoperfusion Clinical Manifestations: Multiple organ failure Hypotension

Differentiating Types of Shock

Backgound Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a state of inadequate tissue perfusion due to cardiac dysfunction, and complicates 7-10% of cases of acute myocardial infarction Without treatment, cardiogenic shock is associated with a 70-80% mortality rate, and is the leading cause of death in patients hospitalized for an acute myocardial infarction Proper recognition and management of patients who develop cardiogenic shock will result in substantial improvements in early and late mortality

Frequency of CS Has Remained Steady Over Time Frequency of Cardiogenic Shock NRMI STEMI Registry 1 N=25,311 NRMI Registry 1 Inclusion of 293,633 patients from Jan 1995-May 2004 with STEMI or new LBBB 775 US Hospitals with on-site PCI CS developed in 25,311 (8.6%) pts CS present on admission in 29% Gusto-1 3 1995 7.2% 1 Babaev et al JAMA 2005 294:448 2 Goldberg RJ NEJM 1991; 325:1117 3 Holmes DR JACC 1995 26:668

Reversible Myocardial Dysfunction Myocardial stunning represents persistent myocardial dysfunction that occurs despite the restoration of normal flow. Develops as a result of alterations in calcium homeostasis, oxidative stress, and decreased myofilament responsiveness to calcium Hibernating myocaridum is a persistent state of myocardial dysfunction at rest because of severely reduced coronary flow. Develops as an adaptive response to hypoperfusion Both conditions may indicate recovery over time as reperfusion occurs Hollenberg Ann Int Med 1999; 131:47-99

Etiology of Cardiogenic Shock Acute Myocardial Infarction (most common) Pump Failure Large infarction Smaller infarctions with preexisting CHF Infarction extension or expansion Mechanical complications Acute MR caused by papillary muscle dysfunction Free wall rupture Pericardial tamponade Other conditions End-stage cardiomyopathy, myocarditis, prolonged cardiopulmonary bypass, aortic stenosis, mitral stenosis, left atrial mxyoma, acute aortic insufficiency

Causes of Cardiogenic Shock SHOCK Trial and Registry (N=1160) 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 74.5% LV failure 8.3% 4.6% 3.4% 1.7% 8% Acute MR VSD RV Infarct Cardiac Rupture Other Hochman Circ 1995; 91:873-81

Shock onset after acute MI occurred within 24 h in 74% of the patients with predominant LV failure Predictors of Early (< 24 h) Cardiogenic Shock Chest pain at shock onset ST-segment elevation in two or more leads Multiple infarct locations Inferior MI Left main disease Smoking Predictors of Late ( 24 h) Cardiogenic Shock Recurrent ischemia, Q waves in 2 leads LAD culprit vessel Webb JACC 2000; 36:1084

Clinical Observations from the SHOCK Trial The average LVEF is only moderately depressed (30%) with a wide range of EFs and LV sizes noted - While most patients were on IABP support and ionotropes, hemodynamic measurements demonstrated persistent hypotension, low CO, and high filling pressures despite a 30% LVEF The SVR was not markedly elevated in many cases, with the SVR ranging from 1350-1400 dynes-sec-cm -5 despite ionotropic support - Cardiac power = CI x MAP was the most powerful hemodynamic predictor of mortality - The ability to raise SVR may be an important compensatory mechanism to support BP Endogenous/exogenous vasodilators Hochman Circulation inhibit 2003; this 107:2998 response

Clinical Observations from the SHOCK Trial The classic notion that cardiogenic shock develops only when 40% of the myocardium is irreversibly damaged is inconsistent with: - 50% survival in PCI-treated patients - Improved LVEF in patients undergoing revascularization - NYHA Class I symptoms in 58% of patients after survival of the cardiogenic shock Resolution of the ischemia and neurohumeralinflammatory mediates may result in resolution of the cardiogenic shock The range of LVEFs, LV size, and SVR in patients with cardiogenic shock indicate that the pathogenesis may be multifactorial. Hochman Circulation 2003; 107:2998

Cardiogenic Shock: Diagnosis Clinical definition 1 is a decreased cardiac output and evidence of tissue hypoperfusion in the presence of adequate filling pressures: - Marked and persistent (> 30 min) hypotension with a systolic BP < 90 mmhg - Reduction in the cardiac index (<2.2 L/min/M 2 ) - Normal or elevated PCWP (> 15 mmhg) Circulatory shock 2 is diagnosed by poor tissue perfusion, including oliguria, clouded sensorium, and cool mottled extremities 2 Hollenberg Ann Int Med 1999; 131:47-99

Cardioge nic Shock Incidence Pathogenesis Diagnosis Treatment Options Pharmacologic Treatment PCI-CABG The SHOCK Trial Circulatory Support Prognosis ACC/AHA Guidelines Clinical Implications

PCI for Cardiogenic Shock Cardiogenic Shock Early Shock, Diagnosed on Hospital Presentation Delayed Onset Shock Echocardiogram to Rule Out Mechanical Defects Fibrinolytic therapy if all of the following are present: 1. Greater than 90 minutes to PCI 2. Less than 3 hours post STEMI onset 3. No contraindications Arrange prompt transfer to invasive procedure-capable center IABP Cardiac Catheterization and Coronary Angiography Arrange rapid transfer to invasive procedure-capable center 1-2 vessel CAD Moderate 3-vessel CAD Severe 3-vessel CAD Left main CAD PCI IRA PCI IRA Immediate CABG Staged Multivessel PCI Staged CABG Cannot be performed http:www.americanheart.org/stemi

4 Potential Therapies Pressors Intra-aortic aortic Balloon Pump (IABP) Fibrinolytics Revascularization: CABG/PCI Refractory shock: ventricular assist device, cardiac transplantation

Pressors do not change outcome Dopamine <2 renal vascular dilation <2-10 +chronotropic/inotropic+ (beta effects) >10 vasoconstriction (alpha effects) Dobutamine positive inotrope, vasodilates, arrhythmogenic at higher doses Norepinephrine(Levophed Levophed): vasoconstriction, inotropic stimulant. Should only be used for refractory hypotension with dec SVR.

The SHOCK Trial (N=302) Randomization from Apr 1993-Nov 1998 Emergency Revascularization N = 152 Medical Therapy N = 150 Angioplasty or CABG within 6 hours after randomization IABP recommended in all pts IABP Thrombolytic Therapy Delayed Revascularization after 54 hours following randomization, if Primary Endpoint: Overall 30 appropriate day mortality Seconday Endpoints: 6 month and 1 year mortality Hochman et al NEJM 1999;341:625

The Shock Trial: Treatment Hochman et al NEJM 1999;341:625

Shock Trial: 30 day mortality (1 o Endpoint) Hochman et al NEJM 1999;341:625

SHOCK trial Hochman J et al. N Engl J Med 1999;341:625-634

SHOCK 6 years later Kaplan-Meier Long-term Survival of All Patients and Those Discharged Alive Following Hospitalization Hochman, J. S. et al. JAMA 2006;295:2511-2515. Copyright restrictions may apply.

PCI v. CABG in the Shock Trial Despite increased patient co-morbidities, include the presence of diabetes mellitus, multivessel disease, left main disease, patients treated with CABG had similar one year outcomes to patients treated with PCI PCI successful revasc, 77.2% PCI complete revasc, 23.1% CABG complete revasc, 87.2% CABG LIMA, 15.2% White HD et al Circulation 2005; 112:199

Shock Trial: Mortality Rates with PCI Overall Mortality = 50% 120 100 80 60 40 N=80 with angiograms 85 67 39 38 55 100 20 0 Severe MR Succ PCI Unsuc c PCI 3 2 0,1 TIMI Flow Webb et al JACC 2003;42:1380

6 Yr Outcome of SHOCK All Patients Hochman et al JAMA 2006; 295:2511

ACC/AHA Guidelines for PCI in Patients with Cardiogenic Shock I IIa IIb III Primary PCI is recommended for patients less than 75 years with ST elevation or LBBB or who develop shock within 36 hours of MI and are suitable for revascularization that can be performed within 18 hours of shock. I IIa IIb III Primary PCI is reasonable for selected patients 75 years or older with ST elevation or LBBB or who develop shock within 36 hours of MI and are suitable for revascularization that can be performed within 18 hours of shock. http:www.americanheart.org/stem