Cardiogenic shock medical therapy: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
====Left Ventricular Assist Device Placement==== | ====Left Ventricular Assist Device Placement==== | ||
In the setting of pronounced [[hypotension]] despite medical therapy and IABP placement, placement of a left [[ventricular assist device]] (which augments the pump-function of the heart) should be considered. A ventricular assist device should only be placed in those patients in whom the cardiogenic shock is deemed to be reversible or if it is being used as a bridge option. <ref>Farrar DJ, Lawson JH, Litwak P, Cederwall G. Thoratec VAD system as a bridge to heart transplantation. J Heart Transplant. Jul-Aug 1990;9(4):415-22; discussion 422-3.</ref> | In the setting of pronounced [[hypotension]] despite medical therapy and IABP placement, placement of a left [[ventricular assist device]] (which augments the pump-function of the heart) should be considered. A ventricular assist device should only be placed in those patients in whom the cardiogenic shock is deemed to be reversible or if it is being used as a bridge option.<ref>Farrar DJ, Lawson JH, Litwak P, Cederwall G. Thoratec VAD system as a bridge to heart transplantation. J Heart Transplant. Jul-Aug 1990;9(4):415-22; discussion 422-3.</ref> | ||
Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices (PLVADs) such as Tandem heart, Impella, [[ECMO]] can be used as a bridge to [[transplant]], left [[ventricular assist device]] (LVAD) or decision making.They provide improved hemodynamics in patients with cardiogenic shock. | Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices (PLVADs) such as Tandem heart, Impella, [[ECMO]] can be used as a bridge to [[transplant]], left [[ventricular assist device]] (LVAD) or decision making.They provide improved hemodynamics in patients with cardiogenic shock. | ||
Revision as of 15:39, 1 March 2013
|
Cardiogenic Shock Microchapters |
|
Diagnosis |
|---|
|
Treatment |
|
Case Studies |
|
Cardiogenic shock medical therapy On the Web |
|
American Roentgen Ray Society Images of Cardiogenic shock medical therapy |
|
Risk calculators and risk factors for Cardiogenic shock medical therapy |
Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]
Medical Therapy
Urgent Revascularizaiton
If the patient has an ST elevation myocardial infarction, then primary angioplasty should be considered to restore flow to the culprit artery. Consideration should also be given to restoration of flow in the non-culprit territories in the setting of cardiogenic shock.
Administration of streptokinase therapy to patients with cardiogenic shock has not been associated with an improvement in survival.[1] These studies, however, oare older and are limited by the infrequent use of adjunctive PCI. If a patient is not deemed a candidate for primary angioplasty, then consideration should be given to fibrinolyitc administration.
Volume Management
The goal of managing the patient with cardiogenic shock is to optimize the filling of the left ventricle so that the Starling relationship and mechanical performance and contractility of the heart is optimized. In the setting of acute MI, a pulmonary capillary wedge pressure of 18 to 20 mm Hg may optimize left ventricular filling. Filling pressures higher than this may lead to LV dilation, and poorer left ventricular function.
Pharmacologic Hemodynamic Support
If hypotension persists despite adequate left ventricular filling pressures, then the addition of vasconstrictors and/or inotropes is suggested. Hemodynamic monitoring is essential to assure that a target mean arterial pressure (MAP) of 60 to 65 mmHg is acheived to maintain perfusion to vital organs (brain, kidney, heart).
Selection of a Vasopressor or an Inotrope
Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) > 80 mm Hg
Dobutamine may be preferable over dopamine at this blood pressure. Dopamine increase contractility and heart rate and thereby increases myocardial oxygen demand. Dobutamine reduces the systemic vascular resistance and may not increase oxygen demands as much as dopamine, and is preferable at this systolic blood pressure. Phosphodiesterase inhibitors (PDIs) such as milrinone and inamrinone (formerly known as amrinone) are not dependent upon the adrenoreceptor activity and patients may not develop tolerance, and they may be less likely to increase myocardial oxygen demands. However, the addition of a vasopressor is often required as these agents reduce preload and afterload. PDIs are more likely to be associated with tachyarrhythmias than dobutamine.
Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) < 80 mm Hg
At systolic blood pressures < 80 mm Hg dopamine should be initiated first. The patient may not tolerate the vasodilating effects of dobutamine at this blood pressure. The initial dose of dopamine is 5 to 10 mcg/kg/min.
If the dopamine at doses of 20 mcg/kg/min does not achieve a MAP of 60-65 mm Hg, then norepinephrine can be added at an initial dose of 0.5 mcg/kg/min which can then be titrated up to 3.3 mcg/kg/min. Norepinephrine is avoided as a first line agent because of its adverse impact upon renal perfusion.
If norepinephrine does not generate a MAP of 60 mm Hg, then epinephrine can be added. Epinephrine increases both the stroke volume and heart rate, but is associated with lactic acidosis
Mechanical Support
Intra-aortic Balloon Placement
In the setting of acute MI, the placement of an intra-aortic balloon pump (which reduces workload for the heart, and improves perfusion of the coronary arteries) should be considered.
A recent meta-analysis of randomized trial data, however, challenges this common practice and class 1B recommendation.[2] In a meta-analysis of seven randomized trials enrolling 1009 patient, IABP placement in STEMI was not associated with an improvement in mortality or in left ventricular function but was associated with a higher rate of stroke and bleeding. When data from non-randomized cohort studies were evaluated in a meta-analysis (n=10,529 STEMI patients with cardiogenic shock), IABP placement was associated with an 18% relative risk reduction in 30 day mortality among patients treated with a fibrinolytic agent. This particular analysis is confounded by the fact that those patients in whom an IABP was placed underwent adjunctive percutaneous intervention (PCI) more frequently. In this non-randomized cohort analysis, IABP placement in patients undergoing primary angioplasty was associated with a 6% relative increase in mortality (p<0.0008). Thus, neither randomized nor observational data support IABP placement in the setting of primary PCI for cardiogenic shock, and careful consideration should be given to the risk of stroke and bleeding prior to IABP placement in this population.
Left Ventricular Assist Device Placement
In the setting of pronounced hypotension despite medical therapy and IABP placement, placement of a left ventricular assist device (which augments the pump-function of the heart) should be considered. A ventricular assist device should only be placed in those patients in whom the cardiogenic shock is deemed to be reversible or if it is being used as a bridge option.[3]
Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices (PLVADs) such as Tandem heart, Impella, ECMO can be used as a bridge to transplant, left ventricular assist device (LVAD) or decision making.They provide improved hemodynamics in patients with cardiogenic shock.
Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG) Placement
CABG in this setting is associated with high rates of mortality and morbidity and is generally not performed if primary angioplasty can be performed.
Mechanical Ventilation
Mechanical ventilation is often required in patients with cardiogenic shock to assure adequate oxygenation.
2013 Revised ACCF/AHA Guidelines for the Management of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (DO NOT EDIT)[4]
Treatment of Cardiogenic Shock in Patients with STEMI (DO NOT EDIT)[4]
| Class I |
| "1. Emergency revascularization with either PCI or CABG is recommended in suitable patients with cardiogenic shock due to pump failure after STEMI irrespective of the time delay from MI onset.[5][6][7](Level of Evidence: B)" |
| "2. In the absence of contraindications, fibrinolytic therapy should be administered to patients with STEMI and cardiogenic shock who are unsuitable candidates for either PCI or CABG.[8][9][10](Level of Evidence: B)" |
| Class IIa |
| "1. The use of intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation can be useful for patients with cardiogenic shock after STEMI who do not quickly stabilize with pharmacological therapy.[11][12][13][2][14](Level of Evidence: B)" |
| Class IIb |
| "1. Alternative left ventricular (LV) assist devices for circulatory support may be considered in patients with refractory cardiogenic shock.(Level of Evidence: C)" |
References
- ↑ "Effectiveness of intravenous thrombolytic treatment in acute myocardial infarction. Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Streptochinasi nell'Infarto Miocardico (GISSI)". Lancet. 1 (8478): 397–402. 1986. PMID 2868337. Unknown parameter
|month=ignored (help) - ↑ 2.0 2.1 Sjauw KD, Engström AE, Vis MM, van der Schaaf RJ, Baan J, Koch KT, de Winter RJ, Piek JJ, Tijssen JG, Henriques JP (2009). "A systematic review and meta-analysis of intra-aortic balloon pump therapy in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: should we change the guidelines?". European Heart Journal. 30 (4): 459–68. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehn602. PMID 19168529. Unknown parameter
|month=ignored (help) - ↑ Farrar DJ, Lawson JH, Litwak P, Cederwall G. Thoratec VAD system as a bridge to heart transplantation. J Heart Transplant. Jul-Aug 1990;9(4):415-22; discussion 422-3.
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 O'Gara PT, Kushner FG, Ascheim DD; et al. (2012). "2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines". Circulation. doi:10.1161/CIR.0b013e3182742c84. PMID 23247303. Unknown parameter
|month=ignored (help) - ↑ Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Webb JG; et al. (1999). "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. 341 (9): 625–34. doi:10.1056/NEJM199908263410901. PMID 10460813. Unknown parameter
|month=ignored (help) - ↑ Babaev A, Frederick PD, Pasta DJ, Every N, Sichrovsky T, Hochman JS (2005). "Trends in management and outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock". JAMA. 294 (4): 448–54. doi:10.1001/jama.294.4.448. PMID 16046651. Unknown parameter
|month=ignored (help) - ↑ Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Webb JG; et al. (2006). "Early revascularization and long-term survival in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction". JAMA. 295 (21): 2511–5. doi:10.1001/jama.295.21.2511. PMC 1782030. PMID 16757723. Unknown parameter
|month=ignored (help) - ↑ "Indications for fibrinolytic therapy in suspected acute myocardial infarction: collaborative overview of early mortality and major morbidity results from all randomised trials of more than 1000 patients. Fibrinolytic Therapy Trialists' (FTT) Collaborative Group". Lancet. 343 (8893): 311–22. 1994. PMID 7905143. Unknown parameter
|month=ignored (help) - ↑ Morrow DA, Antman EM, Charlesworth A; et al. (2000). "TIMI risk score for ST-elevation myocardial infarction: A convenient, bedside, clinical score for risk assessment at presentation: An intravenous nPA for treatment of infarcting myocardium early II trial substudy". Circulation. 102 (17): 2031–7. PMID 11044416. Unknown parameter
|month=ignored (help) - ↑ French JK, Feldman HA, Assmann SF; et al. (2003). "Influence of thrombolytic therapy, with or without intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation, on 12-month survival in the SHOCK trial". Am. Heart J. 146 (5): 804–10. doi:10.1016/S0002-8703(03)00392-2. PMID 14597928. Unknown parameter
|month=ignored (help) - ↑ Barron HV, Every NR, Parsons LS; et al. (2001). "The use of intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: data from the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction 2". Am. Heart J. 141 (6): 933–9. doi:10.1067/mhj.2001.115295. PMID 11376306. Unknown parameter
|month=ignored (help) - ↑ Chen EW, Canto JG, Parsons LS; et al. (2003). "Relation between hospital intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation volume and mortality in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock". Circulation. 108 (8): 951–7. doi:10.1161/01.CIR.0000085068.59734.E4. PMID 12912817. Unknown parameter
|month=ignored (help) - ↑ Sanborn TA, Sleeper LA, Bates ER; et al. (2000). "Impact of thrombolysis, intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation, and their combination in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: a report from the SHOCK Trial Registry. SHould we emergently revascularize Occluded Coronaries for cardiogenic shocK?". J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 36 (3 Suppl A): 1123–9. PMID 10985715. Unknown parameter
|month=ignored (help) - ↑ Ohman EM, Nanas J, Stomel RJ; et al. (2005). "Thrombolysis and counterpulsation to improve survival in myocardial infarction complicated by hypotension and suspected cardiogenic shock or heart failure: results of the TACTICS Trial". J. Thromb. Thrombolysis. 19 (1): 33–9. doi:10.1007/s11239-005-0938-0. PMID 15976965. Unknown parameter
|month=ignored (help)