Therefore, these scores may have a variety of biases and have limited significance for current clinical guidance. Some had no specific disadvantages for CS. Other projects were too big, complicated, and inconvenient to implement. Among these scores, some scoring models were created too early. With the progress of medical technology, several studies have shown that emergency PCI revascularization can significantly benefit patients with CS ( 15, 16). At the early stage, there were some risk scores for CS ( 5, 13, 14), but these were small studies, and most patients failed to undergo emergency PCI due to limited early medical conditions. French scholars have shown that SAPS II score, cardiac function index, and mean arterial pressure are prognostic factors of CS in patients ( 12). These scores have been used in most studies to evaluate the prognosis of patients with myocardial infarction or coronary intervention and have achieved good results ( 10, 11). Specific scoring methods for the cardiovascular system include the TIMI risk score, Primary Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction (PAMI) score, and Zwolle. Both have been proven in the assessment of the prognosis of patients with myocardial infarction ( 7– 9). Non-specific evaluation systems include the Acute Physiological and Chronic Health Score (APACHE) ( 6) and the Simplified Acute Physiological Score (SAPS). These are mainly divided into non-specific and specific evaluation systems. At present, there are many scores on the prognosis of severe cases of myocardial infarction. (3) Guide the allocation and utilization of resources in the ward. (2) Refine the right to know about the family members of patients. (1) Doctors assess the patient's condition and prognosis, measure the treatment effect dynamically, and adjust the treatment plan in time. With the rapid development of critical medicine, a series of methods to evaluate the severity of critical diseases have been produced, and its advantages are as follows. Therefore, infarct-related CS is the most critical state of CS, and timely and accurate risk stratification for this type of CS is helpful to guide clinicians to formulate appropriate treatment plans. AMI is the main cause of CS, and a comparative study with non-infarct-related CS found that AMI is an independent risk factor for death from CS ( 5). If coronary blood flow cannot reach thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) level 3 after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the prognosis of patients is poor ( 4). Many factors influence the prognosis of CS, including gender, age, acute anterior myocardial infarction, gastrointestinal bleeding, history of stroke, and kidney damage ( 2, 3). Even after early revascularization, the mortality rate of patients with AMI complicated with CS is still as high as 40–50% ( 1). It is characterized by low systemic perfusion caused by cardiac pump failure, often leading to multiple organ failure and severe internal environment disorder, with rapid disease change and poor prognosis. In the meanwhile, with the development of molecular omics and the clinical need for optimal treatment of CS, it is urgent to establish a prognosis model with higher differentiation and coincidence rates.Ĭardiogenic shock (CS) is the most serious complication of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Results and Conclusions: The existing related models are in urgent need of more external clinical verifications. The list of references for major studies was reviewed to obtain more references. Filter headlines and abstracts to find articles that may be relevant. There are no restrictions on publication status and start date. Methods: Cardiogenic shock, severe case, prognosis score, myocardial infarction and external verification were used as the search terms to search PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, EBSCO (Medline), Scopus, BMC, NCBI, Oxford Academy, Science Direct, and other databases for pertinent studies published up until 1 August 2021. In order to optimize the diagnosis and treatment of myocardial infarction complicated with cardiogenic shock and facilitate the classification of clinical trials, the prognosis score model is urgently needed. However, few prognostic models are concerned with the score of cardiogenic shock, and few clinical studies have validated it. Objective: Cardiogenic shock seriously affects the survival rate of patients. Department of Cardiology, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.Jingyue Wang, Botao Shen, Xiaoxing Feng, Zhiyu Zhang, Junqian Liu and Yushi Wang *
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |