TY - JOUR
T1 - The Effects of Intra-Aortic Balloon Pumps on Mortality in Patients Undergoing High-Risk Coronary Revascularization
T2 - A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials of Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting and Stenting Era
AU - Wan, You Dong
AU - Sun, Tong Wen
AU - Kan, Quan Cheng
AU - Guan, Fang Xia
AU - Liu, Zi Qi
AU - Zhang, Shu Guang
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright: 2016 Wan et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
PY - 2016/1/1
Y1 - 2016/1/1
N2 - Background Intra-aortic balloon pumps (IABP) have generally been used for patients undergoing highrisk mechanical coronary revascularization. However, there is still insufficient evidence to determine whether they can improve outcomes in reperfusion therapy patients, mainly by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stenting or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). This study was designed to determine the difference between high-risk mechanical coronary revascularization with and without IABPs on mortality, by performing a metaanalysis on randomized controlled trials of the current era. Methods Pubmed and Embase databases were searched from inception to May 2015. Unpublished data were obtained from the investigators. Randomized clinical trials of IABP and non-IABP in high-risk coronary revascularization procedures (PCI or CABG) were included. In the case of PCI procedures, stents should be used in more than 80% of patients. Numbers of events at the short-term and long-term follow-up were extracted. Results A total of 12 randomized trials enrolling 2155 patients were included. IABPs did not significantly decrease short-term mortality (relative risk (RR) 0.66; 95% CI, 0.42 1.01), or longterm mortality (RR 0.79; 95% CI, 0.47 1.35), with low heterogeneity across the studies. The findings remained stable in patients with acute myocardial infarction with or without cardiogenic shock. But in high-risk CABG patients, IABP was associated with reduced mortality (71 events in 846 patients; RR 0.40; 95%CI 0.25 0.67). Conclusion In patients undergoing high-risk coronary revascularization, IABP did not significantly decrease mortality. But high-risk CABG patients may be benefit from IABP. Rigorous criteria should be applied to the use of IABPs.
AB - Background Intra-aortic balloon pumps (IABP) have generally been used for patients undergoing highrisk mechanical coronary revascularization. However, there is still insufficient evidence to determine whether they can improve outcomes in reperfusion therapy patients, mainly by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stenting or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). This study was designed to determine the difference between high-risk mechanical coronary revascularization with and without IABPs on mortality, by performing a metaanalysis on randomized controlled trials of the current era. Methods Pubmed and Embase databases were searched from inception to May 2015. Unpublished data were obtained from the investigators. Randomized clinical trials of IABP and non-IABP in high-risk coronary revascularization procedures (PCI or CABG) were included. In the case of PCI procedures, stents should be used in more than 80% of patients. Numbers of events at the short-term and long-term follow-up were extracted. Results A total of 12 randomized trials enrolling 2155 patients were included. IABPs did not significantly decrease short-term mortality (relative risk (RR) 0.66; 95% CI, 0.42 1.01), or longterm mortality (RR 0.79; 95% CI, 0.47 1.35), with low heterogeneity across the studies. The findings remained stable in patients with acute myocardial infarction with or without cardiogenic shock. But in high-risk CABG patients, IABP was associated with reduced mortality (71 events in 846 patients; RR 0.40; 95%CI 0.25 0.67). Conclusion In patients undergoing high-risk coronary revascularization, IABP did not significantly decrease mortality. But high-risk CABG patients may be benefit from IABP. Rigorous criteria should be applied to the use of IABPs.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84958213440&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84958213440&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0147291
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0147291
M3 - Article
C2 - 26784578
AN - SCOPUS:84958213440
SN - 1932-6203
VL - 11
JO - PloS one
JF - PloS one
IS - 1
M1 - e0147291
ER -