{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.05226722049151956, 'fraction_numerical': 0.04880581516095535, 'mean_word_length': 4.78, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Gender difference in efficacy of intra-aortic balloon pump in acute myocardial infarction patients complicating with cardiogenic shock].

Objective: To investigate the effect of gender on the efficacy of intra-aortic balloon pump(IABP) applied in patients with cardiogenic shock complicated by acute myocardial infarction(AMI). Methods: A total of 209 patients diagnosed as cardiogenic shock complicated by AMI admitted in Fuwai Hospital from June 2012 to May 2018 were enrolled in our study. We collected the data from medical records and investigated their clinical manifestation and laboratory examination and IABP support, as well as 28-day (from diagnosis of cardiogenic shock) mortality retrospectively. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to compare the 28-day survival rates of patients of different genders/with or without IABP treatment. Adjustment for age, systolic blood pressure, ST segment elevation myocardial infarction, dual antiplatelet, coma, APACHEⅡ score and SAPSⅡ score, Cox regression analysis was used to detect the affect of IABP treatment on the risk of all-cause mortality in different crowd, and using Z test to evaluate the modification effect of gender on IABP treatment efficacy. Results: A total of 209 patients were included in this study, with 148 males (80 (54.05%) cases received IABP support) and 61 females (22 (36.06%) cases received IABP support). A total of 102 patients received IABP treatment. The 28-day survival rate of male patients was higher than that of females (39.2% (58/148) vs. 26.2% (16/61), Log-rank P=0.034). The 28-day survival rate of patients receiving IABP was significantly higher than that of non-IABP groups (46.1% (47/102) vs. 25.2% (27/107), Log-rank P=0.001 7). Among female patients, there was no statistically significant difference in 28-day survival rate between those who received IABP and those who did not receive IABP (P=0.889). While in male patients, the 28-day survival rate of those who received IABP was higher than that of those who did not receive IABP (51.2% (41/80) vs. 25.0% (17/68), P=0.001). The survival rate of male patients treated with IABP was higher than that of male patients who did not receive IABP, female patients who did not receive IABP and female patients who received IABP (all P<0.05). After multiple regression analysis and adjustment of confounding factors, it was found that IABP implantation can significantly reduce the 28-day mortality risk in male patients (HR=0.44, 95%CI 0.25-0.77 P=0.004). While it had no inpact on the death risk in female patients(P= 0.401). The impact of IABP implantation in patients of different genders was significantly different (Z=-2.32, P=0.020). Conclusion: In AMI patients complicating cardiogenic shock, there is a gender difference in the impact of IABP implantation on the 28-day mortality risk, and protective effects are seen only in men.