Search

Importance: Myocardial infarction is a frequent cause of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). The long-term effect of early coronary angiography on patients with OHCA with possible coronary trigger but no ST-segment elevation remains unclear. Objective: To compare the clinical outcomes of early unselective angiography with the clinical outcomes of a delayed or selective approach for successfully resuscitated patients with OHCA of presumed cardiac origin without ST-segment elevation at 1-year follow-up. Design, Setting, and Participants: The TOMAHAWK trial was a multicenter, international (Germany and Denmark), investigator-initiated, open-label, randomized clinical trial enrolling 554 patients between November 23, 2016, to September 20, 2019. Patients with stable return of spontaneous circulation after OHCA of presumed cardiac origin but without ST-segment elevation on the postresuscitation electrocardiogram were eligible for inclusion. A total of 554 patients were randomized to either immediate coronary angiography after hospital admission or an initial intensive care assessment with delayed or selective angiography after a minimum of 24 hours. All 554 patients were included in survival analyses during the follow-up period of 1 year. Secondary clinical outcomes were assessed only for participants alive at 1 year to account for the competing risk of death. Interventions: Early vs delayed or selective coronary angiography and revascularization if indicated. Main Outcomes and Measures: Evaluations in this secondary analysis included all-cause mortality after 1 year, as well as severe neurologic deficit, myocardial infarction, and rehospitalization for congestive heart failure in survivors at 1 year. Results: A total of 281 patients were randomized to the immediate angiography group and 273 to the delayed or selective group, with a median age of 70 years (IQR, 60-78 years). A total of 369 of 530 patients (69.6%) were male, and 268 of 483 patients (55.5%) had a sho

Background In acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock the use of mechanical circulatory support devices remains controversial and data from randomized clinical trials are very limited. Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation provides the strongest hemodynamic support in addition to oxygenation. However, despite increasing use it has not yet been properly investigated in randomized trials. Therefore, a prospective randomized adequately powered clinical trial is warranted. Study Design The ECLS-SHOCK trial is a 420-patient controlled, international, multicenter, randomized, open-label trial. It is designed to compare whether treatment with ECLS in addition to early revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention or alternatively coronary artery bypass grafting and optimal medical treatment is beneficial in comparison to no-ECLS in patients with severe infarct-related cardiogenic shock. Patients will be randomized in a 1:1 fashion to one of the two treatment arms. The primary efficacy endpoint of ECLS-SHOCK is 30-day mortality. Secondary outcome measures such as hemodynamic, laboratory, and clinical parameters will serve as surrogate endpoints for prognosis. Furthermore, a longer follow-up at 6 and 12 months will be performed including quality of life assessment. Safety endpoints include peripheral ischemic vascular complications, bleeding and stroke. Conclusions The ECLS-SHOCK trial will address essential questions of efficacy and safety of ECLS in addition to early revascularization in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock.

BackgroundMyocardial infarction is a frequent cause of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. However, the benefits of early coronary angiography and revascularization in resuscitated patients without electrocardiographic evidence of ST-segment elevation are unclear.MethodsIn this multicenter trial, we randomly assigned 554 patients with successfully resuscitated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest of possible coronary origin to undergo either immediate coronary angiography (immediate-angiography group) or initial intensive care assessment with delayed or selective angiography (delayed-angiography group). All the patients had no evidence of ST-segment elevation on postresuscitation electrocardiography. The primary end point was death from any cause at 30 days. Secondary end points included a composite of death from any cause or severe neurologic deficit at 30 days.ResultsA total of 530 of 554 patients (95.7%) were included in the primary analysis. At 30 days, 143 of 265 patients (54.0%) in the immediate-angiography group and 122 of 265 patients (46.0%) in the delayed-angiography group had died (hazard ratio, 1.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00 to 1.63; P=0.06). The composite of death or severe neurologic deficit occurred more frequently in the immediate-angiography group (in 164 of 255 patients [64.3%]) than in the delayed-angiography group (in 138 of 248 patients [55.6%]), for a relative risk of 1.16 (95% CI, 1.00 to 1.34). Values for peak troponin release and for the incidence of moderate or severe bleeding, stroke, and renal-replacement therapy were similar in the two groups.ConclusionsAmong patients with resuscitated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest without ST-segment elevation, a strategy of performing immediate angiography provided no benefit over a delayed or selective strategy with respect to the 30-day risk of death from any cause.

AIMS The mortality in cardiogenic shock (CS) is high. The role of specific mechanical circulatory support (MCS) systems is unclear. We aimed to compare patients receiving Impella versus ECLS (extracorporal life support) with regard to baseline characteristics, feasibility, and outcomes in CS. METHODS AND RESULTS This is a retrospective cohort study including CS patients over 18 years with a complete follow-up of the primary endpoint and available baseline lactate level, receiving haemodynamic support either by Impella 2.5 or ECLS from two European registries. The decision for device implementation was made at the discretion of the treating physician. The primary endpoint of this study was all-cause mortality at 30 days. A propensity score for the use of Impella was calculated, and multivariable logistic regression was used to obtain adjusted odds ratios (aOR). In total, 149 patients were included, receiving either Impella (n = 73) or ECLS (n = 76) for CS. The feasibility of device implantation was high (87%) and similar (aOR: 3.14; 95% CI: 0.18-56.50; P = 0.41) with both systems. The rates of vascular injuries (aOR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.10-3.50; P = 0.56) and bleedings requiring transfusions (aOR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.09-2.10; P = 0.29) were similar in ECLS patients and Impella patients. The use of Impella or ECLS was not associated with increased odds of mortality (aOR: 4.19; 95% CI: 0.53-33.25; P = 0.17), after correction for propensity score and baseline lactate level. Baseline lactate level was independently associated with increased odds of 30 day mortality (per mmol/L increase; OR: 1.29; 95% CI: 1.14-1.45; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS In CS patients, the adjusted mortality rates of both ECLS and Impella were high and similar. The baseline lactate level was a potent predictor of mortality and could play a role in patient selection for therapy in future studies. In patients with profound CS, the type of device is likely to be less important compared with other parameters inclu

Current evidence regarding the effect of intravenous morphine administration on reperfusion injury and/or cardioprotection in patients with myocardial infarction is conflicting. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of morphine administration, on infarct size and reperfusion injury assessed by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) in a large multicenter ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) population. In total, 734 STEMI patients reperfused by primary percutaneous coronary intervention <12 h after symptom onset underwent CMR imaging at eight centers for assessment of myocardial damage. Intravenous morphine administration was recorded in all patients. CMR was completed within one week after infarction using a standardized protocol. The clinical endpoint of the study was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) within 12 months after infarction. Intravenous morphine was administered in 61.8% (n = 454) of all patients. There were no differences in infarct size (17%LV, interquartile range [IQR] 8–25%LV versus 16%LV, IQR 8–26%LV, p = 0.67) and microvascular obstruction (p = 0.92) in patients with versus without morphine administration. In the subgroup of patients with early reperfusion within 120 min and reduced flow of the infarcted vessel (TIMI-flow ≤2 before PCI) morphine administration resulted in significantly smaller infarcts (12%LV, IQR 12–19 versus 19%LV, IQR 10–29, p = 0.035) and reduced microvascular obstruction (p = 0.003). Morphine administration had no effect on hard clinical endpoints (log-rank test p = 0.74) and was not an independent predictor of clinical outcome in Cox regression analysis. In our large multicenter CMR study, morphine administration did not have a negative effect on myocardial damage or clinical prognosis in acute reperfused STEMI. In patients, presenting early ( ≤120 min) morphine may have a cardioprotective effect as reflected by smaller infarcts; but this finding has to be assessed in further well-desig

Objectives: To analyze the use and prognostic impact of active mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices in a large prospective contemporary cohort of patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Background: Although increasingly used in clinical practice, data on the efficacy and safety of active MCS devices in patients with CS complicating AMI are limited. Methods: This is a predefined subanalysis of the CULPRIT-SHOCK randomized trial and prospective registry. Patients with CS, AMI and multivessel coronary artery disease were categorized in two groups: (1) use of at least one active MCS device vs. (2) no active MCS or use of intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) only. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death or renal replacement therapy at 30 days. Results: Two hundred of 1055 (19%) patients received at least one active MCS device (n = 112 Impella®; n = 95 extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO); n = 6 other devices). The primary endpoint occurred significantly more often in patients treated with active MCS devices compared with those without active MCS devices (142 of 197, 72% vs. 374 of 827, 45%; p < 0.001). All-cause mortality and bleeding rates were significantly higher in the active MCS group (all p < 0.001). After multivariable adjustment, the use of active MCS was significantly associated with the primary endpoint (odds ratio (OR) 4.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.7–5.9; p < 0.001). Conclusions: In the CULPRIT-SHOCK trial, active MCS devices were used in approximately one fifth of patients. Patients treated with active MCS devices showed worse outcome at 30 days and 1 year.