Outcomes of Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Plus Intra‐Aortic Balloon Pumping for Treatment of Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock

Abstract

Background

Clinical outcomes of acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock remain poor with high in‐hospital mortality. Veno‐arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA‐ECMO) has been widely used for patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock refractory to conservative therapy, which is likely fatal without mechanical circulatory support. However, whether additional intra‐aortic balloon pumping (IABP) use during VA‐ECMO support improves clinical outcomes remains controversial. This study sought to investigate prognostic impact of the combined VA‐ECMO plus IABP treatment compared with VA‐ECMO alone.

Methods and Results

From the nationwide Japanese administrative case‐mix Diagnostic Procedure Combination (DPC), the JROAD (Japanese Registry of All Cardiac and Vascular Diseases)–DPC, we identified 3815 patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention and managed with VA‐ECMO. Of these, 2964 patients (77.7%) were managed with IABP (VA‐ECMO plus IABP), whereas 851 (22.3%) were managed without IABP (VA‐ECMO alone). We compared in‐hospital, 7‐day, and 30‐day mortality between the VA‐ECMO plus IABP versus the VA‐ECMO alone support. Patients managed with VA‐ECMO plus IABP demonstrated significantly lower in‐hospital, 7‐day, and 30‐day mortality than those managed with VA‐ECMO alone (adjusted odds ratios [95% CI] of 0.47 [95% CI, 0.38–0.59], 0.41 [95% CI, 0.33–0.51], and 0.30 [95% CI, 0.25–0.37], respectively). The findings were consistent in the propensity matching and inverse probability of treatment‐weighting models.

Conclusions

This large‐scale, nationwide study demonstrated that the combination of VA‐ECMO plus IABP support was associated with significantly lower mortality compared with VA‐ECMO support alone in patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention.