American Heart Journal
Volume 146, Issue 5 , Pages 804-810 , November 2003

Influence of thrombolytic therapy, with or without intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation, on 12-month survival in the SHOCK trial

Presented in part at the 72nd Scientific Sessions of the American Heart Association, Atlanta, Ga, November 1999.

  • John K French, MB, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Green Lane Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: John French, MB, PhD, Department of Cardiology, Green Lane Hospital, Private Bag 92189, Auckland 1030, New Zealand.
  • ,
  • Henry A Feldman, PhD

      Affiliations

    • New England Research Institutes, Watertown, Mass, USA
  • ,
  • Susan F Assmann, PhD

      Affiliations

    • New England Research Institutes, Watertown, Mass, USA
  • ,
  • Timothy Sanborn, MD

      Affiliations

    • Evanston Northwestern Healthcare, Division of Cardiology, Evanston, Ill, USA
  • ,
  • Sebastian T Palmeri, MD

      Affiliations

    • University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
  • ,
  • David Miller, MD

      Affiliations

    • Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York, NY, USA
  • ,
  • Jean Boland, MD

      Affiliations

    • Centre Hospitalier Regional Citadelle, Liège, Belgium
  • ,
  • Christopher E Buller, MD

      Affiliations

    • Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, British Coulmbia, Canada
  • ,
  • Richard Steingart, MD

      Affiliations

    • Winthrop University Hospital, Mineola, NY, USA
  • ,
  • Lynn A Sleeper, ScD

      Affiliations

    • New England Research Institutes, Watertown, Mass, USA
  • ,
  • Judith S Hochman, MD

      Affiliations

    • New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA
  • ,
  • SHOCK Investigators

Received 4 February 2002 ,Accepted 21 March 2003.

References 

  1. Goldberg RJ, Gore JM, Alpert JS, et al.  Cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction (incidence and mortality from a community wide perspective 1975–1988). N Engl J Med. 1991;325:1117–1122
  2. Goldberg RJ, Samad NA, Yarzebski J, et al.  Temporal trends in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 1999;340:1162–1168
  3. Hochman JS, Boland J, Sleeper LA, et al.  Current spectrum of cardiogenic shock and effect of early revascularization on mortality (results of an international registry). Circulation. 1995;91:873–881
  4. Hochman JS, Buller CE, Sleeper LA, et al.  Cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction (etiologies, management and outcome: a report from the SHOCK Trial Registry). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;36:1063–1070
  5. Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Webb JG, et al.  Early revascularization in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med. 1999;341:625–634
  6. Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, White HD, et al.  One-year survival following early revascularization for cardiogenic shock. JAMA. 2001;285:190–192
  7. Berger PB, Holmes DR, Stebbins AL, et al.  Impact of an aggressive invasive catheterization and revascularization strategy on mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock in the Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO-I) Trial (an observational study). Circulation. 1997;96:122–127
  8. Holmes DR, Califf RM, Van de Werf F, et al.  Difference in countries' use of resources and clinical outcome for patients with cardiogenic shock after myocardial infarction (results from the GUSTO Trial). Lancet. 1997;349:75–78
  9. Barron HV, Every NR, Parsons LS, et al.  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. 2001;141:933–939
  10. Sanborn TA, Sleeper LA, Bates ER, et al.  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). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;36:1123–1129
  11. Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Godfrey E, et al.  Should we emergently revascularize occluded coronaries for cardiogenic shock (an international randomized trial of emergency PTCA/CABG: trial design). Am Heart J. 1999;137:313–321
  12. Cohen M, Rentrop KP. Limitation of myocardial ischemia by collateral circulation during sudden controlled coronary artery occlusion in human subjects (a prospective study). Circulation. 1986;74:469–476
  13. Califf RM, Harrell FE, Lee KL, et al.  Changing efficacy of coronary revascularization (implications for patient selection). Circulation. 1988;78(Suppl I):I-185–191
  14. Sanborn TA. Core laboratory angiographic findings, angioplasty results, and relation to treatment effect: results from the randomized SHOCK Trial. 48th Annual Scientific Sessions of the American College of Cardiology, 1999, New Orleans, La
  15. Statistical Analysis System. (Version 8.2). Cary, NC: SAS Institute; 2002
  16. Webb JG, Sanborn TA, Sleeper LA, et al.  Percutaneous coronary intervention for cardiogenic shock in the SHOCK Trial Registry. Am Heart J. 2001;141:964–970
  17. Thiemann DR, Coresh J, Schulman SP, et al.  Lack of benefit for intravenous thrombolysis in patients with myocardial infarction who are older than 75 years. Circulation. 2000;101:2239–2246
  18. White HD. Thrombolytic therapy in the elderly. [commentary] Lancet. 2000;356:2028–2030
  19. Ohman ME, Nannas J, Stomel RJ. Thrombolysis and counterpulsation to improve cardiogenic shock survival (TACTICS) (results of a prospective randomized trial). Circulation. 2000;102:600
  20. Hudson MP, Granger CB, Stebbins AL, et al.  Cardiogenic shock survival and use of intraaortic balloon counterpulsation (results from the GUSTO I and III Trials). Circulation. 1999;100(Suppl I):I-370

 Supported by grants from the NHLBI (RO1-HL 50020 and HL-49970, 1994 to 1999, Bethesda, Md).

PII: S0002-8703(03)00392-2

doi: 10.1016/S0002-8703(03)00392-2

American Heart Journal
Volume 146, Issue 5 , Pages 804-810 , November 2003