Читать книгу Interventional Cardiology - Группа авторов - Страница 339

IABP In one small study that randomized 40 patients in cardiogenic shock to optimal medical therapy alone or to optimal medical therapy and an IABP, no significant differences were observed in hemodynamic parameters such as cardiac output and systemic vascular resistance between both groups [20]. The 600‐patient IABP SHOCK II trial randomized patients with cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction to treatment with an IABP or no IABP. Early revascularization and optimal medical therapy were provided in both study arms. The use of the IABP did not reduce 30‐day or 1‐year mortality [11, 21]. Moreover, there were no differences in time to hemodynamic stabilization, the length of intensive care unit stay, serum lactate levels, dose and duration of catecholamine administration, and renal function [21]. ESC guidelines therefore recommend against routine use of IABP in patients with CS due to ACS [18].