Article Text

PDF
Therapeutics
Stent choice in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction likely does not affect mortality or reinfarction
  1. Talla A Rousan,
  2. Udho Thadani
  1. Department of Internal Medicine, Cardiovascular Section, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center and the Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Udho Thadani, Department of Internal Medicine, Cardiovascular Section, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, 800 Stanton L. Young Blvd., AAT, COM 5400, Oklahoma City, OK 73104, USA; Udho-Thadani{at}ouhsc.edu

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Commentary on: Ledwoch J, Fuernau G, Desch S, et al. Drug-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in acute myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock. Heart 2017;103:1177–84.

Context

Early revascularisation improves acute and long-term outcomes of patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS). However, which type of stent to use for revascularisation remains controversial. Earlier small single-centre non-randomised study and registry data concluded that a drug-eluting stent (DES) is superior to a bare metal stent (BMS) as it improved clinical outcomes in these patients.1 2 Current European Society Guidelines recommend the use of DES, while American Society guidelines do not. This study examined the impact of BMS versus DES use on clinical outcomes in patients who had participated in the previously reported the Intra-aortic Balloon Pump (IABP) in Cardiogenic Shock II Trial (IABP-SHOCK II) which showed …

View Full Text

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.