Download PDF
Kardiologie up2date 2014; 10(02): 159-169
DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1365735
Kardiovaskuläre Notfälle
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Revaskularisation und periinterventionelle Therapie im infarktbedingten kardiogenen Schock

Georg Fürnau
,
Holger Thiele
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
28 July 2014 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints All articles of this category

Abstract

Early revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting has been proven as beneficial for survival in patients with myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. This review focuses on technical aspects of coronary revascularization and additive medication. One of the most important actual questions in intervention in cardiogenic shock is the decision to perform culprit lesion only or multi-vessel percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. A large randomized study is currently enrolling patients to answer this question.

Kernaussagen

  • Der kardiogene Schock ist die für die Prognose bedeutsamste Komplikation des akuten Myokardinfarkts.

  • Aktuell ist nur die möglichst schnelle Revaskularisation eine validierte Therapie mit positivem Effekt auf das Überleben.

  • Meist ist eine Revaskularisation durch eine primäre PCI möglich, bei komplexer, für eine PCI nicht geeigneter Anatomie kann nach Rücksprache im Heart-Team auch eine sofortige CABG in Erwägung gezogen werden.

  • Der Frage, ob nur die akute Infarktläsion oder bei Mehrgefäßerkrankung auch andere Stenosen behandelt werden soll, wird gerade in einer großen multizentrischen Studie nachgegangen.

  • Eine Thrombolyse sollte nur bei Patienten durchgeführt werden, für die eine PCI nicht innerhalb einer adäquaten Zeit erreicht werden kann. Aufgrund der Infrastruktur in Deutschland sollten diese Fälle aber faktisch nicht vorkommen.

  • Die adjunktive Begleitmedikation zur Revaskularisation sollte aufgrund fehlender Daten für den kardiogenen Schock gemäß den Empfehlungen für den akuten Myokardinfarkt gegeben werden.

 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Goldberg RJ, Samad NA, Yarzebski J et al. Temporal trends in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1999; 340: 1162-1168
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Goldberg RJ, Spencer FA, Gore JM et al. Thirty-year trends (1975 to 2005) in the magnitude of, management of, and hospital death rates associated with cardiogenic shock in patients with acute myocardial infarction: a population-based perspective. Circulation 2009; 119: 1211-1219
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Hasdai D, Holmes DR Jr, Califf RM et al. Cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: predictors of death. GUSTO Investigators. Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue-Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries. Am Heart J 1999; 138: 21-31
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Thiele H, Zeymer U, Neumann FJ et al. Intraaortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med 2012; 367: 1287-1296
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Alexander JH, Reynolds HR, Stebbins AL et al. Effect of tilarginine acetate in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock: the TRIUMPH randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2007; 297: 1657-1666
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Thiele H, Schuler G. Cardiogenic shock: to pump or not to pump?. Eur Heart J 2009; 30: 389-390
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Thom T, Haase N, Rosamond W et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics – 2006 update: a report from the American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. Circulation 2006; 113: e85-e151
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Hasdai D, Behar S, Wallentin L et al. A prospective survey of the characteristics, treatments and outcomes of patients with acute coronary syndromes in Europe and the Mediterranean basin; the Euro Heart Survey of Acute Coronary Syndromes (Euro Heart Survey ACS). Eur Heart J 2002; 23: 1190-1201
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Werdan K, Ruß M, Buerke M et al. Deutsch-Österreichische S3-Leitlinie Infarktbedingter kardiogener Schock. Diagnose, Monitoring und Therapie. . Der Kardiologe 2011; 5: 166-224
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Matsuzaki M, Gallagher KP, Kemper WS et al. Sustained regional dysfunction produced by prolonged coronary stenosis: gradual recovery after reperfusion. Circulation 1983; 68: 170-182
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Reynolds HR, Hochman JS. Cardiogenic shock: current concepts and improving outcomes. Circulation 2008; 117: 686-697
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Post H, Schwarzl M, Steendijk P et al. Coronary microembolisation induces acute and progressive diastolic heart failure. Eur Heart J 2010; 31: 44
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Webb JG et al. Early revascularization in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. SHOCK Investigators. Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock. N Engl J Med 1999; 341: 625-634
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, White HD et al. One-year survival following early revascularization for cardiogenic shock. JAMA 2001; 285: 190-192
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Webb JG et al. Early revascularization and long-term survival in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. JAMA 2006; 295: 2511-2515
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Jeger RV, Urban P, Harkness SM et al. Early revascularization is beneficial across all ages and a wide spectrum of cardiogenic shock severity: A pooled analysis of trials. Acute Card Care 2011; 13: 14-20
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Urban P, Stauffer JC, Bleed D et al. A randomized evaluation of early revascularization to treat shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. The (Swiss) Multicenter Trial of Angioplasty for Shock-(S)MASH. . Eur Heart J 1999; 20: 1030-1038
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Hamm CW, Bassand JP, Agewall S et al. ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation: The Task Force for the management of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J 2011; 32: 2999-3054
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Steg PG, James SK, Atar D et al. ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation. Eur Heart J 2012; 33: 2569-2619
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Jeger RV, Radovanovic D, Hunziker PR et al. Ten-year trends in the incidence and treatment of cardiogenic shock. Ann Intern Med 2008; 149: 618-626
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Levine GN, Hochman JS. Thrombolysis in Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock. J Thromb Thrombolysis 1995; 2: 11-20
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Cavender MA, Milford-Beland S, Roe MT et al. Prevalence, predictors, and in-hospital outcomes of non-infarct artery intervention during primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry). Am J Cardiol 2009; 104: 507-513
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Frobert O, Lagerqvist B, Olivecrona GK et al. Thrombus aspiration during ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2013; 369: 1587-1597
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Carrick D, Oldroyd KG, McEntegart M et al. A Randomized Trial of Deferred Stenting versus Immediate Stenting to Prevent No-or Slow Reflow in Acute ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (DEFER-STEMI). J Am Coll Cardiol 2014; DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2014.02.530.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Bernat I, Abdelaal E, Plourde G et al. Early and late outcomes after primary percutaneous coronary intervention by radial or femoral approach in patients presenting in acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock. Am Heart J 2013; 165: 338-343
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Tousek P, Rokyta R, Tesarova J et al. Routine upfront abciximab versus standard periprocedural therapy in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for cardiogenic shock: The PRAGUE-7 Study. An open randomized multicentre study. . Acute Card Care 2011; 13: 116-122
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Bonello L, De Labriolle A, Roy P et al. Bivalirudin with provisional glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in patients undergoing primary angioplasty in the setting of cardiogenic shock. Am J Cardiol 2008; 102: 287-291
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Steg PG, van ’t HofA, Hamm CW et al. Bivalirudin started during emergency transport for primary PCI. N Engl J Med 2013; 369: 2207-2217
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Stone GW, Witzenbichler B, Guagliumi G et al. Bivalirudin during primary PCI in acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2008; 358: 2218-2230
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar