top banner image  

topleft corner image     top right corner image
 


bullet

JACC Homepage JACC Imaging Homepage
Still not a subscriber to JACC Imaging or JACC Interventions?

     top nav image

     

J Am Coll Cardiol Intv, 2009; 2:146-152, doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2008.11.006
© 2009 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lim, H. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Lim, H. S.
Related Collections
Right arrowRelated Article

Clinical Research

Survival of Elderly Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock

Han S. Lim, MBBS*,**, Omar Farouque, MBBS, FRACP, PhD, FACC*,{dagger}, Nick Andrianopoulos, MBBS, MBiostat{ddagger}, Bryan P. Yan, MBBS, FRACP§,{dagger}{dagger}, Chris C.S. Lim, MBBS||, Angela L. Brennan, RN, CCRN{ddagger}, Chris M. Reid, BA, MSc, DipEd, PhD{ddagger}, Melanie Freeman, MBBS*, Kerrie Charter, RN, CCRN*, Alexander Black, MBBS, FRACP{dagger},§, Gishel New, MBBS, FRACP, PhD, FACC||, Andrew E. Ajani, MBBS, FRACP, FJFICM, MD{dagger},{ddagger},§, Stephen J. Duffy, MBBS, MRCP, FRACP, PhD#, David J. Clark, MBBS, FRACP*,* on behalf of the Melbourne Interventional Group

* Department of Cardiology, Austin Hospital, Melbourne, Australia
{dagger} University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
{ddagger} Monash Centre for Cardiovascular Research & Education in Therapeutics, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
§ Department of Cardiology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Australia
|| Department of Cardiology, Box Hill Hospital, Melbourne, Australia
Department of Cardiology, Geelong Hospital, Melbourne, Australia
# Department of Cardiology, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Australia
** Discipline of Physiology, School of Molecular and Biomedical Science, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia
{dagger}{dagger} Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Prince of Wales Hospital and Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China

* Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. David J. Clark, Austin Health, Cardiology, PO Box 5555, 145 Studley Road, Heidelberg, Melbourne, Victoria 3084, Australia (Email: clarkdavidj{at}hotmail.com).

Objectives: We sought to assess clinical outcomes of elderly patients (age ≥75 years) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction (MI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS) in a contemporary multicenter PCI registry.

Background: Although benefits of early PCI have been shown in younger groups, few studies have reported on clinical outcomes in elderly shock patients using current PCI techniques.

Methods: We analyzed baseline characteristics and procedural and clinical outcomes in 143 consecutive patients presenting with MI and CS who underwent PCI from the Melbourne Interventional Group registry between 2004 and 2007.

Results: Of the 143 patients, 31.5% (n = 45) were elderly and 68.5% were younger (age <75 years). Elderly patients were more likely to be female (46.7% vs. 22.4%, p < 0.01) and have hypertension (77.8% vs. 46.4%, p < 0.01), previous MI (31.1% vs. 15.5%, p = 0.03), renal failure (24.4% vs. 11.3%, p < 0.05) and multivessel coronary artery disease (93.1% vs. 68.3%, p < 0.01). Stent (86.7% vs. 94.8%, p = 0.09), glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor (68.9% vs. 65.3%, p = 0.67), and intra-aortic balloon pump (57.8% vs. 58.2%, p = 0.97) use were similar in both groups. In-hospital, 30-day, and 1-year mortality in the elderly group versus the younger group were 42.2% vs. 33.7% (p = 0.32), 43.2% vs. 36.1% (p = 0.42), and 52.6% vs. 46.8% (p = 0.56), respectively.

Conclusions: In this study, the 1-year survival of elderly patients with acute MI complicated by CS undergoing PCI was comparable to younger patients. These data suggest that in elderly patients presenting with CS, benefit is possible with selective use of early revascularization and merits further investigation.

Key Words: cardiogenic shock • elderly • acute myocardial infarction • percutaneous coronary intervention

Abbreviations and Acronyms
  CS = cardiogenic shock
  MACE = major adverse cardiac events
  MI = myocardial infarction
  PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention
  STEMI = ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction
  TIMI = Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction
  TVR = target vessel revascularization


Related Article

Contemporary Management of Cardiogenic Shock: Age Is Opportunity
Judith S. Hochman and Adam H. Skolnick
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Intv. 2009 2: 153-155. [Full Text] [PDF]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J Am Coll Cardiol IntvHome page
J. S. Hochman and A. H. Skolnick
Contemporary Management of Cardiogenic Shock: Age Is Opportunity
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Intv., February 1, 2009; 2(2): 153 - 155.
[Full Text] [PDF]



 
   
 
home link current link search link archive link topics link cardiology careers link