Anika Klein, Rasmus P. Beske, Christian Hassager, Lisette O. Jensen, Hans Eiskjær, Norman Mangner, Axel Linke, Amin Polzin, P. Christian Schulze, Carsten Skurk, Peter Nordbeck, Peter Clemmensen, Vasileios Panoulas, Sebastian Zimmer, Andreas Schäfer, Nikos Werner, Thomas Engstøm, Lene Holmvang, Anders Junker, Henrik Schmidt, Jacob E. Møller
{"title":"使用微轴血流泵治疗老年心源性休克患者:危险吗?","authors":"Anika Klein, Rasmus P. Beske, Christian Hassager, Lisette O. Jensen, Hans Eiskjær, Norman Mangner, Axel Linke, Amin Polzin, P. Christian Schulze, Carsten Skurk, Peter Nordbeck, Peter Clemmensen, Vasileios Panoulas, Sebastian Zimmer, Andreas Schäfer, Nikos Werner, Thomas Engstøm, Lene Holmvang, Anders Junker, Henrik Schmidt, Jacob E. Møller","doi":"10.1016/j.jacc.2024.11.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Background</h3>Whether age impacts the recently demonstrated survival benefit of microaxial flow pump (mAFP) treatment in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and cardiogenic shock (CS) is unknown.<h3>Objectives</h3>The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of age on mortality and complication rates in patients with STEMI-related CS randomized to standard care or mAFP on top of standard care.<h3>Methods</h3>This is a secondary analysis of the Danish-German Cardiogenic Shock (DanGer Shock) trial, an international, multicenter, open-label trial, in which 355 adult patients with STEMI-related CS were randomized to receive a mAFP (Impella CP) plus standard care or standard care alone. The primary outcome of 180-day all-cause mortality is analysed according to age and intervention.<h3>Results</h3>From lowest to highest age quartile, the median ages (range) were: 54 (31-59), 65 (60-69), 73 (70-76), and 81 (77-92) years. There were no differences in blood pressure, lactate level, left ventricular ejection fraction or shock severity at randomization across age groups.Mortality increased from lowest to highest quartile (31%, 47%, 61%, and 73%, respectively; log-rank p<0.001), with an adjusted odds ratio (OR) for death at 180 days of 7.85 (95% CI, 3.37-19.2; p<0.001) in the highest quartile compared to the lowest. The predicted risk of mortality was higher in the standard-care group until approximately 77 years, after which the predicted risk became higher in the mAFP group (p-interaction=0.2). In patients younger than 77 years, a reduced 180-day mortality was observed in patients randomized to the mAFP (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.28-0.73; p=0.001), opposed to patients aged 77 years or older (OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.57–4.08; p=0.40), p=0.028 for interaction. Complications were more frequent in the mAFP group, but there were no apparent differences in incidence of complications across all ages.<h3>Conclusions</h3>This exploratory secondary analysis of the DanGer Shock trial demonstrates that elderly patients with STEMI-related CS experience high mortality and may not attain the same benefit from routine treatment with a mAFP as younger patients. Incorporating age as a factor in patient selection may enhance the overall benefit of this therapy. (DanGer Shock, NCT01633502)","PeriodicalId":17187,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American College of Cardiology","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":21.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Treating Older Patients in Cardiogenic Shock with a Microaxial Flow Pump: Is it DANGERous?\",\"authors\":\"Anika Klein, Rasmus P. Beske, Christian Hassager, Lisette O. Jensen, Hans Eiskjær, Norman Mangner, Axel Linke, Amin Polzin, P. Christian Schulze, Carsten Skurk, Peter Nordbeck, Peter Clemmensen, Vasileios Panoulas, Sebastian Zimmer, Andreas Schäfer, Nikos Werner, Thomas Engstøm, Lene Holmvang, Anders Junker, Henrik Schmidt, Jacob E. Møller\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jacc.2024.11.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3>Background</h3>Whether age impacts the recently demonstrated survival benefit of microaxial flow pump (mAFP) treatment in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and cardiogenic shock (CS) is unknown.<h3>Objectives</h3>The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of age on mortality and complication rates in patients with STEMI-related CS randomized to standard care or mAFP on top of standard care.<h3>Methods</h3>This is a secondary analysis of the Danish-German Cardiogenic Shock (DanGer Shock) trial, an international, multicenter, open-label trial, in which 355 adult patients with STEMI-related CS were randomized to receive a mAFP (Impella CP) plus standard care or standard care alone. The primary outcome of 180-day all-cause mortality is analysed according to age and intervention.<h3>Results</h3>From lowest to highest age quartile, the median ages (range) were: 54 (31-59), 65 (60-69), 73 (70-76), and 81 (77-92) years. There were no differences in blood pressure, lactate level, left ventricular ejection fraction or shock severity at randomization across age groups.Mortality increased from lowest to highest quartile (31%, 47%, 61%, and 73%, respectively; log-rank p<0.001), with an adjusted odds ratio (OR) for death at 180 days of 7.85 (95% CI, 3.37-19.2; p<0.001) in the highest quartile compared to the lowest. The predicted risk of mortality was higher in the standard-care group until approximately 77 years, after which the predicted risk became higher in the mAFP group (p-interaction=0.2). In patients younger than 77 years, a reduced 180-day mortality was observed in patients randomized to the mAFP (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.28-0.73; p=0.001), opposed to patients aged 77 years or older (OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.57–4.08; p=0.40), p=0.028 for interaction. Complications were more frequent in the mAFP group, but there were no apparent differences in incidence of complications across all ages.<h3>Conclusions</h3>This exploratory secondary analysis of the DanGer Shock trial demonstrates that elderly patients with STEMI-related CS experience high mortality and may not attain the same benefit from routine treatment with a mAFP as younger patients. Incorporating age as a factor in patient selection may enhance the overall benefit of this therapy. (DanGer Shock, NCT01633502)\",\"PeriodicalId\":17187,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American College of Cardiology\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":21.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American College of Cardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2024.11.003\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American College of Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2024.11.003","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Treating Older Patients in Cardiogenic Shock with a Microaxial Flow Pump: Is it DANGERous?
Background
Whether age impacts the recently demonstrated survival benefit of microaxial flow pump (mAFP) treatment in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and cardiogenic shock (CS) is unknown.
Objectives
The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of age on mortality and complication rates in patients with STEMI-related CS randomized to standard care or mAFP on top of standard care.
Methods
This is a secondary analysis of the Danish-German Cardiogenic Shock (DanGer Shock) trial, an international, multicenter, open-label trial, in which 355 adult patients with STEMI-related CS were randomized to receive a mAFP (Impella CP) plus standard care or standard care alone. The primary outcome of 180-day all-cause mortality is analysed according to age and intervention.
Results
From lowest to highest age quartile, the median ages (range) were: 54 (31-59), 65 (60-69), 73 (70-76), and 81 (77-92) years. There were no differences in blood pressure, lactate level, left ventricular ejection fraction or shock severity at randomization across age groups.Mortality increased from lowest to highest quartile (31%, 47%, 61%, and 73%, respectively; log-rank p<0.001), with an adjusted odds ratio (OR) for death at 180 days of 7.85 (95% CI, 3.37-19.2; p<0.001) in the highest quartile compared to the lowest. The predicted risk of mortality was higher in the standard-care group until approximately 77 years, after which the predicted risk became higher in the mAFP group (p-interaction=0.2). In patients younger than 77 years, a reduced 180-day mortality was observed in patients randomized to the mAFP (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.28-0.73; p=0.001), opposed to patients aged 77 years or older (OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.57–4.08; p=0.40), p=0.028 for interaction. Complications were more frequent in the mAFP group, but there were no apparent differences in incidence of complications across all ages.
Conclusions
This exploratory secondary analysis of the DanGer Shock trial demonstrates that elderly patients with STEMI-related CS experience high mortality and may not attain the same benefit from routine treatment with a mAFP as younger patients. Incorporating age as a factor in patient selection may enhance the overall benefit of this therapy. (DanGer Shock, NCT01633502)
期刊介绍:
The Journal of the American College of Cardiology (JACC) publishes peer-reviewed articles highlighting all aspects of cardiovascular disease, including original clinical studies, experimental investigations with clear clinical relevance, state-of-the-art papers and viewpoints.
Content Profile:
-Original Investigations
-JACC State-of-the-Art Reviews
-JACC Review Topics of the Week
-Guidelines & Clinical Documents
-JACC Guideline Comparisons
-JACC Scientific Expert Panels
-Cardiovascular Medicine & Society
-Editorial Comments (accompanying every Original Investigation)
-Research Letters
-Fellows-in-Training/Early Career Professional Pages
-Editor’s Pages from the Editor-in-Chief or other invited thought leaders