|
|
||||||||||
|
J Am Coll Cardiol, 2000; 36:1084-1090 © 2000 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation |



a St. Pauls Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
New England Research Institutes, Watertown, Massachusetts, USA
Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
CHR Citadelle, Liège, Belgium
|| St. LukesRoosevelt Hospital Center, New York, New York, USA
¶ Green Lane Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand
Manuscript received February 16, 2000; revised manuscript received June 2, 2000, accepted June 7, 2000.
Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. John Webb, St. Pauls Hospital, 1081 Burrard Street, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6Z 1Y6
webb{at}providencehealth.bc.ca
OBJECTIVES
We sought to examine the implications of the timing of onset of cardiogenic shock (CS) after acute myocardial infarction (MI).
BACKGROUND
Little information is available about the relationships between timing, clinical substrate, management and outcomes of shock.
METHODS
The multinational SHOCK Trial Registry enrolled MI patients with CS from 1993 to 1997. Cardiogenic shock was predominantly attributable to left ventricular (LV) failure in 815 Registry patients for whom temporal data were available. We examined factors related to the timing of shock onset and the relation of temporal onset to in-hospital outcomes.
RESULTS
Overall, shock developed a median of 6.2 h after MI symptom onset. Shock onset varied by culprit artery: left main, median 1.7 h; right, 3.5 h; circumflex, 3.9 h; left anterior descending (LAD), 11.0 h; saphenous vein graft, 10.9 h (p = 0.025). Early shock (<24 h) occurred in 74.1% and was associated with chest pain at shock onset, ST-segment elevation in two or more leads, multiple infarct locations, inferior MI, left main disease and smoking. Late shock (
24 h) was associated with recurrent ischemia, Q waves in two or more leads and LAD culprit vessel. Mortality was higher in patients with early versus late shock (62.6% vs. 53.6%, p = 0.022).
CONCLUSIONS
Shock onset after acute MI occurred within 24 h in 74% of the patients with predominant LV failure. Mortality was slightly higher in patients developing shock early rather than later. Many factors influence when shock develops, which has implications for its management.
| ||||||||||||||||||||
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
K. P. Bouki, G. Pavlakis, and E. Papasteriadis Management of Cardiogenic Shock Due to Acute Coronary Syndromes Angiology, March 1, 2005; 56(2): 123 - 130. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. G. Webb, A. M. Lowe, T. A. Sanborn, H. D. White, L. A. Sleeper, R. G. Carere, C. E. Buller, S. C. Wong, J. Boland, V. Dzavik, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention for cardiogenic shock in the SHOCK trial J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., October 15, 2003; 42(8): 1380 - 1386. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D.R Holmes The final common pathway Eur. Heart J., February 1, 2003; 24(3): 214 - 216. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M.G Lindholm, L Kober, S Boesgaard, C Torp-Pedersen, J Aldershvile, and on behalf of the TRACE study group Cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: Prognostic impact of early and late shock development Eur. Heart J., February 1, 2003; 24(3): 258 - 265. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | SUBSCRIPTIONS | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | CARDIOSOURCE | SEARCH | HELP | FEEDBACK |