Antiplatelet Therapy in Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock: Insights From the National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative

Sarah Gorgis, Alejandro Lemor, Brian Kolski, Thomas Lalonde, Amir Kaki, Steve Marso, Shaun Senter, Ayaz Rahman, Simon Gorwara, Raja Nazir, Omer Zuberi, Larry Justice, Nalin Srivastava, Richard Padgett, William O'Neill, Mir B. Basir

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) are at high risk for impaired antiplatelet activity secondary to malabsorption, systemic hypoperfusion, hypothermia, need for mechanical ventilation, and high use of analgesics. The use of antiplatelet therapy in these high-risk patients is not well studied. METHODS: Using the National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative database, we analyzed patients who presented with AMI-CS at 60 hospitals from March 2018 to December 2020. All patients were treated using a standard shock protocol. Herein, the patterns of antiplatelet use are described. RESULTS: A total of 204 patients were included in the analysis, of which 174 (85.3%) presented with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The majority (84.3%) received antiplatelet therapy before percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI); of those who received antiplatelets, 77.9% received aspirin, 55.2% received an oral P2Y12 inhibitor, and 19.2% received intravenous (IV) antiplatelet therapy. Ticagrelor was the most common P2Y12 inhibitor administered (41.9%), followed by clopidogrel (12.2%) and prasugrel (1.2%). Only 18.6% of oral antiplatelet agents were crushed. Baseline characteristics of patients who received IV vs non-IV antiplatelet agents were similar. Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) 0 flow was present in 69.6% of patients before PCI and aspiration thrombectomy was performed in 24.5% of patients. The presence of STEMI, cardiac arrest, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, hypothermia, vasopressor use, elevated lactate levels, or number of vessels treated did not influence the use of IV antiplatelet agents. CONCLUSIONS: The use of crushed and IV antiplatelet agents in AMI-CS is low. Further studies are needed in this high-risk population to assess whether more potent antiplatelet inhibition will improve outcomes.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)E156-E163
JournalThe Journal of invasive cardiology
Volume34
Issue number3
StatePublished - Mar 1 2022

Keywords

  • P2Y12 inhibitors
  • antiplatelets
  • cardiogenic shock
  • glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Antiplatelet Therapy in Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock: Insights From the National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this