米立酮与多巴酚丁胺治疗急性心肌梗死相关性心源性休克倾向评分匹配分析。

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Clinical Research in Cardiology Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2025-09-03 DOI:10.1007/s00392-025-02742-0
Sanne Ten Berg, Margriet Bogerd, Elma J Peters, Marijke J C Timmermans, Wim K Lagrand, Luuk C Otterspoor, Alexander P J Vlaar, Annemarie E Engström, José P S Henriques
{"title":"米立酮与多巴酚丁胺治疗急性心肌梗死相关性心源性休克倾向评分匹配分析。","authors":"Sanne Ten Berg, Margriet Bogerd, Elma J Peters, Marijke J C Timmermans, Wim K Lagrand, Luuk C Otterspoor, Alexander P J Vlaar, Annemarie E Engström, José P S Henriques","doi":"10.1007/s00392-025-02742-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Vasopressors and inotropes remain the cornerstone in treatment of acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS). Milrinone and dobutamine are both commonly used, yet the optimal inotrope remains unclear. We aimed to identify factors associated with milrinone and dobutamine treatment and assess their effects on 30-day mortality in a large real-world cohort of AMI-CS patients. The Netherlands Heart Registration prospectively records data for percutaneous coronary intervention patients. Between 2017 and 2021, additional retrospective data on CS patients were collected by fourteen Dutch hospitals. Patients who were treated with either milrinone or dobutamine were selected; those treated with both were excluded. Missing data were imputed (30 ×) using multiple imputation, and propensity matched score analysis (PSM) was performed to evaluate the association between milrinone or dobutamine treatment and 30-day mortality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 739 patients were included (milrinone n = 247, dobutamine n = 492). Prior to matching, milrinone-treated patients exhibited more severely ill baseline and treatment characteristics, and higher 30-day mortality (50.6% vs. 41.5%, p = 0.018). After PSM, 198 patients remained in each group for analysis. Baseline characteristics were well balanced and 30-day mortality rates were similar (46.5% vs. 41.9%, p = 0.362).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this real-world propensity-matched cohort of AMI-CS patients, no significant difference in 30-day mortality was observed between patients treated with milrinone and dobutamine. Importantly, milrinone patients were more severely ill at baseline, indicating that the choice of inotrope may be influenced by illness severity. This comprehensive study suggests that the selection of inotrope may continue to be guided by individual patient characteristics.</p>","PeriodicalId":10474,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Research in Cardiology","volume":" ","pages":"1414-1426"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12460367/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Milrinone versus dobutamine in acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock; a propensity score matched analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Sanne Ten Berg, Margriet Bogerd, Elma J Peters, Marijke J C Timmermans, Wim K Lagrand, Luuk C Otterspoor, Alexander P J Vlaar, Annemarie E Engström, José P S Henriques\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00392-025-02742-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Vasopressors and inotropes remain the cornerstone in treatment of acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS). Milrinone and dobutamine are both commonly used, yet the optimal inotrope remains unclear. We aimed to identify factors associated with milrinone and dobutamine treatment and assess their effects on 30-day mortality in a large real-world cohort of AMI-CS patients. The Netherlands Heart Registration prospectively records data for percutaneous coronary intervention patients. Between 2017 and 2021, additional retrospective data on CS patients were collected by fourteen Dutch hospitals. Patients who were treated with either milrinone or dobutamine were selected; those treated with both were excluded. Missing data were imputed (30 ×) using multiple imputation, and propensity matched score analysis (PSM) was performed to evaluate the association between milrinone or dobutamine treatment and 30-day mortality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 739 patients were included (milrinone n = 247, dobutamine n = 492). Prior to matching, milrinone-treated patients exhibited more severely ill baseline and treatment characteristics, and higher 30-day mortality (50.6% vs. 41.5%, p = 0.018). After PSM, 198 patients remained in each group for analysis. Baseline characteristics were well balanced and 30-day mortality rates were similar (46.5% vs. 41.9%, p = 0.362).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this real-world propensity-matched cohort of AMI-CS patients, no significant difference in 30-day mortality was observed between patients treated with milrinone and dobutamine. Importantly, milrinone patients were more severely ill at baseline, indicating that the choice of inotrope may be influenced by illness severity. This comprehensive study suggests that the selection of inotrope may continue to be guided by individual patient characteristics.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10474,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Research in Cardiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1414-1426\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12460367/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Research in Cardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00392-025-02742-0\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/9/3 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Research in Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00392-025-02742-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/9/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:血管加压药和收缩性药物仍然是治疗急性心肌梗死相关性心源性休克(AMI-CS)的基石。米立酮和多巴酚丁胺都是常用的,但最佳的肌力仍不清楚。我们的目的是确定米力酮和多巴酚丁胺治疗的相关因素,并评估它们对AMI-CS患者30天死亡率的影响。荷兰心脏登记前瞻性地记录了经皮冠状动脉介入治疗患者的数据。2017年至2021年期间,14家荷兰医院收集了CS患者的额外回顾性数据。选择用米力农或多巴酚丁胺治疗的患者;两种治疗方法均被排除。使用多重输入法输入缺失数据(30 ×),并进行倾向匹配评分分析(PSM)来评估米力酮或多巴酚丁胺治疗与30天死亡率之间的关系。结果:共纳入739例患者(米力酮247例,多巴酚丁胺492例)。配对前,米立酮治疗的患者表现出更严重的基线和治疗特征,30天死亡率更高(50.6%比41.5%,p = 0.018)。PSM结束后,每组保留198例患者进行分析。基线特征平衡良好,30天死亡率相似(46.5%对41.9%,p = 0.362)。结论:在这个真实世界的AMI-CS患者倾向匹配队列中,米力农和多巴酚丁胺治疗的患者30天死亡率没有显著差异。重要的是,米力酮患者在基线时病情更严重,这表明肌力的选择可能受到疾病严重程度的影响。这项综合研究表明,肌力的选择可以继续以个体患者的特征为指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Milrinone versus dobutamine in acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock; a propensity score matched analysis.

Background: Vasopressors and inotropes remain the cornerstone in treatment of acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS). Milrinone and dobutamine are both commonly used, yet the optimal inotrope remains unclear. We aimed to identify factors associated with milrinone and dobutamine treatment and assess their effects on 30-day mortality in a large real-world cohort of AMI-CS patients. The Netherlands Heart Registration prospectively records data for percutaneous coronary intervention patients. Between 2017 and 2021, additional retrospective data on CS patients were collected by fourteen Dutch hospitals. Patients who were treated with either milrinone or dobutamine were selected; those treated with both were excluded. Missing data were imputed (30 ×) using multiple imputation, and propensity matched score analysis (PSM) was performed to evaluate the association between milrinone or dobutamine treatment and 30-day mortality.

Results: In total, 739 patients were included (milrinone n = 247, dobutamine n = 492). Prior to matching, milrinone-treated patients exhibited more severely ill baseline and treatment characteristics, and higher 30-day mortality (50.6% vs. 41.5%, p = 0.018). After PSM, 198 patients remained in each group for analysis. Baseline characteristics were well balanced and 30-day mortality rates were similar (46.5% vs. 41.9%, p = 0.362).

Conclusion: In this real-world propensity-matched cohort of AMI-CS patients, no significant difference in 30-day mortality was observed between patients treated with milrinone and dobutamine. Importantly, milrinone patients were more severely ill at baseline, indicating that the choice of inotrope may be influenced by illness severity. This comprehensive study suggests that the selection of inotrope may continue to be guided by individual patient characteristics.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Research in Cardiology
Clinical Research in Cardiology 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
4.00%
发文量
140
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Research in Cardiology is an international journal for clinical cardiovascular research. It provides a forum for original and review articles as well as critical perspective articles. Articles are only accepted if they meet stringent scientific standards and have undergone peer review. The journal regularly receives articles from the field of clinical cardiology, angiology, as well as heart and vascular surgery. As the official journal of the German Cardiac Society, it gives a current and competent survey on the diagnosis and therapy of heart and vascular diseases.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信