SAcubitril/valsartan versus ramipril in patients with ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction and cardiogenic SHOCK (SAVE-SHOCK): a pilot randomized controlled trial.

IF 1.3
American journal of cardiovascular disease Pub Date : 2021-12-15 eCollection Date: 2021-01-01
Ahmed Rezq, Marwan Saad, Mostafa El Nozahi
{"title":"SAcubitril/valsartan versus ramipril in patients with ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction and cardiogenic SHOCK (SAVE-SHOCK): a pilot randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Ahmed Rezq,&nbsp;Marwan Saad,&nbsp;Mostafa El Nozahi","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the safety and efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan versus ramipril in patients with STEMI and cardiogenic shock.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients who received primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) for STEMI complicated with cardiogenic shock were randomized 1:1 to sacubitril/valsartan versus ramipril after clinical stabilization. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 30 days and 6 months. Secondary in-hospital clinical outcomes included recurrent shock, new or re-initiation of vasoactive medications, and acute kidney injury (AKI). All-cause death, cardiac death, hospitalization due to heart failure (HF), myocardial infarction (MI), and stroke were examined at 30 days and 6 months. Study ID 016-01-2018.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>100 patients with STEMI and cardiogenic shock were included (mean age 54.7±10.3 years, 87% men). Initiation of sacubitril/valsartan and ramipril occurred at 38.18±18.44 versus 39.0±21.03 hours after stabilization, respectively. The primary outcome was similar between both groups at 30 days and 6 months. No difference in in-hospital or 30-day clinical outcomes was observed. However, at 6 months, patients in the sacubitril/valsartan arm suffered less hospitalization with HF (18% vs 38%, P=0.044) compared with patients in the ramipril arm. Other clinical outcomes at 6 months were similar between both groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Sacubitril/valsartan in patients with STEMI and cardiogenic shock may be associated with improved clinical outcome at 6 months compared with ramipril. Larger randomized controlled trials with longer follow-up are recommended.</p>","PeriodicalId":7427,"journal":{"name":"American journal of cardiovascular disease","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8784671/pdf/ajcd0011-0734.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of cardiovascular disease","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan versus ramipril in patients with STEMI and cardiogenic shock.

Methods: Patients who received primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) for STEMI complicated with cardiogenic shock were randomized 1:1 to sacubitril/valsartan versus ramipril after clinical stabilization. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 30 days and 6 months. Secondary in-hospital clinical outcomes included recurrent shock, new or re-initiation of vasoactive medications, and acute kidney injury (AKI). All-cause death, cardiac death, hospitalization due to heart failure (HF), myocardial infarction (MI), and stroke were examined at 30 days and 6 months. Study ID 016-01-2018.

Results: 100 patients with STEMI and cardiogenic shock were included (mean age 54.7±10.3 years, 87% men). Initiation of sacubitril/valsartan and ramipril occurred at 38.18±18.44 versus 39.0±21.03 hours after stabilization, respectively. The primary outcome was similar between both groups at 30 days and 6 months. No difference in in-hospital or 30-day clinical outcomes was observed. However, at 6 months, patients in the sacubitril/valsartan arm suffered less hospitalization with HF (18% vs 38%, P=0.044) compared with patients in the ramipril arm. Other clinical outcomes at 6 months were similar between both groups.

Conclusions: Sacubitril/valsartan in patients with STEMI and cardiogenic shock may be associated with improved clinical outcome at 6 months compared with ramipril. Larger randomized controlled trials with longer follow-up are recommended.

Abstract Image

SAcubitril/缬沙坦与雷米普利对st段抬高型心肌梗死和心源性休克(SAVE-SHOCK)患者的治疗:一项随机对照试验
目的:评价苏比里尔/缬沙坦与雷米普利在STEMI合并心源性休克患者中的安全性和有效性。方法:STEMI合并心源性休克接受原发性经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PPCI)的患者在临床稳定后,按1:1的比例随机分为苏比里尔/缬沙坦和雷米普利。主要终点是30天和6个月的主要不良心脏事件(MACE)。次要住院临床结果包括复发性休克、新的或重新开始使用血管活性药物和急性肾损伤(AKI)。在30天和6个月时分别检查全因死亡、心源性死亡、心力衰竭(HF)、心肌梗死(MI)和中风住院情况。研究编号016-01-2018。结果:纳入STEMI合并心源性休克患者100例(平均年龄54.7±10.3岁,男性87%)。sacubitril/缬沙坦和雷米普利分别在稳定后38.18±18.44和39.0±21.03小时开始使用。两组在30天和6个月时的主要结局相似。住院和30天临床结果均无差异。然而,在6个月时,与雷米普利组相比,苏比里尔/缬沙坦组患者因HF住院的次数较少(18% vs 38%, P=0.044)。6个月时两组的其他临床结果相似。结论:与雷米普利相比,Sacubitril/缬沙坦治疗STEMI和心源性休克患者6个月时的临床结果可能有所改善。建议进行更大规模的随机对照试验,随访时间更长。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American journal of cardiovascular disease
American journal of cardiovascular disease CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信