American Heart Journal
Volume 147, Issue 6 , Pages 950-952 , June 2004

Which elderly patients with cardiogenic shock should be treated with percutaneous coronary intervention?

  • John K French, MB, PhD, FACC

      Affiliations

    • Green Lane Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: John French, MB, PhD, Department of Cardiology, Liverpool Health Service, Locked Bag 7103, Liverpool NSW 1871, Australia.

References 

  1. Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS) Principal Investigators and their associates . CASS (a randomized trial of coronary artery bypass surgery: survival data). Circulation. 1983;68:939–950
  2. Kelly DT. Paul Dudley White International Lecture. Our future society (a global challenge). Circulation. 1997;95:2459–2464
  3. The TIME Investigators . Trial of invasive versus medical therapy in elderly patients with chronic symptomatic coronary-artery disease (TIME) (a randomised trial). Lancet. 2001;358:951–957
  4. Aronow WS. Approach to symptomatic coronary disease in the elderly (TIME to change?). Lancet. 2001;358:945–946
  5. Furman MI, Dauerman HL, Goldberg RJ, et al.  Twenty-two year (1975 to 1997) trends in the incidence, in-hospital and long-term case fatality rates from initial Q-wave and non-Q-wave myocardial infarction (a multi-hospital, community-wide perspective). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;37:1571–1580
  6. Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, White HD, et al.  One-year survival following early revascularization for cardiogenic shock. JAMA. 2001;285:190–192
  7. Prasad A, Lennon RJ, Rihal CS, et al. Outcomes of elderly patients with cardiogenic shock treated with early percutaneous revascularization. Am Heart J 2004;147:1066–70
  8. Boersma E, Harrington RA, Moliterno DJ, et al.  Platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in acute coronary syndromes: a meta-analysis of all major randomised clinical trials. Lancet. 2002;359:189–198
  9. 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
  10. Dzavik V, Sleeper LA, Cocke TP, et al.  Early revascularization is associated with improved survival in elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (a report from the SHOCK trial registry). Eur Heart J. 2003;24:828–837
  11. Zeymer U, Vogt A, Zahn R, et al. Predictors of in-hospital mortality in 1333 patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI): results of the primary PCI registry of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Leitende Kardiologische Krankenhausärzte (ALKK). Eur Heart J 2004 (in press)
  12. Neumann FJ, Ott I, Gawaz M, et al.  Cardiac release of cytokines and inflammatory responses in acute myocardial infarction. Circulation. 1995;92:748–755
  13. Cotter G, Kaluski E, Milo O, et al.  LINCS (L-NAME (a NO synthase inhibitor) in the treatment of refractory cardiogenic shock: a prospective randomized study). Eur Heart J. 2003;24:1287–1295
  14. Keeley EC, Boura JA, Grines CL. Primary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction (a quantitative review of 23 randomised trials). Lancet. 2003;361:13–20
  15. Widimsky P, Budesinsky T, Vorac D, et al.  Long distance transport for primary angioplasty vs immediate thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction (final results of the randomized national multicentre trial—PRAGUE-2). Eur Heart J. 2003;24:94–104
  16. Andersen HR, Nielsen TT, Rasmussen K, et al.  A comparison of coronary angioplasty with fibrinolytic therapy in acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:733–742
  17. Bonnefoy E, Lapostolle F, Leizorovicz A, et al.  Primary angioplasty versus prehospital fibrinolysis in acute myocardial infarction (a randomised study). Lancet. 2002;360:825–829
  18. Aviles FF. GRACIA-2 trial (Grupo de Análisis de la Cardiopatía Isquémica Aguda): randomised trial comparing primary percutaneous coronary intervention versus facilitated intervention (tenecteplase plus stenting) in patients with ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction. Proceedings of the Hot Line 2 Session, European Society of Cardiology Congress 2003, September 1, 2003, Vienna, Austria
  19. Jacobs AK. Primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction—is it worth the wait. [editorial]? N Engl J Med. 2003;349:798–800
  20. French JK, Feldman HA, Assmann SF, et al.  The influence of thrombolytic therapy, with or without intra-aortic balloon counter-pulsation, on 12-month survival in the SHOCK trial. Am Heart J. 2003;146:804–810
  21. The ASSENT-3 Investigators. Efficacy and safety of tenecteplase in combination with enoxaparin, abciximab, or unfractionated heparin: the ASSENT-3 randomised trial in acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 2001;358:605
  22. The GUSTO V Investigators . Reperfusion therapy for acute myocardial infarction with fibrinolytic therapy or combination reduced fibrinolytic therapy and platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition (the GUSTO V randomized trial). Lancet. 2001;357:1905–1914
  23. The Hirulog and Early Reperfusion or Occlusion (HERO)-2 Trial Investigators . Thrombin-specific anticoagulation with bivalirudin versus heparin in patients receiving fibrinolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction (the HERO-2 randomised trial). Lancet. 2001;358:1855–1863

PII: S0002-8703(04)00020-1

doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2003.12.026

American Heart Journal
Volume 147, Issue 6 , Pages 950-952 , June 2004

Article Tools