主动脉内球囊泵与左西孟旦治疗心脏手术后心源性休克的比较

M. Darwish, S. Ammar, Yasser Omar Abdel Rahman, Mahmoud Helmy Alsayed
{"title":"主动脉内球囊泵与左西孟旦治疗心脏手术后心源性休克的比较","authors":"M. Darwish, S. Ammar, Yasser Omar Abdel Rahman, Mahmoud Helmy Alsayed","doi":"10.47672/ajhmn.1347","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: Post cardiac surgery cardiogenic shock is one of the major life threatening complications of open heart surgeries. Two modalities are widely used to improve the cardiac output and overcome the acute postoperative complication beside other conventional treatment including mechanical ventilator, inotropes and vasopressors. Those modalities are levosimendan and Intra-aortic balloon pump. The purpose of this study is to investigate the prognosis of levosimendan vs IABP in patients who developed cardiogenic shock post cardiac surgery. \nMethodology: This was a prospective observational study conducted as national heart institute, Egypt on 50 patients who developed cardiogenic shock post cardiac surgery and managed by either levosimendan or Intra-aortic balloon Pump (IABP) beside other conventional therapies. Patients were then divided into two groups according to the modality used. Group I: patients who were managed by levosimendan and group II: patients who were managed by IABP. Two groups were then compared according to baseline preoperative characteristics and in-hospital course and one month follow up post discharge echocardiography. \nFindings: No significant difference regarding between in-hospital mortality between levosimendan, 44% and IABP, 52% P value 0.5. Levosimendan was associated with significantly shorter ICU stay, 5.56±2.85 compared to IABP, 8±3.34 days (P value 0.02). Levosimendan seems to be a better option than IABP or at least equivalent to it in postoperative cardiogenic shock. \nRecommendations: Levosimendan is an alternative cost effective modality for patients with post-operative low cardiac output syndrome especially when IABP isn’t available. \n ","PeriodicalId":7672,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Health, Medicine and Nursing Practice","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison between Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump and Levosimendan as Treatment Modalities for Cardiogenic Shock Post Cardiac Surgery\",\"authors\":\"M. Darwish, S. Ammar, Yasser Omar Abdel Rahman, Mahmoud Helmy Alsayed\",\"doi\":\"10.47672/ajhmn.1347\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose: Post cardiac surgery cardiogenic shock is one of the major life threatening complications of open heart surgeries. Two modalities are widely used to improve the cardiac output and overcome the acute postoperative complication beside other conventional treatment including mechanical ventilator, inotropes and vasopressors. Those modalities are levosimendan and Intra-aortic balloon pump. The purpose of this study is to investigate the prognosis of levosimendan vs IABP in patients who developed cardiogenic shock post cardiac surgery. \\nMethodology: This was a prospective observational study conducted as national heart institute, Egypt on 50 patients who developed cardiogenic shock post cardiac surgery and managed by either levosimendan or Intra-aortic balloon Pump (IABP) beside other conventional therapies. Patients were then divided into two groups according to the modality used. Group I: patients who were managed by levosimendan and group II: patients who were managed by IABP. Two groups were then compared according to baseline preoperative characteristics and in-hospital course and one month follow up post discharge echocardiography. \\nFindings: No significant difference regarding between in-hospital mortality between levosimendan, 44% and IABP, 52% P value 0.5. Levosimendan was associated with significantly shorter ICU stay, 5.56±2.85 compared to IABP, 8±3.34 days (P value 0.02). Levosimendan seems to be a better option than IABP or at least equivalent to it in postoperative cardiogenic shock. \\nRecommendations: Levosimendan is an alternative cost effective modality for patients with post-operative low cardiac output syndrome especially when IABP isn’t available. \\n \",\"PeriodicalId\":7672,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Health, Medicine and Nursing Practice\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Health, Medicine and Nursing Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.47672/ajhmn.1347\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Health, Medicine and Nursing Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47672/ajhmn.1347","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:心源性休克是心脏直视手术的主要并发症之一。除了机械呼吸机、收缩性药物和血管加压药物等常规治疗方法外,还有两种方法被广泛用于改善心排血量和克服急性术后并发症。这些方法是左西孟旦和主动脉内球囊泵。本研究的目的是探讨左西孟旦与IABP在心脏手术后发生心源性休克患者中的预后。方法:这是埃及国家心脏研究所开展的一项前瞻性观察研究,研究对象为50例心脏手术后发生心源性休克的患者,除其他常规治疗外,采用左西孟旦或主动脉内球囊泵(IABP)治疗。然后根据使用的方式将患者分为两组。第一组:左西孟旦治疗组;第二组:IABP治疗组。两组患者根据术前基线特征、住院病程和出院后1个月随访超声心动图进行比较。结果:左西孟旦与IABP在住院死亡率方面无显著差异,P值为52%,P值为0.5。左西孟旦与IABP(8±3.34天)相比,左西孟旦显著缩短ICU住院时间(5.56±2.85天)(P值为0.02)。左西孟旦似乎是一个更好的选择比IABP或至少相当于它的术后心源性休克。建议:左西孟旦是术后低心输出量综合征患者的另一种经济有效的治疗方法,特别是在不能使用IABP的情况下。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison between Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump and Levosimendan as Treatment Modalities for Cardiogenic Shock Post Cardiac Surgery
Purpose: Post cardiac surgery cardiogenic shock is one of the major life threatening complications of open heart surgeries. Two modalities are widely used to improve the cardiac output and overcome the acute postoperative complication beside other conventional treatment including mechanical ventilator, inotropes and vasopressors. Those modalities are levosimendan and Intra-aortic balloon pump. The purpose of this study is to investigate the prognosis of levosimendan vs IABP in patients who developed cardiogenic shock post cardiac surgery. Methodology: This was a prospective observational study conducted as national heart institute, Egypt on 50 patients who developed cardiogenic shock post cardiac surgery and managed by either levosimendan or Intra-aortic balloon Pump (IABP) beside other conventional therapies. Patients were then divided into two groups according to the modality used. Group I: patients who were managed by levosimendan and group II: patients who were managed by IABP. Two groups were then compared according to baseline preoperative characteristics and in-hospital course and one month follow up post discharge echocardiography. Findings: No significant difference regarding between in-hospital mortality between levosimendan, 44% and IABP, 52% P value 0.5. Levosimendan was associated with significantly shorter ICU stay, 5.56±2.85 compared to IABP, 8±3.34 days (P value 0.02). Levosimendan seems to be a better option than IABP or at least equivalent to it in postoperative cardiogenic shock. Recommendations: Levosimendan is an alternative cost effective modality for patients with post-operative low cardiac output syndrome especially when IABP isn’t available.  
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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