TY - JOUR
T1 - Do DanGer-SHOCK-like patients benefit from VA-ECMO treatment in infarct-related cardiogenic shock? results of an individual patient data meta-Analysis
AU - Zeymer, Uwe
AU - Freund, Anne
AU - Hochadel, Matthias
AU - Ostadal, Petr
AU - Belohlavek, Jan
AU - Massberg, Steffen
AU - Brunner, Stefan
AU - Flather, Marcus
AU - Adlam, David
AU - Hassager, Christian
AU - Moeller, Jacob E.
AU - Schneider, Steffen
AU - Desch, Steffen
AU - Thiele, Holger
PY - 2024/9/1
Y1 - 2024/9/1
N2 - Aims: In a recent meta-Analysis of randomized controlled trials, routine use of veno-Arterial ECMO (VA-ECMO) did not improve outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS), while a microaxial flow pump reduced mortality in a selected group of patients with AMI-CS in the DanGer-Shock trial. Methods and results: Individual patient data of patients included in four randomized clinical trials investigating the routine use of VA-ECMO in AMI-CS were centrally analysed. For the purpose of this sub-Analysis, DanGer-Shock-like patients were analysed (STEMI only, presumed low likelihood of brain injury). The primary endpoint was 180-day all-cause mortality. A total of 202 patients (106 randomized to VA-ECMO and 96 to control) were included. There were no differences in baseline characteristics, angiographic and interventional features between the two groups. Mortality after 6 months was numerically lower with VA-ECMO between the groups [45% in VA-ECMO group vs. 51% in control group; hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.56-1.26], while major bleeding (OR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.08-4.64) and peripheral vascular complications (OR, 3.65; 95% CI, 1.15-11.56) were increased with the use of VA-ECMO. Conclusion: In this exploratory subgroup analysis in patients with CS, STEMI, and a low likelihood of brain injury, there was no mortality benefit with the routine use of VA-ECMO. However, as indicated by the large confidence intervals, the statistical power was limited to draw definite conclusions.
AB - Aims: In a recent meta-Analysis of randomized controlled trials, routine use of veno-Arterial ECMO (VA-ECMO) did not improve outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS), while a microaxial flow pump reduced mortality in a selected group of patients with AMI-CS in the DanGer-Shock trial. Methods and results: Individual patient data of patients included in four randomized clinical trials investigating the routine use of VA-ECMO in AMI-CS were centrally analysed. For the purpose of this sub-Analysis, DanGer-Shock-like patients were analysed (STEMI only, presumed low likelihood of brain injury). The primary endpoint was 180-day all-cause mortality. A total of 202 patients (106 randomized to VA-ECMO and 96 to control) were included. There were no differences in baseline characteristics, angiographic and interventional features between the two groups. Mortality after 6 months was numerically lower with VA-ECMO between the groups [45% in VA-ECMO group vs. 51% in control group; hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.56-1.26], while major bleeding (OR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.08-4.64) and peripheral vascular complications (OR, 3.65; 95% CI, 1.15-11.56) were increased with the use of VA-ECMO. Conclusion: In this exploratory subgroup analysis in patients with CS, STEMI, and a low likelihood of brain injury, there was no mortality benefit with the routine use of VA-ECMO. However, as indicated by the large confidence intervals, the statistical power was limited to draw definite conclusions.
KW - Cardiogenic shock
KW - Meta-Analysis
KW - Veno-Arterial extra corporeal membrane oxygenation
U2 - 10.1093/ehjacc/zuae093
DO - 10.1093/ehjacc/zuae093
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 39217624
AN - SCOPUS:85205460591
SN - 2048-8726
VL - 13
SP - 658
EP - 661
JO - European Heart Journal: Acute Cardiovascular Care
JF - European Heart Journal: Acute Cardiovascular Care
IS - 9
ER -