• J S Hochman, L A Sleeper, H D White, V Dzavik, S C Wong, V Menon, J G Webb, R Steingart, M H Picard, M A Menegus, J Boland, T Sanborn, C E Buller, S Modur, R Forman, P Desvigne-Nickens, A K Jacobs, J N Slater, T H LeJemtel, and SHOCK Investigators. Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock.
• St Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center, 1111 Amsterdam Ave, New York, NY 10025, USA.
• JAMA. 2001 Jan 10; 285 (2): 190192190-2.

ContextCardiogenic shock (CS) is the leading cause of death for patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction (AMI).ObjectiveTo assess the effect of early revascularization (ERV) on 1-year survival for patients with AMI complicated by CS.DesignThe SHOCK (Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock) Trial, an unblinded, randomized controlled trial from April 1993 through November 1998.SettingThirty-six referral centers with angioplasty and cardiac surgery facilities.PatientsThree hundred two patients with AMI and CS due to predominant left ventricular failure who met specified clinical and hemodynamic criteria.InterventionsPatients were randomly assigned to an initial medical stabilization (IMS; n = 150) group, which included thrombolysis (63% of patients), intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation (86%), and subsequent revascularization (25%), or to an ERV group (n = 152), which mandated revascularization within 6 hours of randomization and included angioplasty (55%) and coronary artery bypass graft surgery (38%).Main Outcome MeasuresAll-cause mortality and functional status at 1 year, compared between the ERV and IMS groups.ResultsOne-year survival was 46.7% for patients in the ERV group compared with 33.6% in the IMS group (absolute difference in survival, 13.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.2%-24.1%; P<.03; relative risk for death, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.54-0.95). Of the 10 prespecified subgroup analyses, only age (<75 vs >/= 75 years) interacted significantly (P<.03) with treatment in that treatment benefit was apparent only for patients younger than 75 years (51.6% survival in ERV group vs 33.3% in IMS group). Eighty-three percent of 1-year survivors (85% of ERV group and 80% of IMS group) were in New York Heart Association class I or II.ConclusionsFor patients with AMI complicated by CS, ERV resulted in improved 1-year survival. We recommend rapid transfer of patients with AMI complicated by CS, particularly those younger than 75 years, to medical centers capable of providing early angiography and revascularization procedures.

24 keywords...

hide…