Survival benefit of IABP in pre- versus post-primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with cardiogenic shock

Abstract

Abstract Background Cardiogenic shock (CS) remains a major cause of in-hospital mortality in the setting of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). However, little evidence is available regarding the optimal order of intra-aortic balloon counter-pulsation (IABP) insertion and primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). The aim of this study was to assess the hospital and short-term survival benefits of two different IABP insertion approaches, before versus after PPCI in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock. Results Total mortality was 80 patients representing 48.4% of the total 165 studied patients; 60 patients died during the hospital admission period, while the remaining 20 patients died post-discharge. In-hospital mortality was significantly higher in Post-PPCI–IABP group 40 (49.4%) versus Pre-PPCI–IABP group 20 (23.8%) (P = 0.001). Moreover, the mortality difference between the two groups was sustained over six-month follow-up period, where 15 patients (18.5%) died in the Post-PPCI–IABP group, while only 5 patients 6.0% died in the Pre-PPCI–IABP (P = 0.001). Conclusions Early IABP insertion before PPCI is associated with improved in-hospital and long-term survival when used for patients presenting with AMI complicated by hemodynamic instability.

Keywords

• Acute myocardial infarction
• Cardiogenic shock
• Intra-aortic balloon counter-pulsation
• Mortality
• Percutaneous coronary intervention