Journal
AMERICAN HEART JOURNAL
Volume 163, Issue 6, Pages 938-945Publisher
MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2012.03.012
Keywords
-
Categories
Funding
- German Research Foundation
- German Heart Research Foundation
- German Cardiac Society
- Arbeitsgemeinschaft Leitender Kardiologischer Krankenhausarzte
- University of Leipzig-Heart Center
- Maquet Cardiopulmonary AG, Hirrlingen, Germany
- Teleflex Medical, Everett, MA
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Background In current guidelines, intraaortic balloon pumping (IABP) is considered a class 1 indication in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. However, evidence is mainly based on retrospective or prospective registries with a lack of randomized clinical trials. Therefore, IABP is currently only used in 20% to 40% of cardiogenic shock cases. The hypothesis of this trial is that IABP in addition to early revascularization by either percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting will improve clinical outcome of patients in cardiogenic shock. Study Design The IABP-SHOCK II study is a 600-patient, prospective, multicenter, randomized, open-label, controlled trial. The study is designed to compare the efficacy and safety of IABP versus optimal medical therapy on the background of early revascularization by either percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting. Patients will be randomized in a 1:1 fashion to 1 of the 2 treatments. The primary efficacy end point of IABP-SHOCK II is 30-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcome measures, such as hemodynamic, laboratory, and clinical parameters, will serve as surrogate end points for prognosis. Furthermore, an intermediate and long-term follow-up at 6 and 12 months will be performed. Safety will be assessed, by the GUSTO bleeding definition, peripheral ischemic complications, sepsis, and stroke. Conclusions The IABP-SHOCK II trial addresses important questions regarding the efficacy and safety of IABP in addition to early revascularization in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction. (Am Heart J 2012;163:938-45.)
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available