Search

Valvular heart disease (VHD) is one of the most frequent causes of heart failure (HF) and is associated with poor prognosis, particularly among patients with conservative management. The development and improvement of catheter-based VHD interventions have broadened the indications for transcatheter valve interventions from inoperable/high-risk patients to younger/lower-risk patients. Cardiogenic shock (CS) associated with severe VHD is a clinical condition with a very high risk of mortality for which surgical treatment is often deemed a prohibitive risk. Transcatheter valve interventions might be a promising alternative in this setting given that they are less invasive. However, supportive scientific evidence is scarce and often limited to small case series. Current guidelines on VHD do not contain specific recommendations on how to manage patients with both VHD and CS. The purpose of this clinical consensus statement, developed by a group of international experts invited by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) Scientific Documents and Initiatives Committee, is to perform a review of the available scientific evidence on the management of CS associated with left-sided VHD and to provide a rationale and practical approach for the application of transcatheter valve interventions in this specific clinical setting.

Objectives: Aim of this study is to evaluate safety, feasibility, and mid-term outcome of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in cardiogenic shock (CS)., Background: Balloon aortic valvuloplasty in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis (SAS) complicated by CS is indicated but associated with a grim prognosis. TAVI might be a more reasonable treatment option in this setting but data are scant., Methods: From March 2008 to February 2019, 51 patients with severe aortic valvulopathy (native SAS or degenerated aortic bioprosthesis) and CS treated by TAVI in 11 European centers were included in this multicenter registry. Demographic, clinical, and procedural data were collected, as well as clinical and echocardiographic follow-up., Results: The mean age of our study population was 75.8 ± 13, 49% were women, and mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score was 19 ± 15%. Device success was achieved in 94.1%, with a 5% incidence of moderate/severe paravalvular leak. The 30-day events were mortality 11.8%, stroke 2.0%, vascular complications 5.9%, and acute kidney injury 34%. Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 early safety endpoint was reached in 35.3% of cases. At 1-year of follow-up, the mortality rate was 25.7% and the readmission for congestive heart failure was 8.6%., Conclusions: TAVI seems to be a therapeutic option for patients with CS and SAS or degenerated aortic bioprosthesis in terms of both safety and efficacy at early and long-term follow-up., (© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: The management of patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock is highly complex, and outcomes may depend on the time of hospital admission and subsequent intervention (ie, ON-hours versus OFF-hours). The CULPRIT-SHOCK trial (Culprit Lesion Only PCI Versus Multivessel PCI in Cardiogenic Shock) demonstrated superior outcome for culprit-lesion-only versus immediate multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention in patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction, multivessel disease, and cardiogenic shock. However, it is unknown whether the time of hospital admission affects the overall outcome of these high-risk patients., Methods: We analyzed patients from the CULPRIT-SHOCK trial with respect to the time of hospital admission. We divided patients in ON-hours and OFF-hours groups and further stratified them according to their individual revascularization strategy. Outcome measures consisted of a composite end point of death or renal-replacement therapy within 30 days and mortality within 1 year., Results: Out of 686 patients randomized in the CULPRIT-SHOCK trial, 444 patients (64.7%) presented during ON-hours, whereas 242 patients (35.3%) presented during OFF-hours. Death or renal-replacement therapy at 30 days occurred to a similar extent in patients admitted during ON-hours (51.0%) and OFF-hours (50.0%; P =0.80). Similarly, 1-year mortality was not affected by the time of hospital admission (54.4% ON-hours versus 51.7% OFF-hours, P =0.49). Regardless of admission time, patients had a benefit from culprit-lesion-only as compared to immediate multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention. The composite end point at 30 days occurred in 45.1% versus 57.6% of patients admitted ON-hours and in 47.7% versus 51.9% of patients admitted OFF-hours ( P interaction =0.29). Death within 1 year occurred in 49.4% versus 60.0% of patients admitted during ON-hours and in 51.4% versus 51.9% of patients admitted OFF-hours ( P interaction =0.20)., Conclusions: Among patients with myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock, the risk of death or renal-replacement therapy at 30 days, and mortality at 1 year did not differ significantly according to the time of hospital admission. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01927549.

Most of the guideline-recommended treatment strategies for patients with acute coronary syndromes have been tested in large randomised clinical trials. Still, a major challenge is represented by patients with acute myocardial infarction admitted with impending or established cardiogenic shock. Despite early revascularization the mortality of cardiogenic shock remains high and roughly half of patients do not survive until hospital discharge or 30-day follow-up. However, there is only limited evidence-based scientific knowledge in the cardiogenic shock setting. Therefore, recommendations and actual treatments are often based on retrospective or prospective registry data and extrapolations from randomised clinical trials in acute myocardial infarction patients without cardiogenic shock. This position statement will summarise the current consensus of the diagnosis and treatment of patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock based on current evidence and will provide advice for clinical practice.

For patients with myocardial infarct-related cardiogenic shock (CS), urgent percutaneous coronary intervention is the recommended treatment strategy to limit cardiac and systemic ischemia. However, a specific therapeutic intervention is often missing in non-ischemic CS cases. Though drug treatment with inotropes and/or vasopressors may be required to stabilize the patient initially, their ongoing use is associated with excess mortality. Coronary intervention in unstable patients often leads to further hemodynamic compromise either during or shortly after revascularization. Support devices like the intra-aortic balloon pump failed to improve clinical outcomes in infarct-related CS. Currently, more powerful and active hemodynamic support devices unloading the left ventricle such as transvalvular microaxial pumps are available and are being increasingly used. However, as for other devices large randomized trials are not yet available, and device use is based on registry data and expert consensus. In this article, a multidisciplinary group of experienced users of transvalvular microaxial pumps outlines the pathophysiological background on hemodynamic changes in CS, the available mechanical support devices, and current guideline recommendations. Furthermore, different hemodynamic situations in several case-based scenarios are used to illustrate candidate settings and to provide the theoretic and scientific rationale for left-ventricular unloading in these scenarios. Finally, organization of shock networks, monitoring, weaning, and typical complications and their prevention are discussed., (Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The aim was to assess the extent of coronary artery disease and revascularization using baseline SYNTAX Score (bSS) and residual SYNTAX Score (rSS) in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) secondary to ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The prognostic impact of SYNTAX Score (SS) was evaluated and assessed for additive value over clinical risk scores., Background: bSS and rSS have been proven to be useful in risk stratification in stable coronary artery disease as well as in acute coronary syndromes, but they have not been studied in STEMI related CS., Methods: Patients from a multinational prospective study of CS were analyzed. The study population was divided into tertiles according to bSS. The Cox regression and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to assess the predictive power of SS., Results: Of the 61 studied patients, 85% were male and the mean age was 67 years. Median bSS was 22 (15-32) and rSS 7 (0-13). Ninety-day mortality was 43%. bSS had negative prognostic value in multivariable analysis (HR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01-1.10). However, additive value over clinical risk scores was limited. rSS was not associated with mortality, whereas post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) TIMI flow 3 of infarct-related artery (IRA) predicted better survival., Conclusions: In STEMI related CS, the added value of bSS and rSS over clinical assessment and risk scores is limited. Our results suggest that while immediate PCI in order to restore blood flow to the IRA is essential, deferring the treatment of residual lesions does not seem to be associated with worse prognosis., (© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)