Association of Use of an Intravascular Microaxial Left Ventricular Assist Device vs Intra-aortic Balloon Pump With In-Hospital Mortality and Major Bleeding Among Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock

Unloading in cardiogenic shock: the rationale and current evidence

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Discussing the rationale and current evidence for left ventricular unloading in cardiogenic shock.

RECENT FINDINGS

Microaxial flow pumps (MFP) and intra-aortic balloon pumps (IABP) augment cardiac output while simultaneously unloading the left ventricle (e.g. reducing left ventricular pressure), thereby targeting a key mechanism of cardiogenic shock. A recent randomized trial has shown a mortality reduction with MFP in selected patients with cardiogenic shock, strengthening the rationale for this strategy, although the evidence for the IABP is so far neutral. MFP/IABP can also be used concomitantly with veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (va-ECMO) to alleviate the va-ECMO-related increase in left ventricular afterload, to facilitate weaning and ultimately to improve myocardial recovery and prognosis of affected patients. However, the use of MFP/IABP in this indication solely relies on retrospective data, which need to be interpreted with caution, especially as these strategies are associated with more complications. Currently ongoing randomized trials will help to further clarify the role of left ventricular unloading in patients on va-ECMO.

SUMMARY

Left ventricular unloading addresses a key mechanism of cardiogenic shock, with strong evidence to support MFP use in selected patients, but further randomized controlled trials are required to clarify the role of different devices/strategies for the overall shock population.

European practices on antithrombotic management during percutaneous mechanical circulatory support in adults: a survey of the Association for Acute CardioVascular Care of the ESC and the European branch of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization

AIMS

Bleeding and thrombotic complications compromise outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous mechanical circulatory support (pMCS) with veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A ECMO) and/or microaxial flow pumps like Impella™. Antithrombotic practices are an important determinant of the coagulopathic risk, but standardization in the antithrombotic management during pMCS is lacking. This survey outlines European practices in antithrombotic management in adults on pMCS, making an initial effort to standardize practices, inform future trials, and enhance outcomes.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This online cross-sectional survey was distributed through digital newsletters and social media platforms by the Association of Acute Cardiovascular Care and the European branch of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization. The survey was available from 17 April 2023 to 23 May 2023. The target population were European clinicians involved in care for adults on pMCS. We included 105 responses from 26 European countries. Notably, 72.4% of the respondents adhered to locally established anticoagulation protocols, with unfractionated heparin (UFH) being the predominant anticoagulant (Impella™: 97.0% and V-A ECMO: 96.1%). A minority of the respondents, 10.8 and 14.5%, respectively, utilized the anti-factor-Xa assay in parallel with activated partial thromboplastin time for UFH monitoring during Impella™ and V-A ECMO support. Anticoagulant targets varied across institutions. Following acute coronary syndrome without percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), 54.0 and 42.7% were administered dual antiplatelet therapy during Impella™ and V-A ECMO support, increasing to 93.7 and 84.0% after PCI.

CONCLUSION

Substantial heterogeneity in antithrombotic practices emerged from participants' responses, potentially contributing to variable device-associated bleeding and thrombotic complications.

Impella Versus Non-Impella for Nonemergent High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

The benefit of mechanical circulatory support with Impella (Abiomed, Inc., Danvers, Massachusetts) for high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (HR-PCI) is uncertain. PROTECT III registry data showed improved outcomes with Impella compared with historical data (PROTECT II) but lacks a direct comparison with the HR-PCI cohort without Impella support. We retrospectively identified patients meeting the PROTECT III inclusion criteria for HR-PCI and compared this group (non-Impella cohort [NonIMP]) with the outcomes data from the PROTECT III registry (Impella cohort). Baseline differences were balanced using inverse propensity weighting. The coprimary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in-hospital and at 90 days. A total of 283 patients at great risk did not receive Impella support; 200 patients had 90-days event ascertainment and were included in the inverse propensity weighting analysis and compared with 504 patients in the Impella cohort group. After calibration, few residual differences remained between groups. The primary outcome was not different in-hospital (3.0% vs 4.8%, p = 0.403) but less in NonIMP at 90 days (7.5% vs 13.8%, p = 0.033). Periprocedural vascular complications, bleeding, and transfusion rate did not differ between groups; however, acute kidney injury occurred more frequently in the NonIMP group (10.5% vs 5.4%, p = 0.023). In conclusion, under identical HR-PCI inclusion criteria for Impella use in PROTECT III, an institutional non-Impella-supported HR-PCI cohort showed similar MACE in-hospital but fewer MACE at 90 days, whereas there was no signal for periprocedural harm with Impella use. These results do not support routine usage of Impella for patients with HR-PCI.

Percutaneous Microaxial Ventricular Assist Device Versus Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump for Nonacute Myocardial Infarction Cardiogenic Shock

BACKGROUND

Evidence on the comparative outcomes following percutaneous microaxial ventricular assist devices (pVAD) versus intra-aortic balloon pump for nonacute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock is limited.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We included 704 and 2140 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65 to 99 years treated with pVAD and intra-aortic balloon pump, respectively, for nonacute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock from 2016 to 2020. Patients treated using pVAD compared with those treated using intra-aortic balloon pump were more likely to be concurrently treated with mechanical ventilation, renal replacement therapy, and blood transfusions. We computed propensity scores for undergoing pVAD using patient- and hospital-level factors and performed a matching weight analysis. The use of pVAD was associated with higher 30-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 1.92 [95% CI, 1.59-2.33]) but not associated with in-hospital bleeding (adjusted odds ratio, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.81-1.24]), stroke (adjusted odds ratio, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.56-1.47]), sepsis (OR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.64-1.28]), and length of hospital stay (adjusted mean difference, +0.4 days [95% CI, -1.4 to +2.3]). A quasi-experimental instrumental variable analysis using the cross-sectional institutional practice preferences showed similar patterns, though not statistically significant (adjusted odds ratio, 1.38; 95% CI, 0.28-6.89).

CONCLUSIONS

Our investigation using the national sample of Medicare beneficiaries showed that the use of pVAD compared with intra-aortic balloon pump was associated with higher mortality in patients with nonacute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock. Providers should be cautious about the use of pVAD for nonacute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock, while adequately powered high-quality randomized controlled trials are warranted to determine the clinical effects of pVAD.

The Management of Cardiogenic Shock From Diagnosis to Devices: A Narrative Review

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a heterogenous syndrome broadly characterized by inadequate cardiac output leading to tissue hypoperfusion and multisystem organ dysfunction that carries an ongoing high mortality burden. The management of CS has advanced rapidly, especially with the incorporation of temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) devices. A thorough understanding of how to approach a patient with CS and to select appropriate monitoring and treatment paradigms is essential in modern ICUs. Timely characterization of CS severity and hemodynamics is necessary to optimize outcomes, and this may be performed best by multidisciplinary shock-focused teams. In this article, we provide a review of CS aimed to inform both the cardiology-trained and non-cardiology-trained intensivist provider. We briefly describe the causes, pathophysiologic features, diagnosis, and severity staging of CS, focusing on gathering key information that is necessary for making management decisions. We go on to provide a more detailed review of CS management principles and practical applications, with a focus on tMCS. Medical management focuses on appropriate medication therapy to optimize perfusion-by enhancing contractility and minimizing afterload-and to facilitate decongestion. For more severe CS, or for patients with decompensating hemodynamic status despite medical therapy, initiation of the appropriate tMCS increasingly is common. We discuss the most common devices currently used for patients with CS-phenotyping patients as having left ventricular failure, right ventricular failure, or biventricular failure-and highlight key available data and particular points of consideration that inform tMCS device selection. Finally, we highlight core components of sedation and respiratory failure management for patients with CS.

Transarterial embolization to treat a massive hemothorax during mechanical circulatory support via puncturing of the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation circuit

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend the use of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) for patients with cardiogenic shock that is refractory to medical therapy. Bleeding is the most common complication of MCS. Transarterial embolization (TAE) is often performed to treat this complication, because it is a less invasive hemostatic procedure. However, the TAE option needs to be carefully considered during MCS, as the access route may be limited during MCS.

CASE PRESENTATION

A man in his 70 s was diagnosed with acute myocardial infarction and underwent percutaneous coronary intervention via venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) and Impella. During treatment in the intensive care unit, he suffered damage to a branch of the internal thoracic artery during a cardiac drainage procedure, which was subsequently treated via emergency TAE. An ECMO return cannula and an Impella sheath were inserted into the patient's right and left femoral arteries, respectively. An approach from the left brachial artery was selected, and the left internal thoracic artery was embolized. Subsequently, the patient required re-intervention to treat re-bleeding from another artery. Because it was difficult to target the target artery from the brachial one, owing to interference from the Impella catheter, the ECMO circuit near the return cannula was punctured and a guiding sheath was inserted. The ECMO flow and the patient's blood pressure decreased following placement of this guiding sheath. We were thus able to maintain the patient's blood pressure by increasing the infusion fluids and Impella flow, and embolize the target artery using a gelatin sponge to achieve hemostasis.

CONCLUSION

When TAE is difficult to perform during MCS using an approach from the upper extremities, a lower extremity approach with a sheath inserted into the ECMO circuit may represent a viable alternative.

Intravascular Microaxial Left Ventricular Assist Device Manufacturer Payments to Cardiologists and Use of Devices

This study examines whether payments from a left ventricular assist device manufacturer to cardiologists performing percutaneous coronary intervention were associated with any use of the devices.

Advancing cardiac regeneration through 3D bioprinting: methods, applications, and future directions

Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) represent a paramount global mortality concern, and their prevalence is on a relentless ascent. Despite the effectiveness of contemporary medical interventions in mitigating CVD-related fatality rates and complications, their efficacy remains curtailed by an array of limitations. These include the suboptimal efficiency of direct cell injection and an inherent disequilibrium between the demand and availability of heart transplantations. Consequently, the imperative to formulate innovative strategies for cardiac regeneration therapy becomes unmistakable. Within this context, 3D bioprinting technology emerges as a vanguard contender, occupying a pivotal niche in the realm of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. This state-of-the-art methodology holds the potential to fabricate intricate heart tissues endowed with multifaceted structures and functionalities, thereby engendering substantial promise. By harnessing the prowess of 3D bioprinting, it becomes plausible to synthesize functional cardiac architectures seamlessly enmeshed with the host tissue, affording a viable avenue for the restitution of infarcted domains and, by extension, mitigating the onerous yoke of CVDs. In this review, we encapsulate the myriad applications of 3D bioprinting technology in the domain of heart tissue regeneration. Furthermore, we usher in the latest advancements in printing methodologies and bioinks, culminating in an exploration of the extant challenges and the vista of possibilities inherent to a diverse array of approaches.

Sex-related differences in patients presenting with heart failure-related cardiogenic shock

BACKGROUND

Heart failure-related cardiogenic shock (HF-CS) accounts for a significant proportion of all CS cases. Nevertheless, there is a lack of evidence on sex-related differences in HF-CS, especially regarding use of treatment and mortality risk in women vs. men. This study aimed to investigate potential differences in clinical presentation, use of treatments, and mortality between women and men with HF-CS.

METHODS

In this international observational study, patients with HF-CS (without acute myocardial infarction) from 16 tertiary-care centers in five countries were enrolled between 2010 and 2021. Logistic and Cox regression models were used to assess differences in clinical presentation, use of treatments, and 30-day mortality in women vs. men with HF-CS.

RESULTS

N = 1030 patients with HF-CS were analyzed, of whom 290 (28.2%) were women. Compared to men, women were more likely to be older, less likely to have a known history of heart failure or cardiovascular risk factors, and lower rates of highly depressed left ventricular ejection fraction and renal dysfunction. Nevertheless, CS severity as well as use of treatments were comparable, and female sex was not independently associated with 30-day mortality (53.0% vs. 50.8%; adjusted HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.75-1.19).

CONCLUSIONS

In this large HF-CS registry, sex disparities in risk factors and clinical presentation were observed. Despite these differences, the use of treatments was comparable, and both sexes exhibited similarly high mortality rates. Further research is necessary to evaluate if sex-tailored treatment, accounting for the differences in cardiovascular risk factors and clinical presentation, might improve outcomes in HF-CS.

Association between left ventricular ejection fraction, mortality and use of mechanical circulatory support in patients with non-ischaemic cardiogenic shock

BACKGROUND

Currently, use of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in non-ischaemic cardiogenic shock (CS) is predominantly guided by shock-specific markers, and not by markers of cardiac function. We hypothesise that left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) can identify patients with a higher likelihood to benefit from MCS and thus help to optimise their expected benefit.

METHODS

Patients with non-ischaemic CS and available data on LVEF from 16 tertiary-care centres in five countries were analysed. Cox regression models were fitted to evaluate the association between LVEF and mortality, as well as the interaction between LVEF, MCS use and mortality.

RESULTS

N = 807 patients were analysed: mean age 63 [interquartile range (IQR) 51.5-72.0] years, 601 (74.5%) male, lactate 4.9 (IQR 2.6-8.5) mmol/l, LVEF 20 (IQR 15-30) %. Lower LVEF was more frequent amongst patients with more severe CS, and MCS was more likely used in patients with lower LVEF. There was no association between LVEF and 30-day mortality risk in the overall study cohort. However, there was a significant interaction between MCS use and LVEF, indicating a lower 30-day mortality risk with MCS use in patients with LVEF ≤ 20% (hazard ratio 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.51-1.02 for LVEF ≤ 20% vs. hazard ratio 1.31, 95% confidence interval 0.85-2.01 for LVEF > 20%, interaction-p = 0.017).

CONCLUSION

This retrospective study may indicate a lower mortality risk with MCS use only in patients with severely reduced LVEF. This may propose the inclusion of LVEF as an adjunctive parameter for MCS decision-making in non-ischaemic CS, aiming to optimise the benefit-risk ratio.

Impella - Current issues and future expectations for the percutaneous, microaxial flow left ventricular assist device

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.

Management of cardiogenic shock: a narrative review

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is characterized by low cardiac output and sustained tissue hypoperfusion that may result in end-organ dysfunction and death. CS is associated with high short-term mortality, and its management remains challenging despite recent advances in therapeutic options. Timely diagnosis and multidisciplinary team-based management have demonstrated favourable effects on outcomes. We aimed to review evidence-based practices for managing patients with ischemic and non-ischemic CS, detailing the multi-organ supports needed in this critically ill patient population.

The Evolving Field of Acute Coronary Syndrome Management: A Critical Appraisal of the 2023 European Society of Cardiology Guidelines for the Management of Acute Coronary Syndrome

Acute coronary syndromes (ACS), encompassing conditions like ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS), represent a significant challenge in cardiovascular care due to their complex pathophysiology and substantial impact on morbidity and mortality. The 2023 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines for ACS management introduce several updates in key areas such as invasive treatment timing in NSTE-ACS, pre-treatment strategies, approaches to multivessel disease, and the use of imaging modalities including computed tomography (CT) coronary angiography, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and intracoronary imaging techniques, such as optical coherence tomography (OCT) and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). They also address a modulation of antiplatelet therapy, taking into consideration different patient risk profiles, and introduce new recommendations for low-dose colchicine. These guidelines provide important evidence-based updates in practice, reflecting an evolution in the understanding and management of ACS, yet some potentially missed opportunities for more personalized care and technology adoption are discussed.

Contemporary approach to cardiogenic shock care: a state-of-the-art review

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a time-sensitive and hemodynamically complex syndrome with a broad spectrum of etiologies and clinical presentations. Despite contemporary therapies, CS continues to maintain high morbidity and mortality ranging from 35 to 50%. More recently, burgeoning observational research in this field aimed at enhancing the early recognition and characterization of the shock state through standardized team-based protocols, comprehensive hemodynamic profiling, and tailored and selective utilization of temporary mechanical circulatory support devices has been associated with improved outcomes. In this narrative review, we discuss the pathophysiology of CS, novel phenotypes, evolving definitions and staging systems, currently available pharmacologic and device-based therapies, standardized, team-based management protocols, and regionalized systems-of-care aimed at improving shock outcomes. We also explore opportunities for fertile investigation through randomized and non-randomized studies to address the prevailing knowledge gaps that will be critical to improving long-term outcomes.

Cardiac ECMO: changing role in times of Impella and ventricular assist devices?

Mortality in infarct-related as well as heart failure-associated cardiogenic shock remains high, reaching 40-50% depending on the etiology and severity of cardiogenic shock. Percutaneous active mechanical circulatory support devices including veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) and microaxial left ventricular mechanical circulatory support devices are rapidly evolving in their use. However, evidence of VA-ECMO therapy has only recently emerged and showed no benefit for mortality, with an associated higher complication rate. Evidence for microaxial left ventricular mechanical circulatory support devices such as the Impella pump (Abiomed, Danvers/MA, USA) is limited. The current article aims to give an overview of the basics of VA-ECMO therapy and microaxial left ventricular mechanical circulatory support devices, the current evidence, ongoing trials, patient selection, and potential complications. This article is freely available.

The Effect of Mechanical Circulatory Support on Blood Flow in the Ascending Aorta: A Combined Experimental and Computational Study

Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices are designed for short-term treatment in cases of acute decompensated heart failure as a bridge to transplant or recovery. Some of the known complications of MCS treatments are related to their hemodynamics in the aorta. The current study investigates the effect of MCS on the aortic flow. The study uses combined experimental and numerical methods to delineate complex flow structures. Particle image velocimetry (PIV) is used to capture the vortical and turbulent flow characteristics in a glass model of the human aorta. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analyses are used to complete the 3D flow in the aorta. Three specific MCS configurations are examined: a suction pump with a counterclockwise (CCW) rotating impeller, a suction pump with a clockwise (CW) rotating impeller, and a discharge pump with a straight jet. These models were examined under varying flow rates (1-2.5 L/min). The results show that the pump configuration strongly influences the flow in the thoracic aorta. The rotating impeller of the suction pump induces a dominant swirling flow in the aorta. The swirling flow distributes the incoming jet and reduces the turbulent intensity near the aortic valve and in the aorta. In addition, at high flow rates, the local vortices formed near the pump are washed downstream toward the aortic arch. Specifically, an MCS device with a CCW rotating impeller induces a non-physiological CCW helical flow in the descending aorta (which is opposite to the natural helical flow), while CW swirl combines better with the natural helical flow.

Complications in patients with cardiogenic shock on veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy: distribution and relevance. Results from an international, multicentre cohort study

AIMS

Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy (VA-ECMO) restores circulation and tissue oxygenation in cardiogenic shock (CS) patients, but can also lead to complications. This study aimed to quantify VA-ECMO complications and analyse their association with overall survival as well as favourable neurological outcome (cerebral performance categories 1 + 2).

METHODS AND RESULTS

All-comer patients with CS treated with VA-ECMO were retrospectively enrolled from 16 centres in four countries (2005-2019). Neurological, bleeding, and ischaemic adverse events (AEs) were considered. From these, typical VA-ECMO complications were identified and analysed separately as device-related complications. n = 501. Overall, 118 were women (24%), median age was 56.0 years, median lactate was 8.1 mmol/L. Acute myocardial infarction caused CS in 289 patients (58%). Thirty-days mortality was 40% (198/501 patients). At least one device-related complication occurred in 252/486 (52%) patients, neurological AEs in 108/469 (23%), bleeding in 192/480 (40%), ischaemic AEs in 123/478 (26%). The 22% of patients with the most AEs accounted for 50% of all AEs. All types of AEs were associated with a worse prognosis. Aside from neurological ones, all AEs and device-related complications were more likely to occur in women; although prediction of AEs outside of neurological AEs was generally poor.

CONCLUSION

Therapy and device-related complications occur in half of all patients treated with VA-ECMO and are associated with a worse prognosis. They accumulate in some patients, especially in women. Aside from neurological events, identification of patients at risk is difficult, highlighting the need to establish additional quantitative markers of complication risk to guide VA-ECMO treatment in CS.

Preserving flow, saving lives: Successful treatment of aortic valve failure in acute myocardial infarction without flow down-regulation using ECMO - a case report and mini review

Direct percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) has significantly reduced cardiac mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), but the mortality rate remains high for those who develop cardiogenic shock (CS), reaching 40% to 50%. Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A ECMO) provides robust hemodynamic support and oxygen delivery for AMI patients with refractory CS, ensuring adequate organ perfusion and oxygen supply. However, there is currently no standardized optimal Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP) range during V-A ECMO support. Achieving the proper MAP is crucial for adequate myocardial perfusion, cardiac function recovery, successful weaning off of V-A ECMO, and improving long-term outcomes. In this case study, we successfully treated a 55-year-old man with AMI and refractory cardiogenic shock using V-A ECMO. By adjusting ECMO blood flow and employing hemodynamic strategies, including vasoactive drugs, we optimized the MAP, leading to improved cardiac function and successful weaning off of V-A ECMO. This presents a potential opportunity for MAP optimization under ECMO support in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock.

Integration of implantable device therapy in patients with heart failure. A clinical consensus statement from the Heart Failure Association (HFA) and European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC)

Implantable devices form an integral part of the management of patients with heart failure (HF) and provide adjunctive therapies in addition to cornerstone drug treatment. Although the number of these devices is growing, only few are supported by robust evidence. Current devices aim to improve haemodynamics, improve reverse remodelling, or provide electrical therapy. A number of these devices have guideline recommendations and some have been shown to improve outcomes such as cardiac resynchronization therapy, implantable cardioverter-defibrillators and long-term mechanical support. For others, more evidence is still needed before large-scale implementation can be strongly advised. Of note, devices and drugs can work synergistically in HF as improved disease control with devices can allow for further optimization of drug therapy. Therefore, some devices might already be considered early in the disease trajectory of HF patients, while others might only be reserved for advanced HF. As such, device therapy should be integrated into HF care programmes. Unfortunately, implementation of devices, including those with the greatest evidence, in clinical care pathways is still suboptimal. This clinical consensus document of the Heart Failure Association (HFA) and European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) describes the physiological rationale behind device-provided therapy and also device-guided management, offers an overview of current implantable device options recommended by the guidelines and proposes a new integrated model of device therapy as a part of HF care.

Machine learning in the prediction of in-hospital mortality in patients with first acute myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

Persistent efforts are required to further reduce the in-hospital mortality of patients suffering from acute myocardial infarction (AMI), even in the face of a global trend of declining AMI-related fatalities. We investigated deep machine learning models for in-hospital death prediction in patients on their first AMI.

METHOD

In this 2-center retrospective analysis, first AMI patients from Hospital I and Hospital II were included; 4783 patients from Hospital 1 were split in a 7:3 ratio between the training and testing sets. Data from 1053 AMI patients in Hospital II was used for further validation. 70 clinical information and laboratory examination parameters as predictive indicators were included. Logistic Regression Classifier (LR), Random Forests Classifier (RF), eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGB), Support Vector Machine Classifier (SVM), Multilayer Perceptron (MLP), Gradient Boosting Machine (GBM), Bootstrapped Aggregation (Bagging) models with AMI patients were developed. The importance of selected variables was obtained through the Shapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) method. The performance of each model was shown using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and the area under the precision-recall curve (Average Precision; AP).

RESULT

The in-hospital mortality for AMI in the training, testing, and validation sets were 5.7 %, 5.6 %, and 6.0 %, respectively. The top 8 predictors were D-dimer, brain natriuretic peptide, cardiogenic shock, neutrophil, prothrombin time, blood urea nitrogen, cardiac arrest, and phosphorus. In the testing cohort, the models of LR, RF, XGB, SVM, MLP, GBM, and Bagging yielded AUROC values of 0.929, 0.931, 0.907, 0.868, 0.907, 0.923, and 0.932, respectively. Bagging has good predictive value and certain clinical value in external validation with AUROC 0.893.

CONCLUSION

In order to improve the forecasting accuracy of the risk of AMI patients, guide clinical nursing practice, and lower AMI inpatient mortality, this study looked into significant indicators and the optimal models for predicting AMI inpatient mortality.

Clinical presentation, shock severity and mortality in patients with de novo versus acute-on-chronic heart failure-related cardiogenic shock

AIMS

Heart failure-related cardiogenic shock (HF-CS) accounts for a significant proportion of CS cases. Whether patients with de novo HF and those with acute-on-chronic HF in CS differ in clinical characteristics and outcome remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate differences in clinical presentation and mortality between patients with de novo and acute-on-chronic HF-CS.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this international observational study, patients with HF-CS from 16 tertiary care centres in five countries were enrolled between 2010 and 2021. To investigate differences in clinical presentation and 30-day mortality, adjusted logistic/Cox regression models were fitted. Patients (n = 1030) with HF-CS were analysed, of whom 486 (47.2%) presented with de novo HF-CS and 544 (52.8%) with acute-on-chronic HF-CS. Traditional markers of CS severity (e.g. blood pressure, heart rate and lactate) as well as use of treatments were comparable between groups. However, patients with acute-on-chronic HF-CS were more likely to have a higher CS severity and also a higher mortality risk, after adjusting for relevant confounders (de novo HF 45.5%, acute-on-chronic HF 55.9%, adjusted hazard ratio 1.38, 95% confidence interval 1.10-1.72, p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

In this large HF-CS cohort, acute-on-chronic HF-CS was associated with more severe CS and higher mortality risk compared to de novo HF-CS, although traditional markers of CS severity and use of treatments were comparable. These findings highlight the vast heterogeneity of patients with HF-CS, emphasize that HF chronicity is a relevant disease modifier in CS, and indicate that future clinical trials should account for this.

Comparative Healthcare Resource Utilization of Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Using Impella Versus Intra-aortic Balloon Pump Use for Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome and Cardiogenic Shock Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: Insights From National Inpatient Sample

The use of percutaneous mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices, including Impella and Intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), in patients with cardiogenic shock has increased in recent times. We aimed to evaluate the impact of the choice of an MCS device on healthcare resource utilization. We queried the National Inpatient Sample registry between October 2016 and December 2018 to identify adults admitted for acute coronary syndrome-related cardiogenic shock and who received percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The study population was segregated into Impella and IABP groups using ICD 10 diagnosis codes. The primary endpoint was high healthcare resource utilization (HRU), while secondary outcomes included periprocedural complications. Propensity scoring matching was used to determine which patients in the Impella cohort had similar health to IABP patients. During the study period, 439,610 patients were admitted who received hemodynamic support using, Impella or IABP on account of acute coronary syndrome complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS). The median age (years) of the Impella cohort and IABP cohorts were similar (64.1 vs 65.1, P = 0.08). Gender distribution of the Impella CS patients was like IABP patients with female majorities in both groups, (71.9% vs 67.9%, P = 0.05). Impella CS patients had a higher representation of those with hypertension (P = 0.002), smoking (P = 0.040), obesity (P = 0.034), diabetes mellitus (P = 0.009), CHF (P = 0.030), COPD (P = 0.034), chronic liver disease (P = 0.028), and chronic kidney disease (P = 0.031). 1:1 Propensity score matching identified 2620 Impella patients' comparable severity index with the IABP patients. Patients with hemodynamic support using Impella had higher healthcare resource utilization, (HRU), the surrogate of length of stay (LOS) ≥7 or nonhome disposition at discharge, when compared with those with IABP (57.41% vs 42.76%, P < 0.0001). Impella CS patients had higher in-hospital mortality as compared to the IABP patients (55.45% vs 45.86%, P < 0.0001). Impella CS patients developed more periprocedural complications, including vascular injury (4.8% vs 1.4%, P < 0.0001), acute kidney injury (58.36% vs 41.64%, P < 0.0001), end-stage renal disease requiring dialysis (8.75% vs 1.25%, P = 0.002) when compared to the IABP patients. Among patients with ACS undergoing PCI and receiving MCS devices, those receiving Impella demonstrated higher healthcare resource utilization, higher LOS ≥7 days, and more nonhome disposition at discharge compared to patients receiving IABP. Further investigation is warranted to elucidate factors associated with these findings.

The Year in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia: Selected Highlights From 2023

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.

Mechanical circulatory support versus vasopressors alone in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have compared Impella use to intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) use in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Our objective was to compare clinical outcomes in patients with AMI-CS undergoing PCI who received Impella (percutaneous left ventricular assist device) without vasopressors, IABP without vasopressors, and vasopressors without mechanical circulatory support (MCS).

METHODS

We queried the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) using ICD-10 codes (2015-2018) to identify patients with AMI-CS undergoing PCI. We created three propensity-matched cohorts to examine clinical outcomes in patients receiving Impella versus IABP, Impella versus vasopressors without MCS, and IABP versus vasopressors without MCS.

RESULTS

Among 17,762 patients, Impella use was associated with significantly higher in-hospital major bleeding (31.4% vs. 13.6%; p < 0.001) and hospital charges (p < 0.001) compared to IABP use, with no benefit in mortality (34.1% vs. 26.9%; p = 0.06). Impella use was associated with significantly higher mortality (42.3% vs. 35.7%; p = 0.02), major bleeding (33.9% vs. 22.7%; p = 0.001), and hospital charges (p < 0.001), when compared to the use of vasopressors without MCS. There were no significant differences in clinical outcomes between IABP use and the use of vasopressor without MCS.

CONCLUSIONS

In this analysis of retrospective data of patients with AMI-CS undergoing PCI, Impella use was associated with higher mortality, major bleeding, and in-hospital charges when compared to vasopressor therapy without MCS. When compared to IABP use, Impella was associated with no mortality benefit, along with higher major bleeding events and in-hospital charges. A vasopressor-only strategy suggested no difference in clinical outcomes when compared to IABP. This study uses the NIS for the first time to highlight outcomes in AMI-CS patients undergoing PCI when treated with vasopressor support without MCS, compared to Impella and IABP use.

Mechanical Support Strategies for High-Risk Procedures in the Invasive Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory: A State-of-the-Art Review

Thanks to advancements in percutaneous cardiac interventions, an expanding patient population now qualifies for treatment through percutaneous endovascular procedures. High-risk interventions far exceed coronary interventions and include transcatheter aortic valve replacement, endovascular management of acute pulmonary embolism and ventricular tachycardia ablation. Given the frequent impairment of ventricular function in these patients, frequently deteriorating during percutaneous interventions, it is hypothesized that mechanical ventricular support may improve periprocedural survival and subsequently patient outcome. In this narrative review, we aimed to provide the relevant evidence found for the clinical use of percutaneous mechanical circulatory support (pMCS). We searched the Pubmed database for articles related to pMCS and to pMCS and invasive cath lab procedures. The articles and their references were evaluated for relevance. We provide an overview of the clinically relevant evidence for intra-aortic balloon pump, Impella, TandemHeart and ECMO and their role as pMCS in high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention, transcatheter valvular procedures, ablations and high-risk pulmonary embolism. We found that the right choice of periprocedural pMCS could provide a solution for the hemodynamic challenges during these procedures. However, to enhance the understanding of the safety and effectiveness of pMCS devices in an often high-risk population, more randomized research is needed.

Changing Trends in Mechanical Circulatory Support Use and Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Interventions for Acute Coronary Syndrome Complicated With Cardiogenic Shock: Insights From a Nationwide Registry in Japan

BACKGROUND

Temporal trends in the management of acute coronary syndrome complicated with cardiogenic shock after the revision of guideline recommendations for intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) use and the approval of the Impella require further investigation, because their impact remains uncertain.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Using the Japanese Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (J-PCI) registry database from 2019 to 2021, we identified 12 171 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndrome complicated with cardiogenic shock under mechanical circulatory support. The patients were stratified into 3 groups: (1) IABP alone, (2) Impella, and (3) venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO); the VA-ECMO group was further stratified into (3a) VA-ECMO alone, (3b) VA-ECMO in combination with IABP, and (3c) VA-ECMO in combination with Impella. The quarterly prevalence and outcomes were reported. The use of IABP alone decreased significantly from 63.5% in the first quarter of 2019 to 58.3% in the fourth quarter of 2021 (P for trend=0.01). Among 4245 patients requiring VA-ECMO, the use of VA-ECMO in combination with IABP decreased significantly from 78.7% to 67.3%, whereas the use of VA-ECMO in combination with Impella increased significantly from 4.2% to 17.0% (P for trend <0.001 for both). After adjusting for the confounders, the risk difference in the fourth quarter of 2021 relative to the first quarter of 2019 for in-hospital mortality was not significant (adjusted odds ratio, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.69-1.01]).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study revealed substantial changes in the use of different mechanical circulatory support modalities in acute coronary syndrome complicated with cardiogenic shock, but they did not significantly improve the outcomes.

Postcardiotomy Shock Syndrome: A Narrative Review of Perioperative Diagnosis and Management

Postcardiotomy shock (PCS) is generally described as the inability to separate from cardiopulmonary bypass due to ineffective cardiac output after cardiotomy, which is caused by a primary cardiac disorder, resulting in inadequate tissue perfusion. Postcardiotomy shock occurs in 0.5% to 1.5% of contemporary cardiac surgery cases, and is accompanied by an in-hospital mortality of approximately 67%. In the last 2 decades, the incidence of PCS has increased, likely due to the increased age and baseline morbidity of patients requiring cardiac surgery. In this narrative review, the authors discuss the epidemiology and pathophysiology of PCS, the rationale and evidence behind the initiation, continuation, escalation, and discontinuation of mechanical support devices in PCS, and the anesthetic implications.

Clinical outcomes of hundred large Impella implantations in cardiogenic shock patients based on individual clinical scenarios

BACKGROUND

Large Impella systems (5.0 or 5.5; i.e., Impella 5+) (Abiomed Inc., Danvers, MA, USA) help achieve better clinical outcomes through relevant left ventricular unloading in acute cardiogenic shock (CS). Here, we report our experience with Impella 5+, while focusing on the clinical outcomes depending on individual case scenarios in patients with acute CS.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective observational study included 100 Impella 5+ implantations conducted on patients with acute CS from November 2018 to October 2021. After excluding 10 reimplantation cases, 90 cases were enrolled for further analysis.

RESULTS

In-hospital and 30-day mortality rates were 56.7% (n = 51) and 48.9% (n = 44), respectively. In-hospital mortality was lower in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) than in non-AMI patients (p = 0.07). Young age and low lactate levels were the independent predictors of successful transition and survival after permanent mechanical circulatory support/heart transplantation (pMCS/HTX) (age, p = 0.03; lactate level, p = 0.04; survived after pMCS/HTX, n = 11; died on Impella, n = 41). During simultaneous utilization of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy and Impella 5+, termed ECMELLA therapy, high dose of noradrenaline was a predictive factor for in-hospital mortality by multivariate analysis (n = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that enhanced Impella support might have better clinical outcomes among acute CS patients supported with large Impella, those with AMI than those with no AMI. Young age and low lactate levels were predictors of successful bridging to pMCS/HTX and favorable clinical outcomes thereafter. The clinical outcomes of ECMELLA therapy might depend on noradrenaline dose at the time of Impella 5+ implantation.

Characteristic adverse events with intra-aortic balloon pumps: An analysis of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration MAUDE database from 2016 to 2021

INTRODUCTION

The United States Food and Drug Administration Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) dataset represents a unique source for post-market surveillance data on adverse events (AE). An analysis of AE with percutaneous mechanical circulatory support (pMCS) devices has previously been reported specifically for microaxial flow pumps. The characteristic AE for the intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) have not been similarly analyzed or reported.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

All events in the MAUDE dataset between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2021 were reviewed involving the Linear, Mega and Sensation devices (Datascope/Getinge, Wayne New Jersey). Data was analyzed by two authors and categorized based on AE type, date, event type and device-related or patient-related AE.

RESULTS

A total of 2795 AE were reported over five years. Device malfunction (91.4 %) was the most frequent classification followed by death (5.6 %) and injury (3.0 %). Catheter deformation/fracture/leak accounted for 37.9 % of total AEs. The most common patient event categorization was asymptomatic (90.8 %). Vessel damage/hemorrhage occurred in 1.4 % of reports. Death occurred in 5.6 % of reports and was associated with cardiac arrest in 110 of 156 events. Thrombus formation was described in 1.1 % of AEs. Device optic AE were common and unique to Sensation catheters. Calibration errors were also more common with Sensation (4.6 % versus 1.3 %) compared to other models.

CONCLUSIONS

Publicly reported AE with IABPs are predominantly device malfunctions without clinical sequelae. Injury, vascular damage, bleeding and thrombosis AEs are not frequent amongst reported AEs. Emphasis should be placed on understanding mechanisms of device malfunction in order to improve both reliability and user experience.

Percutaneous ventricular assist device for higher-risk percutaneous coronary intervention in surgically ineligible patients: Indications and outcomes from the OPTIMUM study

BACKGROUND

Indications and outcomes for percutaneous ventricular assist device (pVAD) use in surgically ineligible patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remain poorly characterized.

AIMS

We sought to describe the use and timing of pVAD and outcome in surgically ineligible patients.

METHODS

Among 726 patients enrolled in the prospective OPTIMUM study, clinical and health status outcomes were assessed in patients who underwent pVAD-assisted PCI and those without pVAD.

RESULTS

Compared with patients not receiving pVAD (N = 579), those treated with pVAD (N = 142) more likely had heart failure, lower left ventricular ejection fraction (30.7 ± 13.6 vs. 45.9 ± 15.5, p < 0.01), and higher STS 30-day predicted mortality (4.2 [2.1-8.0] vs. 3.3 [1.7-6.6], p = 0.01) and SYNTAX scores (36.1 ± 12.2, vs. 31.5 ± 12.1, p < 0.01). While the pVAD group had higher in-hospital (5.6% vs. 2.2%, p = 0.046), 30-day (9.0% vs. 4.0%, p = 0.01) and 6-month (20.4% vs. 11.7%, p < 0.01) mortality compared to patients without pVAD, this difference appeared to be largely driven by significantly higher mortality among the 20 (14%) patients with unplanned pVAD use (30% in-hospital mortality with unplanned PVAD vs. 1.6% with planned, p < 0.01; 30-day mortality, 38.1% vs. 4.5%, p < 0.01). The degree of 6-month health status improvement among survivors was similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

Surgically ineligible patients with pVAD-assisted PCI had more complex baseline characteristics compared with those without pVAD. Higher mortality in the pVAD group appeared to be driven by very poor outcomes by patients with unplanned, rescue pVAD.

Beneficial Effects of IABP in Anterior Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock

Background and Objectives. Recent guidelines have downgraded the routine use of the intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) due to ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Despite this, its use in clinical practice remains high. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic impact of the IABP in patients with STEMI complicated by CS undergoing primary PCI (pPCI), focusing on patients with anterior MI in whom a major benefit has been previously hypothesized. Materials and Methods. We enrolled 2958 consecutive patients undergoing pPCI for STEMI in our department from 2005 to 2018. Propensity score matching and mortality analysis were performed. Results. CS occurred in 246 patients (8.3%); among these patients, 145 (60%) had anterior AMI. In the propensity-matched analysis, the use of the IABP was associated with a lower 30-day mortality (39.3% vs. 60.9%, p = 0.032) in the subgroup of patients with anterior STEMI. Conversely, in the whole group of CS patients and in the subgroup of patients with non-anterior STEMI, IABP use did not have a significant impact on mortality. Conclusions. The use of the IABP in cases of STEMI complicated by CS was found to improve survival in patients with anterior infarction. Prospective studies are needed before abandoning or markedly limiting the use of the IABP in this clinical setting.

Predictors of Adverse Outcome in High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Interventions Patients

BACKGROUND

Identifying high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients is challenging. We aimed to evaluate which high-risk patients are prone to adverse events.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study including consecutive high-risk PCIs from 2005 to 2018 in a large tertiary medical centre. Patients with unprotected left main (LM) disease, last patent coronary vessel, or 3-vessel coronary artery disease with left ventricular ejection fraction < 35% were included. A predictive 30-day major adverse cardiac events (MACE) score consisting of any myocardial infarction, all-cause death, or target-vessel revascularisation was constructed.

RESULTS

From 2005 to 2018, a total of 1890 patients who underwent PCI met the predefined high-risk PCI criteria. Mortality rate was 8.8% at 30 days and 20.7% at 1 year, and 30-day MACE rate was 14.2% and 33.5% at 1 year. Predictors of short-term MACE were New York Heart Association functional class (NYHA) 4 (hazard ratio [HR] 6.65; P < 0.001), systolic blood pressure (SBP) < 90 mm Hg (HR 4.93; P < 0.001), creatinine > 1.3 mg/dL (HR 3.57; P < 0.001), hemoglobin < 11.0 g/dL (HR 3.07; P < 0.001), pulmonary artery systolic pressure > 50 mm Hg (HR 2.06; P < 0.001), atrial fibrillation (HR 1.74; P < 0.001), and LM disease (HR 2.04; P < 0.001) or last patent vessel (HR 1.70; P = 0.002). A score constructed from these parameters reached a sensitivity of 90% and a specificity of 81% with areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.92 for MACE and 0.94 with 89% sensitivity and 87% specificity for all-cause mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Specific features such as LM lesion or last patent conduit, pulmonary hypertension, atrial fibrillation, anemia, and renal failure, along with low SBP and NYHA 4, aid risk stratification and consideration of further treatment measures.

Clinical Phenotyping with an Outcomes-driven Mixture of Experts for Patient Matching and Risk Estimation

Observational medical data present unique opportunities for analysis of medical outcomes and treatment decision making. However, because these datasets do not contain the strict pairing of randomized control trials, matching techniques are to draw comparisons among patients. A key limitation to such techniques is verification that the variables used to model treatment decision making are also relevant in identifying the risk of major adverse events. This article explores a deep mixture of experts approach to jointly learn how to match patients and model the risk of major adverse events in patients. Although trained with information regarding treatment and outcomes, after training, the proposed model is decomposable into a network that clusters patients into phenotypes from information available before treatment. This model is validated on a dataset of patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. The mixture of experts approach can predict the outcome of mortality with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.85 ± 0.01 while jointly discovering five potential phenotypes of interest. The technique and interpretation allow for identifying clinically relevant phenotypes that may be used both for outcomes modeling as well as potentially evaluating individualized treatment effects.

Perspectives and Considerations of IABP in the Era of ECMO for Cardiogenic Shock

The development of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) has been rapid, and its use worldwide in patients with cardiogenic shock is increasingly widespread. However, current statistical data and clinical research do not demonstrate its significant improvement in the patient prognosis. This review focuses on the widely used intra-aortic balloon pumps (IABP) and veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO), analyzing and comparing their characteristics, efficacy, risk of complications, and the current exploration status of left ventricular mechanical unloading. Subsequently, we propose a rational approach to viewing the negative outcomes of current MCS, and look ahead to the future development trends of IABP.

Distribution and 24-hour transition of SCAI shock stages and their association with 30-day mortality in acute myocardial infarction

The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) shock classification has been shown to predict mortality in acute myocardial infarction (AMI). However, data on the transition of SCAI stages and their association with mortality after AMI are limited. All patients with AMI admitted to Vietnam National Heart Institute between August 2022 and February 2023 were classified into SCAI stages A, B, and C/D/E at admission and were reevaluated in 24 hours. We used Kaplan-Meier estimate and multivariable Cox regression analysis to assess the association between SCAI stages transition and 30-day mortality. We included 139 patients (median age 69 years, 29.5% female). On admission, 50.4%, 20.1%, and 29.5% of patients were classified as SCAI stage A, B, and C/D/E, respectively. The proportion of patients whose SCAI stage improved, remained stable, or worsened after 24 hours was 14.4%, 66.2%, and 19.4%, respectively. The 30-day mortality in patients with initial SCAI stages A, B, and C/D/E on admission was 2.9%, 21.4%, and 61.0%, respectively (P < .001). The 30-day mortality was 2.4% for patients with baseline SCAI stage A/B who remained unchanged or improved, 30.0% for patients with baseline SCAI stage C/D/E who remained unchanged or improved, and 92.6% for patients with SCAI stage B/C/D/E who worsened at 24 hours after admission (log-rank P < .001). In patients with AMI, evaluating the SCAI stage shock stage on admission and reevaluating after 24 hours added more information about 30-day mortality.

INTRA-AORTIC BALLOON PUMP REDUCES 30-DAY MORTALITY IN EARLY-STAGE CARDIOGENIC SHOCK COMPLICATING ACUTE MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION ACCORDING TO SCAI CLASSIFICATION

ABSTRACT

Background: Cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMICS) remains a high 30-day mortality. Mechanical circulatory support devices are increasingly used in AMICS, but their effects on mortality vary partly because of shock severity. Aims: This study aimed to evaluate the association between intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) and 30-day mortality in patients with early-stage AMICS. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) based on a multicenter clinical trial (NCT04996901). Patients were stratified by IABP use, and shock severity was classified according to the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) SHOCK stages. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. The association between IABP and 30-day mortality was evaluated across shock stages using propensity score matching, weighting, and logistic regression. Results: Five thousand three hundred forty-three patients were included, and 299 received IABP. The SCAI SHOCK stage was associated with 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR], 20.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 13.60-29.97; P < 0.001). In the 580 matched patients, a significant interaction between IABP and 30-day mortality at different shock stages was observed ( P = 0.005). Intra-aortic balloon pump was associated with lower 30-day mortality among patients with shock stage A/B (5.8% vs. 1.2%; OR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.03-0.73; P = 0.034) but not stage C/D/E (29.3% vs. 38.1%; OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 0.84-2.65; P = 0.172). These results were confirmed by sensitivity analyses of the weighted cohort. Conclusions: Intra-aortic balloon pump reduced 30-day mortality in patients with early-stage AMICS. The SCAI SHOCK stage provides risk stratification for patients with STEMI and helps identify those who may respond well to IABP.

Advances in the Management of Cardiogenic Shock

OBJECTIVES

To review a contemporary approach to the management of patients with cardiogenic shock (CS).

DATA SOURCES

We reviewed salient medical literature regarding CS.

STUDY SELECTION

We included professional society scientific statements and clinical studies examining outcomes in patients with CS, with a focus on randomized clinical trials.

DATA EXTRACTION

We extracted salient study results and scientific statement recommendations regarding the management of CS.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Professional society recommendations were integrated with evaluated studies.

CONCLUSIONS

CS results in short-term mortality exceeding 30% despite standard therapy. While acute myocardial infarction (AMI) has been the focus of most CS research, heart failure-related CS now predominates at many centers. CS can present with a wide spectrum of shock severity, including patients who are normotensive despite ongoing hypoperfusion. The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention Shock Classification categorizes patients with or at risk of CS according to shock severity, which predicts mortality. The CS population includes a heterogeneous mix of phenotypes defined by ventricular function, hemodynamic profile, biomarkers, and other clinical variables. Integrating the shock severity and CS phenotype with nonmodifiable risk factors for mortality can guide clinical decision-making and prognostication. Identifying and treating the cause of CS is crucial for success, including early culprit vessel revascularization for AMI. Vasopressors and inotropes titrated to restore arterial pressure and perfusion are the cornerstone of initial medical therapy for CS. Temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is indicated for appropriately selected patients as a bridge to recovery, decision, durable MCS, or heart transplant. Randomized controlled trials have not demonstrated better survival with the routine use of temporary MCS in patients with CS. Accordingly, a multidisciplinary team-based approach should be used to tailor the type of hemodynamic support to each individual CS patient's needs based on shock severity, phenotype, and exit strategy.

Comparative Effectiveness of Percutaneous Microaxial Left Ventricular Assist Device vs Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump or No Mechanical Circulatory Support in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock

Importance

Recent studies have produced inconsistent findings regarding the outcomes of the percutaneous microaxial left ventricular assist device (LVAD) during acute myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock (AMICS).

Objective

To compare the percutaneous microaxial LVAD vs alternative treatments among patients presenting with AMICS using observational analyses of administrative data.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This comparative effectiveness research study used Medicare fee-for-service claims of patients admitted with AMICS undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention from October 1, 2015, through December 31, 2019. Treatment strategies were compared using (1) inverse probability of treatment weighting to estimate the effect of different baseline treatments in the overall population; (2) instrumental variable analysis to determine the effectiveness of the percutaneous microaxial LVAD among patients whose treatment was influenced by cross-sectional institutional practice patterns; (3) an instrumented difference-in-differences analysis to determine the effectiveness of treatment among patients whose treatment was influenced by longitudinal changes in institutional practice patterns; and (4) a grace period approach to determine the effectiveness of initiating the percutaneous microaxial LVAD within 2 days of percutaneous coronary intervention. Analysis took place between March 2021 and December 2022.

Interventions

Percutaneous microaxial LVAD vs alternative treatments (including medical therapy and intra-aortic balloon pump).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Thirty-day all-cause mortality and readmissions.

Results

Of 23 478 patients, 14 264 (60.8%) were male and the mean (SD) age was 73.9 (9.8) years. In the inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis and grace period approaches, treatment with percutaneous microaxial LVAD was associated with a higher risk-adjusted 30-day mortality (risk difference, 14.9%; 95% CI, 12.9%-17.0%). However, patients receiving the percutaneous microaxial LVAD had a higher frequency of factors associated with severe illness, suggesting possible confounding by measures of illness severity not available in the data. In the instrumental variable analysis, 30-day mortality was also higher with percutaneous microaxial LVAD, but patient and hospital characteristics differed across levels of the instrumental variable, suggesting possible confounding by unmeasured variables (risk difference, 13.5%; 95% CI, 3.9%-23.2%). In the instrumented difference-in-differences analysis, the association between the percutaneous microaxial LVAD and mortality was imprecise, and differences in trends in characteristics between hospitals with different percutaneous microaxial LVAD use suggested potential assumption violations.

Conclusions

In observational analyses comparing the percutaneous microaxial LVAD to alternative treatments among patients with AMICS, the percutaneous microaxial LVAD was associated with worse outcomes in some analyses, while in other analyses, the association was too imprecise to draw meaningful conclusions. However, the distribution of patient and institutional characteristics between treatment groups or groups defined by institutional differences in treatment use, including changes in use over time, combined with clinical knowledge of illness severity factors not captured in the data, suggested violations of key assumptions that are needed for valid causal inference with different observational analyses. Randomized clinical trials of mechanical support devices will allow valid comparisons across candidate treatment strategies and help resolve ongoing controversies.

Management of Bleeding and Hemolysis During Percutaneous Microaxial Flow Pump Support: A Practical Approach

Percutaneous ventricular assist devices (pVADs) are increasingly being used because of improved experience and availability. The Impella (Abiomed), a percutaneous microaxial, continuous-flow, short-term ventricular assist device, requires meticulous postimplantation management to avoid the 2 most frequent complications, namely, bleeding and hemolysis. A standardized approach to the prevention, detection, and treatment of these complications is mandatory to improve outcomes. The risk for hemolysis is mostly influenced by pump instability, resulting from patient- or device-related factors. Upfront echocardiographic assessment, frequent monitoring, and prompt intervention are essential. The precarious hemostatic balance during pVAD support results from the combination of a procoagulant state, due to critical illness and contact pathway activation, together with a variety of factors aggravating bleeding risk. Preventive strategies and appropriate management, adapted to the impact of the bleeding, are crucial. This review offers a guide to physicians to tackle these device-related complications in this critically ill pVAD-supported patient population.