Electrical Storm Ablation in a Patient in Cardiogenic Shock Supported by Impella 5.0.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Le Ruz R
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8311017 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundPercutaneous ventricular assist devices (pVADs) have been used to support patients who are in cardiogenic shock (CS). There is limited data on 30-day mortality predictors in patients supported by an Impella pVAD.MethodsAll CS patients requiring left-sided Impella implantation in Harefield Hospital (Greater London, United Kingdom) between 2017 and 2020 were included in the current study. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors of 30-day mortality.ResultsA total of 92 patients were included. The mean age was 53.8 ± 14.9 years, and 78.3% were male. CS etiology was predominantly acute coronary syndromes (44.6%), followed by decompensated dilated cardiomyopathy (28.3%). Survival at 30 days was 63% (58 of 92). Deceased patients had a lower left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (15.1 ± 9.6 vs 21.8 ± 14.2, P < 0.001), higher serum lactate levels (2.8[1.6 to 5.4] vs 1.45 [1.08 to 3.53], P = 0.012), a higher percentage of prolonged invasive ventilation (> 24 hours) (64.7% vs 13.8%, P < 0.001), and worse renal and liver function. Serum lactate, baseline LVEF, and prolonged ventilation (> 24 hours) were independent predictors of 30-day survival with an area under the curve of 0.85 (95% confidence interval 0.769 to 0.930), P < 0.001.ConclusionsIn the current retrospective registry of patients requiring Impella pVAD implantation, independent 30-day mortality predictors included serum lactate, baseline LVEF, and prolonged invasive ventilation (> 24 hours). These parameters could highlight patients who would benefit from earlier mechanical circulatory support escalation or neurologic assessment to inform withdrawal decisions.
| S-EPMC8413249 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) still has high likelihood of in-hospital mortality. The only trial evidence currently available for the intra-aortic balloon pump showed no benefit of its routine use in AMI-CS. While a potential benefit of complete revascularisation has been suggested in urgent revascularisation, the CULPRIT-SHOCK trial demonstrated no benefit of multivessel compared to culprit-lesion only revascularisation in AMI-CS. However, mechanical circulatory support was only used in a minority of patients. Objectives: We hypothesised that more complete revascularisation facilitated by Impella support is related to lower mortality in AMI-CS patients. Methods: We analysed data from 202 consecutive Impella-treated AMI-CS patients at four European high-volume shock centres (age 66 ± 11 years, 83% male). Forty-seven percentage (n = 94) had cardiac arrest before Impella implantation. Revascularisation was categorised as incomplete if residual SYNTAX-score (rS) was >8. Results: Overall 30-day mortality was 47%. Mortality was higher when Impella was implanted post-PCI (Impella-post-PCI: 57%, Impella-pre-PCI: 38%, p = 0.0053) and if revascularisation was incomplete (rS ≤ 8: 37%, rS > 8: 56%, p = 0.0099). Patients with both pre-PCI Impella implantation and complete revascularisation had significantly lower mortality (33%) than those with incomplete revascularisation and implantation post PCI (72%, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Our retrospective analysis suggests that complete revascularisation supported by an Impella microaxial pump implanted prior to PCI is associated with lower mortality than incomplete revascularisation in patients with AMI-CS.
| S-EPMC8299360 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 can present with cardiovascular complications.Case summaryWe present a case report of a 43-year-old previously fit patient who suffered from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection with thrombosis of the coronary arteries causing acute myocardial infarction. These were treated with coronary stenting during which the patient suffered cardiac arrest. He was supported with automated chest compressions followed by peripheral veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA ECMO). No immediate recovery of the myocardial function was observed and, after insufficient venting of the left ventricle was diagnosed, an Impella 5 pump was implanted. The cardiovascular function recovered sufficiently and ECMO was explanted and inotropic infusions discontinued. Due to SARS-CoV-2 pulmonary infection, hypoxia became resistant to conventional mechanical ventilation and the patient was nursed prone overnight. After initial recovery of respiratory function, the patient received a tracheostomy and was allowed to wake up. Following a short period of agitation his neurological function recovered completely. During the third week of recovery, progressive multisystem dysfunction, possibly related to COVID-19, developed into multiorgan failure, and the patient died.DiscussionWe believe that this is the first case report of coronary thrombosis related to COVID-19. Despite the negative outcome in this patient, we suggest that complex patients may in the future benefit from advanced cardiovascular support, and may even be nursed safely in the prone position with Impella devices.
| S-EPMC7717226 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (AMICS), is characterized by critically low cardiac output and decreased myocardial contractility. In this situation, a treatment that unloads the myocardium and restores CO without increasing the myocardial oxygen demand is theoretically appealing. Axial flow pumps offer hemodynamic support without increasing myocardial oxygen consumption. Consequently, the use of axial flow pumps, especially the Impella devices, is increasing. It is likely that the SCAI C patient with predominantly left ventricular failure and without prolonged cardiac arrest is the best candidate for these devices. Registry data suggest that pre-PCI Impella may be advantageous to post-PCI placement. However, several gaps in knowledge exist regarding optimal patient selection, futility criteria, timing, weaning and escalation strategy, and until data from adequately sized randomized trials are available, immediate individual evaluation for mechanical circulatory support by a shock team is warranted when a patient is diagnosed with AMICS.
| S-EPMC9101440 | biostudies-literature
Project description:With percutaneous left ventricular mechanical circulatory support devices becoming increasingly available for patients with cardiogenic shock due to acute myocardial infarction and the lack of a clear mortality benefit to date, identifying optimal candidates for this technology is crucial. We studied the effectiveness of Impella Cardiac Pow (Abiomed, Danvers, MA) in various stages of cardiogenic shock and elderly cohorts.DesignRetrospective review.SettingData were collected for patients at a single community hospital between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2019.SubjectsThirty-one consecutive adult patients with cardiogenic shock due to acute myocardial infarction who received Impella Cardiac Pow support. Shock stages were defined by the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention (Stages A-E).InterventionsNone.Measurements and main resultsThe primary outcome was in-hospital death across Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention cardiogenic shock stages and in patients greater than or equal to 80 and less than 80 years old. Secondary outcomes were Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 vascular and bleeding complications, stroke, and renal failure requiring dialysis. The median age of the study population was 64 years, with seven patients (23%) being greater than or equal to 80 years old. No patients were in Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention Stage A, whereas there were seven in B, eight in C, six in D, and 10 (32%) in E. Overall in-hospital mortality occurred in 61% of patients. All 10 patients in Stage E died before hospital discharge. Mortality occurred in 54% of patients (13/24) age less than 80 years compared with 86% of those 80 years or older (6/7). A total of 38.7% of patients (12/31) and 32.3% of patients (10/31) experienced Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 bleeding and vascular events, which were evenly distributed across Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention cardiogenic shock Stages.ConclusionsIn conclusion, patients with shock in extremis and those 80 years old and older may have a prohibitively high mortality despite Impella use. These findings merit further prospective investigation in a larger number of patients to evaluate the effectiveness of Impella (and other left ventricular mechanical circulatory devices) and the inherent resource utilization in advanced cardiogenic shock and the elderly.
| S-EPMC8202667 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cardiogenic shock (CS) remains a leading cause of hospital death. However, the use of mechanical circulatory support has fundamentally changed CS management over the last decade and is rapidly increasing. In contrast to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as well as counterpulsation with an intraaortic balloon pump, ventricular unloading by the Impella™ device actively reduces ventricular volume as well as pressure and augments systemic blood flow at the same time. By improving myocardial oxygen supply and enhancing systemic circulation, the Impella device potentially protects myocardium, facilitates ventricular recovery and may interrupt the shock spiral. So far, the evidence supporting the use of Impella™ in CS patients derives mostly from observational studies, and there is a need for adequate randomized trials. However, the Impella™ device appears a promising technology for management of CS patients. But a profound understanding of the device, its physiologic impact and clinical application are all important when evaluating CS patients for percutaneous circulatory support. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the percutaneous assist device Impella™. Moreover, it highlights in depth the rationale for ventricular unloading in CS and describes practical aspects to optimize care for patients requiring hemodynamic support.
| S-EPMC8984099 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesIn patients with cardiogenic shock, delayed surgery after stabilization of haemodynamics and improvement in end-organ function by mechanical circulatory support is known to yield better outcomes than emergency surgery. We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of Impella (Abiomed, Danvers, MA, USA) as a bridge to cardiac surgery in patients with cardiogenic shock.MethodsWe reviewed 7 patients with cardiogenic shock who underwent Impella support as a bridge to cardiac surgery using cardiopulmonary bypass at our institution between April 2018 and August 2021.ResultsCardiogenic shock was caused by ventricular septal rupture in 3 patients, papillary muscle rupture in 1 and acute myocardial infarction in 3. Cardiac surgery was delayed by 1-7 (3.9 ± 2.5) days with Impella support after the diagnosis of cardiogenic shock, during which the hepatic and renal function of the patients improved significantly. Device-related or operation-related adverse events included re-exploration for bleeding in 3 patients, acute limb ischaemia due to thromboembolism in 1 and intraoperative aortic dissection in 1. Thirty-day mortality was 14.3%, and the cumulative survival was 71.4% at 1 year. The survival tended to be better than that in historical control group in which extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was used as a bridge to surgery (P = 0.0992).ConclusionsImpella is an effective tool for bridging patients with cardiogenic shock to surgery. This strategy may improve surgical outcomes in patients with cardiogenic shock. However, prolonged Impella support may increase significant adverse events, and further investigation is required to determine the optimal duration of support before surgery.
| S-EPMC9297506 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices are effective tools in managing refractory cardiogenic shock (CS). Data comparing veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) and IMPELLA® are however scarce. We aimed to assess outcomes of patients implanted with these two devices and eligible to both systems. From 2004 to 2020, we retrospectively analyzed 128 patients who underwent VA-ECMO or IMPELLA® in our institution for refractory left ventricle (LV) dominant CS. All patients were eligible to both systems: 97 patients were first implanted with VA-ECMO and 31 with IMPELLA®. The primary endpoint was 30-day all-cause death. VA-ECMO patients were younger (52 vs. 59.4, p = 0.006) and had a higher lactate level at baseline than those in the IMPELLA® group (6.84 vs. 3.03 mmol/L, p < 0.001). Duration of MCS was similar between groups (9.4 days vs. 6 days in the VA-ECMO and IMPELLA® groups respectively, p = 0.077). In unadjusted analysis, no significant difference was observed between groups in 30-day mortality: 43.3% vs. 58.1% in the VA-ECMO and IMPELLA® groups, respectively (p = 0.152). After adjustment, VA-ECMO was associated with a significant reduction in 30-day mortality (HR = 0.25, p = 0.004). A higher rate of MCS escalation was observed in the IMPELLA® group: 32.3% vs. 10.3% (p = 0.003). In patients eligible to either VA-ECMO or IMPELLA® for LV dominant refractory CS, VA-ECMO was associated with improved survival rate and a lower need for escalation.
| S-EPMC7918655 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsThe mortality in cardiogenic shock (CS) is high. The role of specific mechanical circulatory support (MCS) systems is unclear. We aimed to compare patients receiving Impella versus ECLS (extracorporal life support) with regard to baseline characteristics, feasibility, and outcomes in CS.Methods and resultsThis is a retrospective cohort study including CS patients over 18 years with a complete follow-up of the primary endpoint and available baseline lactate level, receiving haemodynamic support either by Impella 2.5 or ECLS from two European registries. The decision for device implementation was made at the discretion of the treating physician. The primary endpoint of this study was all-cause mortality at 30 days. A propensity score for the use of Impella was calculated, and multivariable logistic regression was used to obtain adjusted odds ratios (aOR). In total, 149 patients were included, receiving either Impella (n = 73) or ECLS (n = 76) for CS. The feasibility of device implantation was high (87%) and similar (aOR: 3.14; 95% CI: 0.18-56.50; P = 0.41) with both systems. The rates of vascular injuries (aOR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.10-3.50; P = 0.56) and bleedings requiring transfusions (aOR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.09-2.10; P = 0.29) were similar in ECLS patients and Impella patients. The use of Impella or ECLS was not associated with increased odds of mortality (aOR: 4.19; 95% CI: 0.53-33.25; P = 0.17), after correction for propensity score and baseline lactate level. Baseline lactate level was independently associated with increased odds of 30 day mortality (per mmol/L increase; OR: 1.29; 95% CI: 1.14-1.45; P < 0.001).ConclusionsIn CS patients, the adjusted mortality rates of both ECLS and Impella were high and similar. The baseline lactate level was a potent predictor of mortality and could play a role in patient selection for therapy in future studies. In patients with profound CS, the type of device is likely to be less important compared with other parameters including non-cardiac and neurological factors.
| S-EPMC8006691 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThis study aimed to elucidate the strategy of an effective Impella support for better clinical outcomes in patients with a postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock (PCCS).MethodsThis single-center retrospective observational study enrolled 31 patients with PCCS undergoing an elective open-heart surgery followed by Impella support between November 2018 and February 2022 for further analysis.ResultsThe preoperative Euroscore II and left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction were 9.1 ± 10.4 and 35.7% ± 12.6%, respectively. The in-hospital mortality rate was 51.6% (n = 16). In survivors (n = 15), the mean Impella support time was 6.9 ± 3.5 days. Patients were discharged on the postoperative day 24.9 ± 16.4. Regarding LV remodeling, LV end-diastolic diameter was significantly decreased after Impella support (59.2 ± 6.0 mm vs. 54.4 ± 4.7 mm, p = 0.01, preoperative vs. postoperative). In-hospital mortality rates were comparable with small (CP, n = 6) or large (5.0, n = 25) Impella systems (33.3% [n = 2] vs. 56.0% [n = 14], p = 0.39). However, a lower in-hospital mortality rate was observed in the group with early initiation (i.e., intraoperative) of Impella support (n = 14) than that with delayed Impella initiation (i.e., in the postoperative course) (n = 11) (28.6% [n = 4] vs. 90.9% [n = 10], p = 0.004).ConclusionsImpella support contributes to LV remodeling in PCCS patients. In-hospital mortality was comparable in different Impella sizes and lower in early Impella initiation.
| S-EPMC10902663 | biostudies-literature