Impact of the Timing of Mechanical Circulatory Support on the Outcomes in Myocardial Infarction-Related Cardiogenic Shock: Subanalysis of the PREPARE CS Registry.

(1) Background: Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in myocardial infarction-associated cardiogenic shock is subject to debate. This analysis aims to elucidate the impact of MCS's timing on patient outcomes, based on data from the PREPARE CS registry. (2) Methods: The PREPARE CS prospective registry includes patients who experienced cardiogenic shock (SCAI classes C-E) and were subsequently referred for cardiac catheterization. Our present analysis included a subset of this registry, in whom MCS was used and who underwent coronary intervention due to myocardial infarction. Patients were categorized into an Upfront group and a Procedural group, depending on the timing of MCS's introduction in relation to their PCI. The endpoint was in-hospital mortality. (3) Results: In total, 71 patients were included. MCS was begun prior to PCI in 33 (46%) patients (Upfront), whereas 38 (54%) received MCS during or after the initiation of PCI (Procedural). The groups' baseline characteristics and hemodynamic parameters were comparable. The Upfront group had a higher utilization of the Impella® device compared to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (67% vs. 33%), while the Procedural group exhibited a balanced use of both (50% vs. 50%). Most patients suffered from multi-vessel disease in both groups (82% vs. 84%, respectively; p = 0.99), and most patients required a complex PCI procedure; the latter was more prevalent in the Upfront group (94% vs. 71%, respectively; p = 0.02). Their rates of complete revascularization were comparable (52% vs. 34%, respectively; p = 0.16). Procedural CPR was significantly more frequent in the Procedural group (45% vs. 79%, p < 0.05); however, in-hospital mortality was similar (61% vs. 79%, respectively; p = 0.12). (4) Conclusions: The upfront implantation of MCS in myocardial infarction-associated CS did not provide an in-hospital survival benefit.

PRospective REgistry of PAtients in REfractory cardiogenic shock-The PREPARE CardShock registry.

AIM: Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a hemodynamically complex multisystem syndrome associated with persistently high morbidity and mortality. As CS is characterized by progressive failure to provide adequate systemic perfusion, supporting end-organ perfusion using mechanical circulatory support (MCS) seems intriguing. Since most patients with CS present in the catheterization laboratory, percutaneously implantable systems have the widest adoption in the field. We evaluated feasibility, outcomes, and complications after the introduction of a full-percutaneous program for both the Impella CP device and venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenator (VA-ECMO). METHODS: PREPARE CardShock (PRospective REgistry of PAtients in REfractory cardiogenic shock) is a prospective single-center registry, including 248 consecutive patients between May 2019 and April 2021, who underwent cardiac catheterization and displayed advanced cardiogenic shock. The median age was 70 (58-77) years and 28% were female. Sixty-five percent of the cases had cardiac arrest, of which 66% were out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. A local standard operating procedure (SOP) indicating indications as well as relative and absolute contraindications for different means of MCS (Impella CP or VA-ECMO) was used to guide MCS use. The primary endpoint was in-hospital death and secondary endpoints were spontaneous myocardial infarction and major bleedings during the hospital stay. RESULTS: Overall mortality was 50.4% with a median survival of 2 (0-6) days. Significant independent predictors of mortality were cardiac arrest during the index event (odds ratio [OR] with 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.53 [1.43-4.51]; p = 0.001), age > 65 years (OR: 2.05 [1.03-4.09]; p = 0.036]), pH < 7.30 (OR: 2.69 [1.56-4.66]; p < 0.001), and lactate levels > 2 mmol/L (OR: 4.51 [2.37-8.65]; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Conclusive SOPs assist target-orientated MCS use in CS. This study provides guidance on the implementation, validation, and modification of newly established MCS programs to aid centers that are establishing such programs.

Cangrelor Induces More Potent Platelet Inhibition without Increasing Bleeding in Resuscitated Patients.

Dual antiplatelet therapy is the standard of care for patients with myocardial infarction (MI), who have been resuscitated and treated with therapeutic hypothermia (TH). We compare the antiplatelet effect and bleeding risk of intravenous cangrelor to oral P2Y12-inhibitors in patients with MI receiving TH in a prospective comparison of two matched patient cohorts. Twenty-five patients within the CANGRELOR cohort were compared to 17 patients receiving oral P2Y12-inhibitors. CANGRELOR group (NCT03445546) and the ORAL P2Y12 Group (NCT02914795) were registered at clinicaltrials.gov. Platelet function testing was performed using light-transmittance aggregometry and monitored for 4 days. P2Y12-inhibition was stronger in CANGRELOR compared to ORAL P2Y12 (adenosine diphosphate (ADP) (area under the curve (AUC)) 26.0 (5.9⁻71.6) vs. 160.9 (47.1⁻193.7)) at day 1. This difference decreased over the following days as more patients were switched from CANGRELOR to oral P2Y12-inhibitor treatment. There was no difference in the effect of aspirin between the two groups. We did not observe significant differences with respect to thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) or Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) classified bleedings, number of blood transfusions or drop in haemoglobin B (Hb) or hematocrit (Hct) over time. Cangrelor treatment is not only feasible and effective in resuscitated patients, but also inhibited platelet function more effectively than orally administered P2Y12-inhibitors without an increased event rate for bleeding.

Impaired aspirin-mediated platelet function inhibition in resuscitated patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with therapeutic hypothermia: a prospective, observational, non-randomized single-centre study.

The majority of resuscitated patients present with underlying cardiac disease, and out of these myocardial infarction is most common. Immediate interventional treatment is recommended and routinely requires dual antiplatelet therapy including aspirin and a P2Y12-inhibitor. Therapeutic hypothermia or target temperature management is also recommended in these patients. Cardiogenic shock as well as reduced body temperature impacts platelet reactivity and its medical inhibition. The study aims to quantify aspirin- and P2Y12-mediated platelet inhibition in patients presenting with myocardial infarction and cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Twenty-five resuscitated patients were enrolled in this prospective, observational, non-randomized single-centre study. These patients were compared to 77 matched controls from the ATLANTIS-ACS database of non-resuscitated patients with myocardial infarction. Platelet function testing was performed by light transmittance aggregometry. Aspirin reactivity was monitored by inducing platelet aggregation with collagen and arachidonic acid, respectively. P2Y12 inhibition was recorded by stimulation of platelet aggregation with adenosine diphosphate. To quantify the overall platelet response, thrombin receptor-activated peptide was used. Aspirin-mediated platelet reactivity decreased significantly in resuscitated patients during the first days and was significantly weaker on day 3 (collagen AUC 253.8 (122.7-352.2) vs. 109.0 (73.0-182.0); p = 0.022). P2Y12-mediated platelet inhibition was also impaired in resuscitated patients on day 3 (mean ADP AUC (IQR): CPR 172.1 (46.7-346.5) vs. control 43.9 (18.9-115.2); p < 0.05). Aspirin- and P2Y12-mediated platelet inhibition is impaired in resuscitated patients treated with therapeutic hypothermia. On day 3, we recorded lowest inhibitory effects of both drug types and patients might be at particular risk at that time. Potentially, intravenous aspirin and P2Y12 inhibitors might still supply a more predictable and stable platelet inhibition.