Percutaneous left ventricular assist device with TandemHeart for high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: The Mayo Clinic experience

Stroke and Mechanical Circulatory Support in Adults

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

Short-term and durable mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices represent life-saving interventions for patients with cardiogenic shock and end-stage heart failure. This review will cover the epidemiology, risk factors, and treatment of stroke in this patient population.

RECENT FINDINGS

Short-term devices such as intra-aortic balloon pump, Impella, TandemHeart, and Venoatrial Extracorporal Membrane Oxygenation, as well as durable continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVADs), improve cardiac output and blood flow to the vital organs. However, MCS use is associated with high rates of complications, including ischemic and hemorrhagic strokes which carry a high risk for death and disability. Improvements in MCS technology have reduced but not eliminated the risk of stroke. Mitigation strategies focus on careful management of anti-thrombotic therapies. While data on therapeutic options for stroke are limited, several case series reported favorable outcomes with thrombectomy for ischemic stroke patients with large vessel occlusions, as well as with reversal of anticoagulation for those with hemorrhagic stroke. Stroke in patients treated with MCS is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Preventive strategies are targeted based on the specific form of MCS. Improvements in the design of the newest generation device have reduced the risk of ischemic stroke, though hemorrhagic stroke remains a serious complication.

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.

Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization

Left main (LM) coronary artery disease accounts for approximately 4-6% of all percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs). There has been mounting evidence indicating the non-inferiority of LM PCI as a revascularization option, particularly for those with a low SYNTAX score. The EXCEL and NOBEL trials have shaped current guidelines. The European Society of Cardiology assigned a class 2a (level of evidence B) for isolated LM disease involving the shaft and ostium and a class IIb (level of evidence B) for isolated LM disease involving the bifurcation or additional two- or three-vessel disease and a SYNTAX score <32. However, data on the use of a single stent or an upfront two-stent strategy for distal LM disease are conflicting, wherein the EBC Main trial reported similar outcomes with a stepwise provisional approach and the DKCRUSH-V trial reported better outcomes with an upfront two-stent strategy using the 'double-kissing' crush technique. Although several studies have noted better immediate results with image-guided PCI, there are few data on outcomes in LM disease specifically. In fact, the uptake of imaging in the aforementioned landmark trials was only 40%. More importantly, the role of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) has been less well studied in LM PCI. Indiscriminate use of MCS for LM PCI has been noted in clinical practice. Trials evaluating the benefit of MCS in high-risk PCI demonstrated no benefit. This review highlights contemporary trials as they apply to current practice in LM PCI.

The Use of Cardioprotective Devices and Strategies in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Procedures and Cardiac Surgery

In the United States, about one million people are seen to visit the operating theater for cardiac surgery annually. However, nearly half of these visits result in complications such as renal, neurological, and cardiac injury of varying degrees. Historically, many mechanisms and approaches have been explored in attempts to reduce injuries associated with cardiac surgery and percutaneous procedures. Devices such as cardioplegia, mechanical circulatory support, and other methods have shown promising results in managing and preventing life-threatening cardiac-surgery-related outcomes such as heart failure and cardiogenic shock. Comparably, cardioprotective devices such as TandemHeart, Impella family devices, and venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) have also been proven to show significant cardioprotection through mechanical support. However, their use as interventional agents in the prevention of hemodynamic changes due to cardiac surgery or percutaneous interventions has been correlated with adverse effects. This can lead to a rebound increased risk of mortality in high-risk patients who undergo cardiac surgery. Further research is necessary to delineate and stratify patients into appropriate cardioprotective device groups. Furthermore, the use of one device over another in terms of efficacy remains controversial and further research is necessary to assess device potential in different settings. Clinical research is also needed regarding novel strategies and targets, such as transcutaneous vagus stimulation and supersaturated oxygen therapy, aimed at reducing mortality among high-risk cardiac surgery patients. This review explores the recent advances regarding the use of cardioprotective devices in patients undergoing percutaneous procedures and cardiac surgery.

Mechanical Circulatory Support for Complex High-risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Technological and procedural innovations presently permit the safe and effective performance of increasingly complex percutaneous coronary interventions, while new mechanical circulatory support devices offer circulatory and ventricular support to patients with severely reduced left ventricular systolic function and deranged cardiovascular hemodynamics. Together, these advances now permit the application of complex percutaneous coronary interventions to higher-risk patients who might otherwise be left untreated. Increasing observational data support the use of mechanical circulatory support in appropriate complex and high-risk patients as part of a larger multidisciplinary heart team treatment plan. In-progress and upcoming randomized clinical trials may provide higher-quality evidence to better guide management decisions in the near future.

The Use of Mechanical Circulatory Assist Devices for ACS Patients with Cardiogenic Shock and High-Risk PCI

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There has been a significant expansion of the use of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices for patient with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) with cardiogenic shock (CS) and in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous interventions (PCI). The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the indications and outcomes of these devices in high-risk cardiac patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Early revascularization of the culprit-lesion is the immediate goal in ACS patients with CS and the use of pulmonary artery catheters has been associated with improved outcomes in patients with cardiogenic shock. The MCS devices that are used for myocardial support include the intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), the left ventricle (LV) to aorta pumps, left atrium (LA) to arterial pumps, and right atrial (RA) to arterial pumps. This review provides an overview on the use of these devices in patients with ACS and CS and those undergoing high-risk PCI. Attention is focused on the IABP, the Impella (LV-aorta pump), the TandemHeart (LA-arterial pump), and veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (RA-arterial pump). The indications, evidence, and complications of each device are reviewed. Each device varies in its physiological effect on native heart function, complexity in insertion, and complications. The use of MCS devices for high-risk PCI and CS has increased in recent years and have demonstrated efficacy in supporting a vulnerable myocardium. Although recommendations can be made for use of each device in certain clinical scenarios, further evidence through registries and clinical trials is necessary to guide appropriate device utilization.

Trends in the Outcomes of High-risk Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Device-assisted Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, 2008-2018

Percutaneous ventricular assist devices (pVAD) are frequently utilized in high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (HR-PCI) to provide hemodynamic support in patients with complex cardiovascular disease and/or multiple comorbidities who are poor candidates for surgical revascularization. Using the National Inpatient Sample we identified pVAD-assisted PCI (excluding intra-aortic balloon pump) in patients without cardiogenic shock from January 2008 to December 2018. We evaluated the trends in patient and procedural characteristics, and complication rates across the 11-year study period. A total of 26,661 pVAD-PCI was performed. From 2008 to 2018 there has was a 27-fold increase in the number of pVAD-PCIs performed annually. There has also been an increase in the proportion of procedures performed in small to medium sized hospitals. The use of atherectomy, image-guided PCI, FFR/iFR, drug-eluting stents, and multi-vessel intervention has significantly increased. Patients undergoing pVAD-PCI had a higher burden of comorbidities, without a significant difference in mortality over time. There were decreased rates of acute stroke and blood transfusions over time, while vascular complications and acute kidney injury (AKI) requiring dialysis remained mostly unchanged. In conclusion, the use of pVAD for HR-PCI has increased significantly, along with adjunctive PCI techniques such as atherectomy, intravascular imaging, and physiologic lesion assessment. With increasing use of this device, there appeared to be lower rates of peri-procedural stroke, and blood transfusions. Despite a higher burden of comorbidities, adjusted mortality remained stable over time.

Mechanical Circulatory Support in High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

The use of mechanical circulatory devices to support high-risk elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has become more common as the group of patients considered inoperable or high risk for surgical revascularization has grown. Most of the data examining outcomes in high-risk PCI are observational and retrospective. Limited prospective randomized studies have been unable to show improved clinical outcomes with routine mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in patients with a high burden of coronary artery disease and reduced ejection fraction. The role for MCS in high-risk PCI continues to evolve as understanding of the appropriate groups for this therapy evolves.

The role of mechanical support devices during percutaneous coronary intervention

The practice of interventional cardiology has changed dramatically over the last four decades since Andreas Gruentzig carried out the first balloon angioplasty. The obvious technological improvements in stent design and interventional techniques have facilitated the routine treatment of a higher risk cohort of patients, including those with complex coronary artery disease and poor left ventricular function, and more often in the setting of cardiogenic shock (CS) complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The use of mechanical cardiac support (MCS) in these settings has been the subject of intense interest, particularly over the past decade . A number of commercially available devices now add to the interventional cardiologist's armamentarium when faced with the critically unwell or high-risk patient in the cardiac catheter laboratory. The theoretical advantage of such devices in these settings is clear- an increase in cardiac output and hence mean arterial pressure, with variable effects on coronary blood flow. In doing so, they have the potential to prevent the downward cascade of ischaemia and hypoperfusion, but there is a paucity of evidence to support their routine use in any patient subset, even those presenting with cardiogenic shock. This review will discuss the use and haemodynamic effect of MCS devices during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and also examine the clinical evidence for their use in patients with cardiogenic shock, and those undergoing 'high risk' PCI.

The Role of Hemodynamic Support in High-risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Patients with advanced age, complex coronary anatomy, and multiple comorbidities are often unsuitable for surgical revascularization. In this setting, hemodynamic support devices are used as an adjunct to percutaneous coronary intervention to maintain hemodynamic stability and enable optimal revascularization. This article provides an overview of percutaneous hemodynamic support devices currently used in clinical practice for high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention. These include the intra-aortic balloon pump, centrifugal pumps (TandemHeart, venous arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation), and micro-axial Impella pump. The hemodynamic effects, clinical evidence supporting improved outcomes and recovery of heart function, and associated complications with these devices are highlighted, with a special focus on Impella pumps.

Case series of high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention with rotational atherectomy under short-term mechanical circulatory support with TandemHeart in the setting of acute myocardial infarction

Background 

TandemHeart is a percutaneous Ventricular Assist Device, most commonly used to provide mechanical circulatory support during high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention and postcardiotomy cardiac failure. However, TandemHeart has not been applied in patients with severe heart failure due to myocardial infarction during high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention with the need for rotational artherectomy (RA) before, so we present a first-in-man case series.

Case summary 

Three patients with severe HF[Please spell out HF, LA and MI (if necessary).] due to acute myocardial infarction revealed severely calcified lesions of the unprotected left main artery. We successfully used the TandemHeart as percutaneous Ventricular Assist Device during high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention with RA.

Discussion 

We here report our experience and show that RA under TandemHeart mechanical circulatory support is feasible and safe in case of acute MI.

Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes From Percutaneous Coronary Intervention of Last Remaining Coronary Artery

Background:

Patients with complex high-risk coronary anatomy, such as those with a last remaining patent vessel (LRPV), are increasingly revascularized with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in contemporary practice. There are limited data on the outcomes of these high-risk procedures.

Methods:

We analyzed a large longitudinal PCI cohort (2007–2014, n=501 841) from the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society database. Clinical, demographic, procedural, and outcome data were analyzed by dividing patients into 2 groups; LRPV group (n=2432) and all other PCI groups (n=506 691).

Results:

Patients in the LRPV PCI group were older, had more comorbidities, and higher prevalence of moderate-severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Mortality was higher in the LRPV PCI group during hospital admission (12 % versus 1.5 %, P <0.001), at 30 days (15% versus 2%, P <0.001), and at one-year (24% versus 5%, P <0.001). In a propensity score matching analysis the adjusted risk of mortality during index admission (odds ratio, 2.05 [95% CI, 1.65–2.44], P <0.001), at 30 days (odds ratio, 2.13 [95% CI, 1.78–2.5], P <0.001), at 1 year (odds ratio, 1.81 [95% CI, 1.59–2.03], P <0.001), and in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (odds ratio, 1.8 [95% CI, 1.42–2.19], P <0.001) were higher in LRPV PCI group as compared to control group. In sensitivity analyses, similar clinical outcomes were observed irrespective of which major epicardial coronary artery was treated.

Conclusions:

In this contemporary cohort, patients who had PCI to their LRPV had a higher-risk profile and more adverse clinical outcomes, irrespective of the vessel treated.

Mechanical Circulatory Support for Acute Heart Failure Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock

Acute heart failure is a potentially life-threatening condition that can lead to cardiogenic shock, which is associated with hypotension and organ failure. Although there have been many studies on the treatment for cardiogenic shock, early mortality remains high at 40-50%. No new medicines for cardiogenic shock have been developed. Recently, there has been a gradual decline in the use of the intra-aortic balloon pump mainly due to a lack of adequate hemodynamic support. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and the percutaneous ventricular assist device have become more widely used in recent years. A thorough understanding of the mechanisms of such mechanical support devices and their hemodynamic effects, components of the devices, implantation technique, management, criteria for indications or contraindications of use, and clinical outcomes as well as multidisciplinary decision making may improve the outcomes in patients experiencing cardiogenic shock.

When the Complex Meets the High-Risk: Mechanical Cardiac Support Devices and Percutaneous Coronary Interventions in Severe Coronary Artery Disease

Coronary artery disease (CAD) remains a leading cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide. Few practice guidelines directly address the issue of revascularization in patients with CAD at higher risk of periprocedural complications. It remains a challenge to appropriately identify the subset of patients with CAD who will require short-term use of mechanical cardiocirculatory support devices (MCSDs) when high-risk (HR) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is required. Issues of the complexity (coronary anatomy and high burden of comorbidities) and risk status (hemodynamic precarity or compromise) need to be considered when considering revascularization in patients. This review will focus on the evolving concept of protected PCI in patients with CAD, and how a balanced, integrated heart-team approach remains the path to optimal patient-centred care in the setting of HR-PCI supported with MCSD.

Temporal Trends and Site Variation in High-Risk Coronary Intervention and the Use of Mechanical Circulatory Support: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment Reporting and Tracking (CART) Program

Background Patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are older with greater medical comorbidities and anatomical complexity than ever before, resulting in an increased frequency of nonemergent high-risk PCI (HR-PCI). We thus sought to evaluate the temporal trends in performance of HR-PCI and utilization of mechanical circulatory support in the largest integrated healthcare system in the United States. Methods and Results A cohort of high-risk adult patients that underwent nonemergent PCI in the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System between January 2008 and June 2018 were identified by objective clinical, hemodynamic, and anatomic criteria. Temporal trends in the performance of HR-PCI, utilization of mechanical circulatory support, and site-level variation were assessed. Of 111 548 patients assessed during the study period, 554 met 3 high-risk criteria whereas 4414 met at least 2 criteria for HR-PCI. There was a significant linear increase in the proportion of interventions that met 3 (P<0.001) or at least 2 (P<0.001) high-risk criteria over time, with rates approaching 1.9% and 11.2% in the last full calendar year analyzed. A minority of patients who met all high-risk criteria received PCI with mechanical support (15.7%) without a significant increase over time (P=0.193). However, there was significant site-level variation in the probability of performing HR-PCI (4.0-fold higher likelihood) and utilizing mechanical circulatory support (1.9-fold higher likelihood) between high and low utilization sites. Conclusions The proportion of cases categorized as HR-PCI has increased over time, with significant site-level variation in performance. The majority of HR-PCI cases did not utilize mechanical support, highlighting a discrepancy between current recommendations and clinical practice in an integrated healthcare system.

Complications of Temporary Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support for Cardiogenic Shock: An Appraisal of Contemporary Literature

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is associated with hemodynamic compromise and end-organ hypoperfusion due to a primary cardiac etiology. In addition to vasoactive medications, percutaneous mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices offer the ability to support the hemodynamics and prevent acute organ failure. Despite the wide array of available MCS devices for CS, there are limited data on the complications from these devices. In this review, we seek to summarize the complications of MCS devices in the contemporary era. Using a systems-based approach, this review covers domains of hematological, neurological, vascular, infectious, mechanical, and miscellaneous complications. These data are intended to provide a balanced narrative and aid in risk-benefit decision-making in this acutely ill population.

Vascular complications associated with percutaneous left ventricular assist device placement: A 10-year US perspective

BACKGROUND

Over the last decade, there has been a significant increase in the use of percutaneous left ventricular assist devices(p-LVADs). p-LVADs are being increasingly used during complex coronary interventions and for acute cardiogenic shock. These large bore percutaneous devices have a higher risk of vascular complications. We examined the vascular complication rates from the use of p-LVAD in a national database.

METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis of the National In-patient Sample (NIS) dataset from 2005 till 2015. We used the ICD-9-CM procedure codes 37.68 and 37.62 for p-LVAD placement regardless of indications. We investigated common vascular complications, defining them by the validated ICD 9 CM codes. χ² test and t test were used for categorical and continuous variables, respectively for comparison.

RESULTS

A total of 31,263 p-LVAD placements were identified during the period studied. A majority of patients were male (72.68%) and 64.44% were white. The overall incidence of vascular complications was 13.53%, out of which 56% required surgical treatment. Acute limb thromboembolism and bleeding requiring transfusion accounted for 27.6% and 21.8% of all vascular complications. Occurrence of a vascular complication was associated with significantly higher in-hospital mortality (37.77% vs. 29.95%, p < .001), length of stay (22.7 vs. 12.2 days, p < .001) and cost of hospitalization ($ 161,923 vs. $ 95,547, p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a high incidence of vascular complications with p-LVAD placement including need for vascular surgery. These complications are associated with a higher in-hospital, LOS and hospitalization costs. These findings should be factored into the decision-making for p-LVAD placement.

Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices in high-risk patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices (pMCSDs) are increasingly used on the assumption (but without solid proof) that their use will improve prognosis. A meta-analysis was undertaken according to the PRISMA guidelines to evaluate the benefits of pMCSDs in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (hr-PCI).

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMbase, Cochrane Library, Clinical Trial.gov, and other databases to identify eligible studies. Relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for 30-day and 6-month all-cause mortality rates, reinfarction, and other adverse events using a random effect model.

RESULTS

Sixteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this study. In the pooled analysis, intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) was not associated with a decrease in 30-day and 6-month all-cause mortality (RR 1.01 95% CI 0.61-1.66; RR 0.88 95% CI 0.66-1.17), reinfarction (RR 0.89 95% CI 0.69-1.14), stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA) (RR 1.75 95% CI 0.47-6.42), heart failure (HF) (RR 0.54 95% CI 0.11-2.66), repeat revascularization (RR 0.73 95% CI 0.25-2.10), embolization (RR 3.00 95% CI 0.13-71.61), or arrhythmia (RR 2.81 95% CI 0.30-26.11). Compared with IABP, left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) were not associated with a decrease in 30-day and 6-month all-cause mortality (RR 0.96 95% CI 0.71-1.29; RR 1.23 95% CI 0.88-1.72), reinfarction (RR 0.98 95% CI 0.68-1.42), stroke/TIA (RR 0.45 95% CI 0.1-1.95), acute kidney injury (AKI) (RR 0.83 95% CI 0.38-1.80), or arrhythmia (RR 1.52 95% CI 0.71-3.27), but LVADs were associated with a decrease in repeat revascularization (RR 0.26 95% CI 0.08-0.83). However, LVADs significantly increased the risk of bleeding compared with IABP (RR 2.85 95% CI 1.72-4.73).

CONCLUSIONS

Neither LVADs nor IABP improves short or long-term survival in hr-PCI patients. LVADs are more likely to reduce repeat revascularization after PCI, but to increase the risk of bleeding events than IABP.

Utilization of Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices in Cardiogenic Shock Complicating Acute Myocardial Infarction and High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Interventions

Given the tremendous progress in interventional cardiology over the last decade, a growing number of older patients, who have more comorbidities and more complex coronary artery disease, are being considered for technically challenging and high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). The success of performing such complex PCI is increasingly dependent on the availability and improvement of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices, which aim to provide hemodynamic support and left ventricular (LV) unloading to enable safe and successful coronary revascularization. MCS as an adjunct to high-risk PCI may, therefore, be an important component for improvement in clinical outcomes. MCS devices in this setting can be used for two main clinical conditions: patients who present with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and those undergoing technically complex and high-risk PCI without having overt cardiogenic shock. The current article reviews the advancement in the use of various devices in both AMI complicated by cardiogenic shock and complex high-risk PCI, highlights the available hemodynamic and clinical data associated with the use of MCS devices, and presents suggestive management strategies focusing on appropriate patient selection and optimal timing and support to potentially increase the clinical benefit from utilizing these devices during PCI in this high-risk group of patients.

Mechanical Circulatory Support in High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Due to advancing age and increasing comorbidities, the current population has a higher incidence of complex coronary artery disease, often without surgical options for revascularization. In this setting, hemodynamic support devices are an important adjunct in the interventionist's toolbox as they allow for a safer, more effective procedure. The following paper reviews the indications of various available mechanical support devices, highlights their clinical data and technical parameters, and offers a practical approach towards appropriate patient and device selection.

Efficacy and Safety of the HeartMate Percutaneous Heart Pump During High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (from the SHIELD I Trial)

This study aimed to evaluate the use of the HeartMate percutaneous heart pump, a catheter-based axial flow pump designed to provide partial left ventricular support, in patients who underwent high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Patients who are hemodynamically unstable, or at risk of being hemodynamically unstable, while undergoing PCI may require mechanical circulatory support. Fifty high-risk patients were enrolled in a prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter, open-label trial. Primary end points were freedom from hemodynamic compromise during PCI and a composite measure of major adverse events. Patients were followed for 30 days. No patient met the primary performance end point. Six safety end points in 5 patients occurred, including 1 access site complication requiring intervention, 1 cerebrovascular accident, 2 major bleeding complications, and 2 cases of new or worsening aortic insufficiency. No cardiac deaths, myocardial infarctions, or surgical interventions occurred. In conclusion, initial results of the HeartMate percutaneous heart pump for mechanical circulatory support during high-risk PCI are encouraging. Hemodynamic stability was achieved in all patients with a low incidence of adverse events.

Mechanical Circulatory Support in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure and Shock

An array of interventional therapeutics is available in the modern era, with uses depending on acute or chronic situations. This article focuses on support in acute decompensated heart failure and cardiogenic shock, including intra-aortic balloon pumps, continuous aortic flow augmentation, and extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation.

Meta-Analysis of Usefulness of Percutaneous Left Ventricular Assist Devices for High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Interventions

High-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is often offered to patients with extensive coronary artery disease, decreased left ventricular function, and co-morbid conditions that increase surgical risk. In these settings, percutaneous left ventricular assist devices (PVADs) can be used for hemodynamic support. To assess the effects of PVAD use on mortality, myocardial infarction, and complication rates in patients undergoing high-risk PCI, we systematically searched the electronic databases, MEDLINE, PUBMED, EMBASE, and Cochrane for prospective controlled trials and cohort studies of patients that received hemodynamic support with PVADs for high-risk PCI. The primary outcome measures were 30-day all-cause mortality, 30-day myocardial infarction rates, periprocedural major bleeding, and vascular complications. We included 12 studies with 1,346 participants who underwent Impella 2.5 L device placement and 8 cohort studies with 205 patients that received TandemHeart device for high-risk PCI. Short-term mortality rates were 3.5% and 8% and major bleeding rates were 7.1% and 3.6% with Impella and TandemHeart, respectively. Both devices are associated with comparable periprocedural outcomes in patients undergoing high-risk PCI.

Hemodynamic Support Devices for Complex Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

High-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) encompasses a growing portion of total PCIs performed and typically includes patients with high-risk clinical and anatomic characteristics. Such patients may represent not only a high-risk group for complications but also a group who may derive the most benefit from complete revascularization. Several hemodynamic support devices are available. Trial data, consensus documents, and guidelines currently recommend high-risk PCI aided by hemodynamic support devices, and this article discusses the patient populations who would benefit from such an approach, the available devices and strategies, and expected outcomes.

2015 SCAI/ACC/HFSA/STS Clinical Expert Consensus Statement on the Use of Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices in Cardiovascular Care (Endorsed by the American Heart Association, the Cardiological Society of India, and Sociedad Latino Americana de Cardiologia Intervencion; Affirmation of Value by the Canadian Association of Interventional Cardiology-Association Canadienne de Cardiologie d'intervention)

Although historically the intra-aortic balloon pump has been the only mechanical circulatory support device available to clinicians, a number of new devices have become commercially available and have entered clinical practice. These include axial flow pumps, such as Impella(®); left atrial to femoral artery bypass pumps, specifically the TandemHeart; and new devices for institution of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. These devices differ significantly in their hemodynamic effects, insertion, monitoring, and clinical applicability. This document reviews the physiologic impact on the circulation of these devices and their use in specific clinical situations. These situations include patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention, those presenting with cardiogenic shock, and acute decompensated heart failure. Specialized uses for right-sided support and in pediatric populations are discussed and the clinical utility of mechanical circulatory support devices is reviewed, as are the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association clinical practice guidelines.

Percutaneous coronary intervention with the TandemHeart™ percutaneous left ventricular assist device support: Six years of experience and outcomes

OBJECTIVES

Our study was designed to evaluate the outcomes of TandemHeart™ assistance during percutaneous coronary intervention, specifically in relationship to pre-procedural clinical and hemodynamic risk factors in patients ineligible for surgical revascularization.

BACKGROUND

We have used the TandemHeart™ percutaneous left ventricular assist device during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients for whom conventional PCI and aorto-coronary bypass would pose substantial risk owing to comorbidities and/or clinical presentations.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data from 626 consecutive PCIs at the Texas Heart Institute from 2005 to 2011. Among these, 74 interventions were performed with TandemHeart™ support. Mortality and morbidity were analyzed in relationship to presentation status (elective, urgent, emergent, or emergent salvage), and then we recorded outcomes and survival rates over the course of six years.

RESULTS

At 30 days after PCI, survival rates were 94%, 88%, 79%, and 55% in the elective, urgent, emergent, and emergent salvage groups, respectively. Survival rates at one year were at 75% in the elective, 64% in the urgent, 52% in the emergent, and 45% in the emergent salvage groups. Survival rates at 6 years were 68% in the elective, 53% in the urgent, 31% in the emergent, and 41% in the emergent salvage groups, respectively. In elective and urgent groups, successful weaning from mechanical support was possible in all patients. In the emergent and emergent salvage groups, successful weaning from mechanical support was possible in 84% and 55% of patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

TandemHeart™ assisted PCI is a viable option for revascularization in cases of profound cardiogenic shock or extremely risky intervention due to complex anatomy. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Usage of Percutaneous Left Ventricular Assist Devices in Clinical Practice and High-risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Patients who require coronary revascularization and present with poor left ventricular function and complex coronary anatomy are at high risk for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting surgery. Some of these patients are poor surgical candidates because of previous cardiac surgery or significant comorbidities. The recent approval and availability of percutaneous left ventricular assist devices has created an opportunity for the highest risk patients. This article reviews currently available mechanical circulatory support systems and portable extracorporeal oxygenation, describing hemodynamic and physiologic rationales, indications, strategies, and available evidence for their use in high risk PCI.