RESUMEN
Evaluation of treatment outcomes in patients supported by temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) currently relies mainly on mortality, which may not sufficiently address other patient benefits or harms. Bleeding and thrombosis are major contributors to mortality. Still, current bleeding scores are not designed for critically ill patients undergoing tMCS, only consider selected populations, and do not account for the high heterogeneity among bleeding and thrombotic adverse events. To improve clinical management, a group of European experts has proposed a revised scoring system based on the MOMENTUM 3 Hemocompatibility Score and the Society of Cardiac Angiography and Interventions (SCAI)classification of cardiogenic shock. The new system termed the Scoring Haemostasis Events and Assessment for Risk (SHEAR) score, is divided into a baseline characterization stage and four escalating scoring stages encompassing all aspects of clinical relevance. This report summarizes the literature on hemocompatibility-related adverse events associated with tMCS, including bleeding, stroke, vascular access complications, hemolysis, thrombosis, and device failure. The SHEAR score provides a simple and rapid bedside scoring system aiming to provide a univocal tool to increase physician awareness of hemocompatibility complications at baseline and beyond, improve clinical research, and enable the capture of device-related complications that will inform relevant outcomes beyond mortality.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Data on shock severity and bleeding events in patients with temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) are limited. We investigated the relationship between the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) shock stage classification and bleeding events in patients with tMCS. METHODS: We evaluated the data of 285 consecutive patients with tMCS who were admitted to our institution between June 2019 and May 2022. At the time of tMCS initiation, 81 patients (28.4%) were in SCAI stage A, 38 (13.3%) in stage B, 69 (24.2%) in stage C, 33 (11.6%) in stage D, and 64 (22.5%) in stage E. Multivariable logistic regression modeling was used to assess the association between the SCAI shock stage and in-hospital bleeding events. RESULTS: In-hospital bleeding occurred in 100 patients (35.1%). The bleeding event rate increased incrementally across the SCAI shock stages (stage A, 11.1%; stage B, 15.8%; stage C, 37.7%; stage D, 54.6%; stage E, 64.1%). In-hospital bleeding was associated with the SCAI shock stage (p < 0.001). Compared with stage A, the adjusted odds ratios for in-hospital bleeding were 1.48 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47-4.66), 6.47 (95% CI 2.61-10.66), 11.59 (95% CI 3.77-35.64), and 7.85 (95% CI 2.51-24.55) for stages B, C, D, and E, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The SCAI shock stage predicted subsequent bleeding events in patients with tMCS. This simple scheme may be useful for tailored risk-based clinical assessment and management of patients with tMCS.
RESUMEN
Background: Hospital admissions for cardiogenic shock have increased in the United States. Temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) can be used to acutely stabilize patients. We sought to evaluate the presence of racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic inequities in access to MCS in the United States among patients with cardiogenic shock. Methods: Medicare data were used to identify patients with cardiogenic shock admitted to hospitals with advanced tMCS (microaxial left ventricular assist device [mLVAD] or extracorporeal membranous oxygenation [ECMO]) capabilities within the 25 largest core-based statistical areas, all major metropolitan areas. We modeled the association between patient race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status and use of mLVAD or ECMO. Results: After adjusting for age and clinical comorbidities, dual eligibility for Medicaid was associated with a 19.9% (95% CI, 11.5%-27.4%) decrease in odds of receiving mLVAD in a patient with cardiogenic shock (P < .001). After adjusting for age, clinical comorbidities, and dual eligibility for Medicaid, Black race was associated with 36.7% (95% CI, 28.4%-44.2%) lower odds of receiving mLVAD in a patient with cardiogenic shock. Dual eligibility for Medicaid was associated with a 62.0% (95% CI, 60.8%-63.1%) decrease in odds of receiving ECMO in a patient with cardiogenic shock (P < .001). Black race was associated with 36.0% (95% CI, 16.6%-50.9%) lower odds of receiving ECMO in a patient with cardiogenic shock, after adjusting for Medicaid eligibility. Conclusions: We identified large and significant racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic inequities in access to mLVAD and ECMO among patients presenting with cardiogenic shock to metropolitan hospitals with active advanced tMCS programs. These findings highlight systematic inequities in access to potentially lifesaving therapies.
RESUMEN
Cardiogenic shock is a multisystem pathology that carries a high mortality rate, and initial pharmacotherapies include the use of vasopressors and inotropes. These agents can increase myocardial oxygen consumption and decrease tissue perfusion that can oftentimes result in a state of refractory cardiogenic shock for which temporary mechanical circulatory support can be considered. Numerous support devices are available, each with its own hemodynamic blueprint. Defining a patient's hemodynamic profile and understanding the phenotype of cardiogenic shock is important in device selection. Careful patient selection incorporating a multidisciplinary team approach should be utilized.
Asunto(s)
Corazón Auxiliar , Choque Cardiogénico , Humanos , Choque Cardiogénico/terapia , Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea/métodos , Selección de Paciente , HemodinámicaRESUMEN
Objectives. Temporary mechanical circulatory support (TMCS) has become a component in the therapeutic strategy for treatment of cardiogenic shock as a bridge-to-decision. TMCS can facilitate recovery of cardiopulmonary function, end-organ function, and potentially reduce the surgical risk of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. Despite the improvements of hemodynamics and end-organ function, post-LVAD operative morbidity might be increased in these high-risk patients. The aim of the study was to compare outcomes after Heartmate 3 (HM3) implantation in patients with and without TMCS prior to HM3 implant. Methods. In this retrospective cohort study of all HM3 patients in the period between November 2015 and October 2021, patients with and without prior TMCS were compared. Patients' demographics, baseline clinical characteristics, laboratory tests, intraoperative variables, postoperative outcomes, and adverse events were collected from patient records. Results. The TMCS group showed an improvement in hemodynamics prior to LVAD implantation. Median TMCS duration was 19.5 (14-26) days. However, the TMCS group were more coagulopathic, had more wound infections, neurological complications, and more patients were on dialysis compared with patient without TMCS prior to HM3 implantation. Survival four years after HM3 implantation was 80 and 82% in the TMCS (N = 22) and non-TMCS group (N = 41), respectively. Conclusion. Patients on TMCS had an acceptable short and long-term survival and comparable to patients receiving HM3 without prior TMCS. However, they had a more complicated postoperative course.
Asunto(s)
Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Corazón Auxiliar , Hemodinámica , Recuperación de la Función , Choque Cardiogénico , Función Ventricular Izquierda , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Choque Cardiogénico/fisiopatología , Choque Cardiogénico/mortalidad , Choque Cardiogénico/terapia , Choque Cardiogénico/diagnóstico , Factores de Riesgo , Adulto , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/fisiopatología , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/terapia , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/mortalidad , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/diagnóstico , Anciano , Implantación de Prótesis/instrumentación , Implantación de Prótesis/efectos adversos , Implantación de Prótesis/mortalidad , Medición de Riesgo , Diseño de PrótesisRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The Impella 5.0 and 5.5 pumps (Abiomed, Danvers, MA) are large-bore transvalvular micro-axial assist devices used in cardiogenic shock (CS) for patients requiring high-capacity flow. Despite their increasing use, real-world data regarding indications, rates of utilization and clinical outcomes with this therapy are limited. The objective of our study was to examine clinical profiles and outcomes of patients in a contemporary, real-world CS registry of patients who received an Impella 5.0/5.5 alone or in combination with other temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) devices. METHODS: The CS Working Group (CSWG) Registry includes patients from 34 US hospitals. For this analysis, data from patients who received an Impella 5.0/5.5 between 2020-2023 were analyzed. Use of Impella 5.0/5.5 with or without additional tMCS therapies, duration of support, adverse events and outcomes at hospital discharge were studied. Adverse events including stroke, limb ischemia, bleeding and hemolysis were not standardized by the registry but reported per individual CSWG Primary Investigator discretion. For those who survived, rates of native heart recovery (NHR) or heart replacement therapy (HRT) including heart transplant (HT), or durable ventricular assist device (VAD) were recorded. We also assessed outcomes based on shock etiology (acute myocardial infarction or MI-CS vs. heart failure-related CS or HF-CS). RESULTS: Among 6,205 patients, 754 received an Impella 5.0/5.5 (12.1%), including 210 MI-CS (27.8%) and 484 HF-CS (64.1%) patients. Impella 5.0/5.5 was used as the sole tMCS device in 32% of patients, while 68% of patients received a combination of tMCS devices. Impella cannulation sites were available for 524/754 (69.4%) of patients, with 93.5% axillary configuration. Survival to hospital discharge for those supported with an Impella 5.0/5.5 was 67%, with 20.4% NHR and 45.5% HRT. Compared to HF-CS, patients with MI-CS supported on Impella 5.0/5.5 had higher in-hospital mortality (45.2% vs 26.2%, p < 0.001) and were less likely to receive HRT (22.4% vs 56.6%, p < 0.001. For patients receiving a combination of tMCS during hospitalization, this was associated with higher rates of limb ischemia (9% vs. 3%, p < 0.01), bleeding (52% vs 33%, p < 0.01), and mortality (38% vs 25%; p < 0.001) compared to Impella 5.0/5.5 alone. Among Impella 5.0/5.5 recipients, the median duration of pump support was 12.9 days (IQR: 6.8-22.9) and longer in patients bridged to HRT (14 days; IQR: 7.7-28.4). CONCLUSIONS: In this multi-center cohort of patients with CS, use of Impella 5.0/5.5 was associated with an overall survival of 67.1% and high rates of HRT. Lower adverse event rates were observed when Impella 5.0/5.5 was the sole support device used. Further study is required to determine whether a strategy of early Impella 5.0/5.5 use for CS improves survival. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: High capacity Impella heart pumps are capable of provide up to 5.5 liter/min of flow while upper body surgical placement allows for ambulation. Patients with advanced cardiogenic shock from acute myocardial infarction or heart failure requiring temporary mechanical circulatory support may benefit from upfront use of Impella 5.5 to improve overall survival, including native heart recovery or successful bridge to durable left ventricular assist device surgery or heart transplantation.
Asunto(s)
Corazón Auxiliar , Sistema de Registros , Choque Cardiogénico , Humanos , Choque Cardiogénico/terapia , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Resultado del Tratamiento , Anciano , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Tasa de Supervivencia , Diseño de PrótesisRESUMEN
Temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) is increasingly used in patients with cardiogenic shock as a bridge to further treatment. We present the case of a 52-year-old female patient with biventricular heart failure who was bridged to heart transplantation employing biventricular tMCS through a non-femoral access. The 'groin-free' tMCS concept facilitates pre-habilitation while awaiting heart transplantation.
RESUMEN
AIMS: Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a potential useful tool to support clinical treatment of heart failure, including the setting of mechanical circulatory support (MCS). Modern Impella pumps are equipped with advanced technology (SmartAssist), enabling real-time acquisition and display of data related to both pump performance and the patient's haemodynamic status. These data emerge as an 'ideal' source for data-driven AI applications to predict the clinical course of an ongoing therapeutic protocol. Yet, no evidence of effective application of AI tools in the setting of Impella support is available. On this background, we aimed at identifying possible future applications of AI-based tools in the setting of temporary MCS with an Impella device. METHODS: We explored the state of research and development at the intersection of AI and Impella support and derived future potential applications of AI in routine Impella clinical management. RESULTS: We identified different areas where the future implementation of AI tools may contribute to addressing important clinical challenges in the setting of Impella support, including (i) early identification of the best suited pathway of care according to patients' conditions at presentation and intention to treat, (ii) prediction of therapy outcomes according to different possible therapeutic actions, (iii) optimization of device implantation procedures and evaluation of proper pump position over the whole course of support and (iv) prevention and/or rationale management of haemocompatibility-related adverse events. For each of those areas, we discuss the potential advantages, challenges and implications of harnessing AI-driven insights in the setting of MCS with an Impella device. CONCLUSIONS: Temporary MCS with an Impella device has great potential to benefit from the integration of AI-based tools. Such tools may indeed translate into groundbreaking innovation supporting clinical decision-making and therapy regulation, in particular in complex scenarios such as the multidevice MCS strategy.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Since the 2018 change in the US adult heart allocation policy, more patients are bridged-to-transplant on temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS). Previous studies indicate that durable left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) may lead to allosensitization. The goal of this study was to assess whether tMCS implantation is associated with changes in sensitization. METHODS: We included patients evaluated for heart transplants between 2015 and 2022 who had alloantibody measured before and after MCS implantation. Allosensitization was defined as development of new alloantibodies after tMCS implant. RESULTS: A total of 41 patients received tMCS before transplant. Nine (22.0%) patients developed alloantibodies following tMCS implantation: 3 (12.0%) in the intra-aortic balloon pump group (n = 25), 2 (28.6%) in the microaxial percutaneous LVAD group (n = 7), and 4 (44.4%) in the veno-arterial extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation group (n = 9)-p = .039. Sensitized patients were younger (44.7 ± 11.6 years vs. 54.3 ± 12.5 years, p = .044), were more likely to be sensitized at baseline - 3 of 9 (33.3%) compared to 2 out of 32 (6.3%) (p = .028) and received more transfusions with red blood cells (6 (66.6%) vs. 8 (25%), p = .02) and platelets (6 (66.6%) vs. 5 (15.6%), p = .002). There was no significant difference in tMCS median duration of support (4 [3,15] days vs. 8.5 [5,14.5] days, p = .57). Importantly, out of the 11 patients who received a durable LVAD after tMCS, 5 (45.5%) became sensitized, compared to 4 out of 30 patients (13.3%) who only had tMCS-p = .028. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that patients bridged-to-transplant with tMCS, without significant blood product transfusions and a subsequent durable LVAD implant, have a low risk of allosensitization. Further studies are needed to confirm our findings and determine whether risk of sensitization varies by type of tMCS and duration of support.
Asunto(s)
Trasplante de Corazón , Corazón Auxiliar , Isoanticuerpos , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Isoanticuerpos/inmunología , Isoanticuerpos/sangre , Estudios de Seguimiento , Adulto , Factores de Riesgo , Pronóstico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/cirugía , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/terapia , Rechazo de Injerto/etiologíaRESUMEN
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To present an abridged overview of the literature and pathophysiological background of adjunct interventional left ventricular unloading strategies during veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A ECMO). From a clinical perspective, the mechanistic complexity of such combined mechanical circulatory support often requires in-depth physiological reasoning at the bedside, which remains a cornerstone of daily practice for optimal patient-specific V-A ECMO care. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent conventional clinical trials have not convincingly shown the superiority of V-A ECMO in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock as compared with medical therapy alone. Though, it has repeatedly been reported that the addition of interventional left ventricular unloading to V-A ECMO may improve clinical outcome. Novel approaches such as registry-based adaptive platform trials and computational physiological modeling are now introduced to inform clinicians by aiming to better account for patient-specific variation and complexity inherent to V-A ECMO and have raised a widespread interest. To provide modern high-quality V-A ECMO care, it remains essential to understand the patient's pathophysiology and the intricate interaction of an individual patient with extracorporeal circulatory support devices. Innovative clinical trial design and computational modeling approaches carry great potential towards advanced clinical decision support in ECMO and related critical care.
Asunto(s)
Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea , Choque Cardiogénico , Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea/métodos , Humanos , Choque Cardiogénico/terapia , Choque Cardiogénico/fisiopatología , Corazón Auxiliar , Infarto del Miocardio/fisiopatología , Infarto del Miocardio/terapia , Función Ventricular Izquierda/fisiología , Ventrículos Cardíacos/fisiopatologíaRESUMEN
Background: Cardiogenic shock in children still carries a high mortality risk despite advances in medical therapy. The use of temporary mechanical circulatory supports is an accepted strategy to bridge patients with acute heart failure to recovery, decision, transplantation or destination therapy. These devices are however limited in children and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) remains the most commonly used device. Veno-arterial ECMO may provide adequate oxygen delivery, but it does not significantly unload the left ventricle, and this may prevent recovery. To improve the likelihood of left ventricular recovery and minimize the invasiveness of mechanical support, the Impella axial pump has been increasingly used in children with acute heart failure in the last decade. Purpose: There are still limited data describing the Impella indications, management and outcomes in children, therefore, we aimed to provide a comprehensive narrative review useful for the pediatric nurses to be adequately trained and acquire specific competencies in Impella management.
Asunto(s)
Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea , Corazón Auxiliar , Choque Cardiogénico , Niño , Humanos , Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea/métodos , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/terapia , Enfermería Pediátrica/métodos , Choque Cardiogénico/terapiaRESUMEN
Background: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is recommended for patients with symptomatic heart failure in sinus rhythm with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 35%, QRS duration ≥ 150â ms, and left bundle branch block (LBBB) morphology. However, when severe left ventricular dysfunction and cardiogenic shock are present, treatment paradigms are often limited to palliative medical therapy or advanced therapies with durable left ventricular assist device or heart transplant as the functional and survival benefit of CRT in these patients remains uncertain. Case summary: A 77-year-old white man with long-standing LBBB with dyssynchrony, severely reduced LVEF of 4%, and severe bicuspid aortic stenosis (AS) presented with worsening heart failure symptoms. After multidisciplinary heart team evaluation and pre-operative optimization, the patient underwent a surgical aortic valve replacement with simultaneous intraoperative initiation of CRT with pacemaker (CRT-P) and temporary mechanical circulatory support. Echocardiography at 44 days and 201 days post-discharge showed an LVEF of 29% and 40%, respectively. Discussion: This case demonstrates that reverse remodelling and native heart recovery were successfully achieved in a patient with advanced structural heart disease, presenting with cardiogenic shock, through an early and aggressive approach involving multidisciplinary heart team evaluation, treatment of severe AS with surgical aortic valve replacement, prophylactic intraoperative initiation of temporary mechanical circulatory support, and early initiation of CRT-P.
RESUMEN
Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA ECMO) has become a standard of care for severe cardiogenic shock, refractory cardiac arrest and related impending multiorgan failure. The widespread clinical use of this complex temporary circulatory support modality is still contrasted by a lack of formal scientific evidence in the current literature. This might at least in part be attributable to VA ECMO related complications, which may significantly impact on clinical outcome. In order to limit adverse effects of VA ECMO as much as possible an indepth understanding of the complex physiology during extracorporeally supported cardiogenic shock states is critically important. This review covers all relevant physiological aspects of VA ECMO interacting with the human body in detail. This, to provide a solid basis for health care professionals involved in the daily management of patients supported with VA ECMO and suffering from cardiogenic shock or cardiac arrest and impending multiorgan failure for the best possible care.
Asunto(s)
Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea , Choque Cardiogénico , Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea/métodos , Humanos , Choque Cardiogénico/terapia , Choque Cardiogénico/fisiopatología , Insuficiencia Multiorgánica , Paro Cardíaco/terapia , Paro Cardíaco/fisiopatologíaRESUMEN
Heart transplantation and durable left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) represent two definitive therapies for end-stage heart failure in the modern era. Despite technological advances, both treatment modalities continue to experience unique risks that impact surgical and perioperative decision-making. Here, we review special populations and factors that impact risk in LVAD and heart transplant surgery and examine critical decisions in the management of these patients. As both heart transplantation and the use of durable LVADs as destination therapy continue to increase, these considerations will be of increasing relevance in managing advanced heart failure and improving outcomes.
RESUMEN
This review highlights key studies examining perioperative management of cardiothoracic transplantation published in 2023. Articles were manually screened after searching Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases for manuscripts related to cardiothoracic transplantation, which yielded 343 papers with 15 qualitatively selected as the most salient for readers. Overarching themes include differences in outcomes across the various etiologies of end-stage lung disease, novel developments to expand the donor pool, and multi-organ transplantation.
Asunto(s)
Trasplante de Corazón , Trasplante de Pulmón , Humanos , Trasplante de Corazón/métodos , Trasplante de Pulmón/métodos , Atención Perioperativa/métodosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety of cangrelor administered concurrently with heparin or bivalirudin in patients on mechanical circulatory support. DESIGN: A single-center, retrospective cohort study of adult patients consecutively admitted between January 2016 and October 2020. SETTING: A tertiary medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients admitted to the cardiovascular intensive care unit put on mechanical circulatory support for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) or non-AMI indications. Patients who received cangrelor underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting during the index event or within the last year. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was the incidence of major bleeding, defined by the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization criteria, in patients with mechanical circulatory support receiving cangrelor plus anticoagulation with heparin or bivalirudin with or without aspirin versus patients who did not receive cangrelor. Sixty-eight patients were included in the study. Twenty-nine patients received cangrelor, and 39 did not. Cangrelor was not associated with an increase in major bleeding; however, the CI was wide (adjusted hazard ratio 1.93, 95% CI 0.61-6.11; p = 0.262). CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving cangrelor did not appear to be at higher risk of major bleeding compared to patients not receiving cangrelor. Larger trials should be conducted to better evaluate the safety of cangrelor in patients with mechanical circulatory support.
Asunto(s)
Adenosina Monofosfato , Adenosina Monofosfato/análogos & derivados , Anticoagulantes , Humanos , Femenino , Masculino , Estudios Retrospectivos , Adenosina Monofosfato/administración & dosificación , Adenosina Monofosfato/uso terapéutico , Adenosina Monofosfato/efectos adversos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anticoagulantes/administración & dosificación , Anticoagulantes/efectos adversos , Anciano , Corazón Auxiliar/efectos adversos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Fragmentos de Péptidos/administración & dosificación , Fragmentos de Péptidos/uso terapéutico , Hirudinas/administración & dosificación , Proteínas Recombinantes/administración & dosificación , Proteínas Recombinantes/uso terapéutico , Heparina/administración & dosificación , Heparina/efectos adversos , Hemorragia/inducido químicamente , Hemorragia/epidemiología , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/métodos , Infarto del Miocardio/terapia , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria/administración & dosificaciónRESUMEN
Objective: The Impella 5.5 (Abiomed, Inc), a surgically implanted endovascular microaxial left ventricular assist device, is increasingly used worldwide and there have been more than 10,000 implants. The purpose of this study is to describe a large-volume, single-center experience with the use of the Impella 5.5. Methods: Data were obtained retrospectively from patients supported with the Impella 5.5 implanted at our institution from May 1, 2020, to December 31, 2022. Demographic, operative, and postoperative outcomes for each group are described. Results are reported in median (interquartile range) or n (%). The entire cohort was divided into 5 main groups based on the intention to treat at the time of the Impella 5.5 implantation: (1) patients who had a planned Impella 5.5 implanted at the time of high-risk cardiac surgery; (2) patients with cardiogenic shock; (3) patients bridged to a durable left ventricular assist device; (4) patients bridged to transplant; and (5) patients with postcardiotomy shock who received an unplanned Impella 5.5 implant. Results: A total of 126 patients were supported with the Impella 5.5. Overall survival to device explant was 76.2%, with 67.5% surviving to discharge. Midterm survival was assessed with a median follow-up time of 318 days and demonstrated an overall survival of 60.3% and a median of 650 days (549-752). Conclusions: Outcomes after using the Impella 5.5 are variable depending on the indication of use. Patient selection may be of utmost importance and requires further experience with this device to determine who will benefit from insertion.
RESUMEN
The importance of temporary mechanical circulatory support for treating acute heart failure with cardiogenic shock is increasingly recognized, and Impella (Abiomed, Danvers, MA, USA) has received particular attention in this regard. Impella is an axial flow left ventricular assist device (LVAD) built into the tip of a catheter. It is inserted via a peripheral artery and implanted into the left ventricle. Although the morphology of Impella is different from a typical LVAD, it has similar actions and effects as an LVAD in terms of left ventricular drainage and aortic blood delivery. Impella increases mean arterial pressure (MAP) and systemic blood flow, thereby improving peripheral organ perfusion and promoting recovery from multiple organ failure. In addition, left ventricular unloading with increased MAP increases coronary perfusion and decreases myocardial oxygen demand, thereby promoting myocardial recovery. Impella is also useful as a mechanical vent of the left ventricle in patients supported with veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Indications for Impella include emergency use for cardiogenic shock and non-emergent use during high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention and ventricular tachycardia ablation. Its intended uses for cardiogenic shock include bridge to recovery, durable device, heart transplantation, and heart surgery. Prophylactic use of Impella in high-risk patients undergoing open heart surgery to prevent postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock is also gaining attention. While there have been many case reports and retrospective studies on the benefits of Impella, there is little evidence based on sufficiently large randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Currently, several RCTs are now ongoing, which are critical to determine when, for whom, and how these devices should be used. In this review, we summarize the principles, physiology, indications, and complications of the Impella support and discuss current issues and future expectations for the device.
Asunto(s)
Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Cardíacos , Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Corazón Auxiliar , Humanos , Choque Cardiogénico/terapia , Choque Cardiogénico/cirugía , Corazón Auxiliar/efectos adversos , Motivación , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/complicaciones , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Cardíacos/efectos adversos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
This special article is the 16th in an annual series for the Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia. The authors thank the editor-in-chief, Dr. Kaplan, and the editorial board for the opportunity to continue this series, namely the research highlights of the past year in the specialty of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesiology. The major themes selected for 2023 are outlined in this introduction, and each highlight is reviewed in detail in the main article. The literature highlights in the specialty for 2023 begin with an update on perioperative rehabilitation in cardiothoracic surgery, with a focus on novel methods to best assess patients in the preoperative and postoperative periods, and the impact of rehabilitation on outcomes. The second major theme is focused on cardiac surgery, with the authors discussing new insights into inhaled pulmonary vasodilators, coronary revascularization surgery, and discussion of causes of coronary graft failure after surgery. The third theme is focused on cardiothoracic transplantation, with discussions focusing on bridge-to-transplantation strategies. The fourth theme is focused on mechanical circulatory support, with discussions focusing on both temporary and durable support. The fifth and final theme is an update on medical cardiology, with a focus on outcomes of invasive approaches to heart disease. The themes selected for this article are only a few of the diverse advances in the specialty during 2023. These highlights will inform the reader of key updates on various topics, leading to improved perioperative outcomes for patients with cardiothoracic and vascular disease.