The use of an intra-aortic balloon pump in patients with cardiogenic shock secondary to acute myocardial infarction

Abstract Background Cardiogenic shock secondary to acute myocardial infarction (AMI-CS) is associated with high mortality despite advances in therapy. The intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) is used to support hemodynamics in these patients, but its efficacy remains debated. This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of IABP use in patients with AMI complicated by CS. Results This retrospective cohort study included 95 patients with AMI-CS treated at a tertiary referral center from January 2020 to December 2022. Patients were divided into two groups: those receiving IABP ( n = 72) and those not receiving IABP ( n = 23). Baseline characteristics revealed that patients who received IABP had more advanced shock [SCAI stage E 25% vs. 9%, P < 0.01], an increased prevalence of cardiac arrest at presentation [31% vs. 4%, P = 0.01], and required more aggressive hospital interventions, including vasopressor support [97% vs. 39%, P < 0.01], mechanical ventilation [90% vs. 30%, P < 0.01], and renal replacement therapy [42% vs. 9%, P < 0.01]. The IABP group had significantly higher in-hospital mortality [69% vs. 30%, P < 0.01]. IABP was associated with increased in-hospital mortality in patients with cardiac arrest [OR 27, P < 0.01], but in patients without cardiac arrest, IABP use reduced mortality [OR 0.15, P = 0.02]. There were no significant differences in cerebrovascular accident, bleeding, and length of stay between groups. No significant differences in long-term survival were observed between the groups [log-rank P = 0.44]. Conclusions IABP use in AMI-CS patients was associated with higher in-hospital mortality, reflected by the more critical clinical status of these patients at baseline. IABP may offer in-hospital survival benefits in patients without cardiac arrest but does not improve long-term outcomes. Further research is needed to refine its role in clinical practice.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Cardiothoracic Surgeon
Published
2025-02-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s43057-025-00151-7
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.70
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The use of an intra-aortic balloon pump in patients with cardiogenic shock secondary to acute myocardial infarction

Mohammed A. Qutub
4 citations
The Cardiothoracic Surgeon
Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices
2.70
article

The use of an intra-aortic balloon pump in patients with cardiogenic shock secondary to acute myocardial infarction

Mohammed A. Qutub
article en
4 citations

Abstract

Abstract Background Cardiogenic shock secondary to acute myocardial infarction (AMI-CS) is associated with high mortality despite advances in therapy. The intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) is used to support hemodynamics in these patients, but its efficacy remains debated. This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of IABP use in patients with AMI complicated by CS. Results This retrospective cohort study included 95 patients with AMI-CS treated at a tertiary referral center from January 2020 to December 2022. Patients were divided into two groups: those receiving IABP ( n = 72) and those not receiving IABP ( n = 23). Baseline characteristics revealed that patients who received IABP had more advanced shock [SCAI stage E 25% vs. 9%, P < 0.01], an increased prevalence of cardiac arrest at presentation [31% vs. 4%, P = 0.01], and required more aggressive hospital interventions, including vasopressor support [97% vs. 39%, P < 0.01], mechanical ventilation [90% vs. 30%, P < 0.01], and renal replacement therapy [42% vs. 9%, P < 0.01]. The IABP group had significantly higher in-hospital mortality [69% vs. 30%, P < 0.01]. IABP was associated with increased in-hospital mortality in patients with cardiac arrest [OR 27, P < 0.01], but in patients without cardiac arrest, IABP use reduced mortality [OR 0.15, P = 0.02]. There were no significant differences in cerebrovascular accident, bleeding, and length of stay between groups. No significant differences in long-term survival were observed between the groups [log-rank P = 0.44]. Conclusions IABP use in AMI-CS patients was associated with higher in-hospital mortality, reflected by the more critical clinical status of these patients at baseline. IABP may offer in-hospital survival benefits in patients without cardiac arrest but does not improve long-term outcomes. Further research is needed to refine its role in clinical practice.

The Cardiothoracic SurgeonVol. 33(1)
King Abdulaziz University (SA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices
2.70
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.