TY - JOUR
T1 - Percutaneous cardiopulmonary support-supported percutaneous coronary intervention
T2 - A single center experience
AU - Cho, Sung Soo
AU - Oh, Chang Myung
AU - Jang, Ji Yong
AU - Yu, Hee Tae
AU - Bang, Woo Dae
AU - Kim, Jung Sun
AU - Ko, Young Guk
AU - Choi, Donghoon
AU - Hong, Myeong Ki
AU - Shim, Won Heum
AU - Cho, Seung Yun
AU - Jang, Yangsoo
PY - 2011/6
Y1 - 2011/6
N2 - Background and Objectives: Percutaneous cardiopulmonary support (PCPS) has proven to be a valuable technique in high-risk coronary patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, there have been few studies on PCI associated with PCPS in Korea. We summarized our experience with PCPS-supported PCI. Subjects and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 19 patients with PCPS-supported PCI between August 2005 and June 2009. PCPS was used as an elective procedure for 10 patients with at least two of the following conditions: left-ventricular ejection fraction <35%, target vessel(s) supplying more than 50% of the viable myocardium, high risk surgical patients, and patients who refused coronary bypass surgery. In the remaining 9 patients PCPS was used as an emergency procedure, to stabilize and even resuscitate patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock, in order to attempt urgent PCI. Results: Among the 19 patients who were treated with PCPS-supported PCI, 11 (57.9%) survived and 8 (42.1%) patients did not. ST elevation myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock was more prevalent in the non-survivors than in the survivors (75% vs. 27.3%, p=0.04). The elective PCPS-supported PCI was practiced more frequently in the survivors than in the non-survivors (72.7% vs. 25%, p=0.04). In the analysis of the event-free survival curve between elective and emergency procedures, there was a significant difference in the survival rate (p=0.025). Among the survivors there were more patients with multi-vessel disease, but a lower Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction grade in the culprit lesions was detected in the non-survivors, before PCI. Although we studied high-risk patients, there was no procedure-related mortality. Conclusion: Our experience suggests that PCPS may be helpful in high risk patients treated with PCI, especially in elective cases. More aggressive and larger scale studies of PCPS should follow.
AB - Background and Objectives: Percutaneous cardiopulmonary support (PCPS) has proven to be a valuable technique in high-risk coronary patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, there have been few studies on PCI associated with PCPS in Korea. We summarized our experience with PCPS-supported PCI. Subjects and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 19 patients with PCPS-supported PCI between August 2005 and June 2009. PCPS was used as an elective procedure for 10 patients with at least two of the following conditions: left-ventricular ejection fraction <35%, target vessel(s) supplying more than 50% of the viable myocardium, high risk surgical patients, and patients who refused coronary bypass surgery. In the remaining 9 patients PCPS was used as an emergency procedure, to stabilize and even resuscitate patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock, in order to attempt urgent PCI. Results: Among the 19 patients who were treated with PCPS-supported PCI, 11 (57.9%) survived and 8 (42.1%) patients did not. ST elevation myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock was more prevalent in the non-survivors than in the survivors (75% vs. 27.3%, p=0.04). The elective PCPS-supported PCI was practiced more frequently in the survivors than in the non-survivors (72.7% vs. 25%, p=0.04). In the analysis of the event-free survival curve between elective and emergency procedures, there was a significant difference in the survival rate (p=0.025). Among the survivors there were more patients with multi-vessel disease, but a lower Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction grade in the culprit lesions was detected in the non-survivors, before PCI. Although we studied high-risk patients, there was no procedure-related mortality. Conclusion: Our experience suggests that PCPS may be helpful in high risk patients treated with PCI, especially in elective cases. More aggressive and larger scale studies of PCPS should follow.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79960614996&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79960614996&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.4070/kcj.2011.41.6.299
DO - 10.4070/kcj.2011.41.6.299
M3 - Article
C2 - 21779281
AN - SCOPUS:79960614996
SN - 1738-5520
VL - 41
SP - 299
EP - 303
JO - Korean Circulation Journal
JF - Korean Circulation Journal
IS - 6
ER -