Intra-aortic balloon pump in patients with myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock of stages A and B
https://doi.org/10.18087/cardio.2022.7.n2156
Abstract
This article presents two clinical cases of patients with myocardial infarction and stage A (at risk) and B (beginning) cardiogenic shock who underwent intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation (IABP). In patients with a high risk of classic cardiogenic shock and/or the no-reflow phenomenon, stenting of the infarct-related coronary artery during this type of mechanical circulatory support was performed without complications. Theoretical and practical aspects of using IABP at different stages of cardiogenic shock are discussed.
Supporting agencies: State Assignment of the Research Institute of Cardiology of the Tomsk National Research Medical Center # AAAA-A20‑120041090007‑8. No conflict of interest is reported.
About the Authors
V. V. Vyshlov
Research Institute of Cardiology, Tomsk National Research Medical Center, Tomsk
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Doctor of Medical Sciences, Associate Professor, Leading Researcher, Department of Emergency Cardiology
O. O. Panteleev
Research Institute of Cardiology, Tomsk National Research Medical Center, Tomsk
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Junior Researcher, Department of Emergency Cardiology
V. V. Ryabov
Research Institute of Cardiology, Tomsk National Research Medical Center, Tomsk
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Doctor of Medical Sciences, Associate Professor, Head of the Department of Emergency Cardiology, Deputy Director for Scientific and Medical Work
References
1. Redfors B, Angerås O, Råmunddal T, Dworeck C, Haraldsson I, Ioanes D et al. 17-year trends in incidence and prognosis of cardiogenic shock in patients with acute myocardial infarction in western Sweden. International Journal of Cardiology. 2015;185:256–62. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.03.106
2. Wayangankar SA, Bangalore S, McCoy LA, Jneid H, Latif F, Karrowni W et al. Temporal Trends and Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Interventions for Cardiogenic Shock in the Setting of Acute Myocardial Infarction. A report from the CathPCI Registry. JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions. 2016;9(4):341– 51. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2015.10.039
3. Baran DA, Grines CL, Bailey S, Burkhoff D, Hall SA, Henry TD et al. SCAI clinical expert consensus statement on the classification of cardiogenic shock: This document was endorsed by the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM), and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) in April 2019. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions. 2019;94(1):29–37. DOI: 10.1002/ccd.28329
4. Thiele H, Zeymer U, Neumann F-J, Ferenc M, Olbrich H-G, Hausleiter J et al. Intraaortic Balloon Support for Myocardial Infarction with Cardiogenic Shock. New England Journal of Medicine. 2012;367(14):1287–96. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1208410
5. McDonagh TA, Metra M, Adamo M, Gardner RS, Baumbach A, Böhm M et al. 2021 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure. European Heart Journal. 2021;42(36):3599–726. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehab368
6. Rezkalla SH, Stankowski RV, Hanna J, Kloner RA. Management of No-Reflow Phenomenon in the Catheterization Laboratory. JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions. 2017;10(3):215–23. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.11.059
7. Kim MC, Cho JY, Jeong HC, Lee KH, Park KH, Sim DS et al. LongTerm Clinical Outcomes of Transient and Persistent No Reflow Phenomena following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction. Korean Circulation Journal. 2016;46(4):490–8. DOI: 10.4070/kcj.2016.46.4.490
8. Papapostolou S, Andrianopoulos N, Duffy SJ, Brennan AL, Ajani AE, Clark DJ et al. Long-term clinical outcomes of transient and persistent no-reflow following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI): a multicentre Australian registry. EuroIntervention. 2018;14(2):185– 93. DOI: 10.4244/EIJ-D-17-00269
9. Heusch G, Kleinbongard P, Böse D, Levkau B, Haude M, Schulz R et al. Coronary Microembolization: From Bedside to Bench and Back to Bedside. Circulation. 2009;120(18):1822–36. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.888784
10. Mahmoudi M, Hauville C, Gaglia MA, Sardi G, Torguson R, Xue Z et al. The impact of intra-aortic balloon counter-pulsation on in-hospital mortality in patients presenting with anterior ST-elevation myocardial infarction without cardiogenic shock. Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine. 2012;13(6):328–30. DOI: 10.1016/j.carrev.2012.08.001 1
11. Kono T, Morita H, Nishina T, Fujita M, Onaka H, Hirota Y et al. Aortic Counterpulsation May Improve Late Patency of the Occluded Coronary Artery in Patients With Early Failure of Thrombolytic Therapy. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 1996;28(4):876–81. DOI: 10.1016/S0735-1097(96)00240-9
12. Ohman EM, Nanas J, Stomel RJ, Leesar MA, Nielsen DWT, O’Dea D et al. Thrombolysis and Counterpulsation to Improve Survival in Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Hypotension and Suspected Cardiogenic Shock or Heart Failure: Results of the TACTICS Trial. Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis. 2005;19(1):33–9. DOI: 10.1007/s11239-005-0938-0
13. Mishra S, Chu WW, Torguson R, Wolfram R, Deible R, Suddath WO et al. Role of Prophylactic Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump in High-Risk Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. The American Journal of Cardiology. 2006;98(5):608–12. DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2006.03.036
Review
For citations:
Vyshlov V.V., Panteleev O.O., Ryabov V.V. Intra-aortic balloon pump in patients with myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock of stages A and B. Kardiologiia. 2022;62(7):68-72. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18087/cardio.2022.7.n2156
Views:
1252
Email this article 
Post a Comment 
