Impella ventricular support in clinical practice: Collaborative viewpoint from a European expert user group

Left ventricular unloading to facilitate ventricular remodelling in heart failure: A narrative review of mechanical circulatory support

Heart failure represents a dynamic clinical challenge with the continuous rise of a multi-morbid and ageing population. Yet, the evolving nature of mechanical circulatory support offers a variety of means to manage candidates who might benefit from such interventions. This narrative review focuses on the role of the main mechanical circulatory support devices, such as ventricular assist device, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, Impella and TandemHeart, in the physiological process of ventricular unloading and remodelling in heart failure, highlighting their characteristics, mechanism and clinical outcomes. The outcome measures described include physiological changes (i.e., stroke volume or preload and afterload), intracardiac pressure (i.e., end-diastolic pressure) and extracardiac pressure (i.e., pulmonary capillary wedge pressure). Overall, all the above mechanical circulatory support strategies can facilitate the unloading of the ventricular failure through different mechanisms, which subsequently affects the ventricular remodelling process. These physiological changes start immediately after ventricular assist device implantation. The devices are indicated in different but overlapping populations and operate in distinctive ways; yet, they have evidenced performance to a favourable standard to improve cardiac function in heart failure, although this proved variable for different devices, and further high-quality trials are vital to assess their clinical outcomes further. Both Impella and TandemHeart are indicated mainly in cardiogenic shock and high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention patients; at the time the literature was evaluated, both devices were found to yield a significant improvement in haemodynamics but not in survival. Nevertheless, the choice of device strategy should be based on individual patient factors, including indication, to optimize clinical outcomes.

CVIT expert consensus document on primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in 2024

Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) has significantly contributed to reducing the mortality of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) even in cardiogenic shock and is now the standard of care in most of Japanese institutions. The Task Force on Primary PCI of the Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics (CVIT) proposed an expert consensus document for the management of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) focusing on procedural aspects of primary PCI in 2018 and updated in 2022. Recently, the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) published the guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndrome in 2023. Major new updates in the 2023 ESC guideline include: (1) intravascular imaging should be considered to guide PCI (Class IIa); (2) timing of complete revascularization; (3) antiplatelet therapy in patient with high-bleeding risk. Reflecting rapid advances in the field, the Task Force on Primary PCI of the CVIT group has now proposed an updated expert consensus document for the management of ACS focusing on procedural aspects of primary PCI in 2024 version.

Factors associated with stellate ganglion block success in recurrent ventricular arrhythmias

AIMS

One treatment option for refractory ventricular arrythmias is stellate ganglion block (SGB). We examined differences in SGB success by patient and arrhythmia characteristics and predictors of successful SGB.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This was a multicenter analysis of patients treated for refractory ventricular arrythmias in the Czech Republic and the United States. The primary outcome was absence of ventricular arrythmias at 24 h post SGB. SGB effectiveness was examined according to aetiology of cardiomyopathy, arrhythmia type, laterality of SGB, presence of inotropes, and presence of mechanical circulatory support. Binary logistic regression was used to examine variables associated with the primary outcome. In total there were 117 patients with refractory ventricular arrythmias treated with SGB. Overall, the mean age was 63.5 ± 11.0 years, majority of patients were male (94.0%), White (87.2%), and had an implantable cardioverter defibrillator in situ (70.1%). There were no differences in efficacy of SGB based on aetiology of cardiomyopathy (P = 0.623), arrhythmia type (0.852), laterality of block (P = 0.131), and presence of inotropes (P = 0.083). Multivariable analysis demonstrated that increased age was associated with decreased odds of SGB success (odds ratio: 0.96, confidence interval: 0.92-0.99, P = 0.039) whereas increased left ventricular ejection fraction trended towards increased odds of SGB success (odds ratio: 1.05, confidence interval: 0.995-1.11, P = 0.077).

CONCLUSIONS

In this multicentre experience, SGB was similarly effective despite the aetiology of cardiomyopathy, type of arrhythmia, laterality, and inotropic or mechanical support. SGB was less effective for the suppression of ventricular arrythmias at 24 h for the elderly.

Role of Mechanical Circulatory Support in Complex High-Risk and Indicated Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Current Indications, Device Options, and Potential Complications

Improved expertise and technological advancements have enabled the safe and effective performance of complex and high-risk-indicated percutaneous coronary intervention (CHIP) in patients previously considered inoperable or high-risk. Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices play a crucial role in stabilizing hemodynamics during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) -related ischemia, thereby reducing the risk of major adverse events and achieving a more complete revascularization. However, the use of MCS devices in protected PCI is not without risks, including peri-procedural myocardial infarction (MI), bleeding, and access-related complications. Despite numerous observational studies, there is a significant lack of randomized clinical trials comparing different MCS devices in various CHIP scenarios and evaluating their long-term safety and efficacy profiles. This review aims to summarize the current evidence regarding the benefits of MCS devices during CHIPs, offer a practical guide for selecting appropriate devices based on clinical scenarios, and highlight the unanswered questions that future trials need to address.

Extended Duration of Impella 5.5 Support Does Not Adversely Impact Outcomes Following Heart Transplantation: A National Registry Analysis

Prior studies assessing the effects of Impella 5.5 support duration on posttransplant outcomes have been limited to single-center case reports and series. This study evaluates the impact of Impella 5.5 support duration on outcomes following heart transplantation using the United Network for Organ Sharing database. Adult heart transplant recipients who were directly bridged to primary isolated heart transplantation with Impella 5.5 were included. The cohort was stratified into two groups based on the duration of Impella support: less than or equal to 14 and greater than 14 days. The primary outcome was 90 day posttransplant survival. Propensity score matching was performed. Sub-analysis was conducted to evaluate the impact of greater than 30 days of Impella support on 90 day survival. Three hundred thirty-two recipients were analyzed. Of these, 212 recipients (63.9%) were directly bridged to heart transplantation with an Impella support duration of greater than 14 days. The two groups had comparable 90 day posttransplant survival and complication rates. The comparable posttransplant survival persisted in a propensity score-matched comparison. In the sub-analysis, Impella support duration of greater than or equal to 30 days did not adversely impact 90 day survival. This study demonstrates that extended duration of support with Impella 5.5 as a bridge to transplantation does not adversely impact posttransplant outcomes. Impella 5.5 is a safe and effective bridging modality to heart transplantation.

A Novel Predictive Score Model for Successful Weaning From Mechanical Circulatory Support in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock

BACKGROUND

Clinical evidence regarding predictors of successful weaning from mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is lacking. This study aimed to create a simple risk score to predict successful weaning from MCS in patients with cardiogenic shock.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This retrospective single-center cohort study included 114 consecutive patients with cardiogenic shock treated with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or IMPELLA between January 2013 and June 2023. Patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest were excluded. The primary end point was successful weaning from MCS, defined as successful decannulation without the need for MCS reimplantation and survival to discharge. Multivariable logistic regression with a stepwise variable selection was performed to generate the prediction model. We first developed a general weaning score model, and then created a simple version of the score model using the same variables. Fifty-five patients were weaned from MCS successfully. The following variables measured during weaning evaluation were selected as the components of the weaning score model: acute myocardial infarction (AMI), mean blood pressure, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), lactate level, and QRS duration. According to the results, we conducted a novel weaning score model to predict successful weaning from MCS: 1.774 - 2.090 × (AMI) + 0.062 × [mean blood pressure (mm Hg)] + 0.139 × [LVEF (%)] - 0.322 × [Lactate (mg/dL)] - 0.066 × [QRS (ms)]. The following variables were selected as the components of the simple version of the weaning score model: AMI, mean blood pressure of ≥80 mm Hg, lactate of <10 mg/dL, QRS duration of ≤95 ms, and LVEF of >35%.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a simple model to predict successful weaning from MCS in patients with cardiogenic shock.

Outcomes of Impella 5.0 and 5.5 for cardiogenic shock: A single-center 137 patient experience

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) supported with Impella 5.0 or 5.5 and identified risk factors for in-hospital mortality.

METHODS

Adults with CS who were supported with Impella 5.0 or 5.5 at a single institution were included. Patients were stratified into three groups according to their CS etiology: (1) acute myocardial infarction (AMI), (2) acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF), and (3) postcardiotomy (PC). The primary outcome was survival, and secondary outcomes included adverse events during Impella support and length of stay. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify risk factors for in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

One hundred and thirty-seven patients with CS secondary to AMI (n = 47), ADHF (n = 86), and PC (n = 4) were included. The ADHF group had the highest survival rates at all time points. Acute kidney injury (AKI) was the most common complication during Impella support in all 3 groups. Increased rates of AKI and de novo renal replacement therapy were observed in the PC group, and the AMI group experienced a higher incidence of bleeding requiring transfusion. Multivariable analysis demonstrated diabetes mellitus, elevated pre-insertion serum lactate, and elevated pre-insertion serum creatinine were independent predictors of in-hospital mortality, but the etiology of CS did not impact mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that Impella 5.0 and 5.5 provide effective mechanical support for patients with CS with favorable outcomes, with nearly two-thirds of patients alive at 180 days. Diabetes, elevated pre-insertion serum lactate, and elevated pre-insertion serum creatinine are strong risk factors for in-hospital mortality.

Management of patients with impella devices or intra-aortic balloon pumps during helicopter air ambulance transport in observational data

INTRODUCTION

Placement of percutaneous ventricular support devices such as an intraaortic balloon pump (IABP) or Abiomed Impella device can treat severe cardiogenic shock. Critical care transport medicine (CCTM) providers frequently manage patients supported by these devices during interfacility transfers, often using a helicopter air ambulance (HAA). An understanding of patient needs and management during transport is essential to informing crew configuration and training, and this study adds to the limited existing data on the HAA transport of this complex patient population.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective chart review of all HAA transports of patients with an IABP (n = 38) or Impella (n = 11) device at a single CCTM program from 2016 to 2020. We evaluated transport times and composite variables for the frequency of adverse events, condition changes requiring critical care evaluation, and critical care interventions.

RESULTS

In this observational cohort, patients with an Impella device more frequently had an advanced airway and at least 1 vasopressor or inotrope active prior to transport. While flight times were similar, CCTM teams remained at referring facilities longer for patients with an Impella device (99 vs 68 minutes; p = 0.0097). Compared to patients with an IABP, patients with an Impella device more frequently had a condition change requiring critical care evaluation (100% vs 42%; p = 0.0005) and more frequently received critical care interventions (100% vs 53%; p = 0.0037). Adverse events were uncommon and did not differ for patients with an Impella device compared to an IABP (27% vs 11%; p = 0.178).

CONCLUSION

Patients requiring mechanical circulatory support with IABP and Impella devices frequently require critical care management during transport. Clinicians should ensure the CCTM team has appropriate staffing, training, and resources to meet the critical care needs of these high acuity patients.

Heparin dosing in patients with Impella-supported cardiogenic shock

BACKGROUND

Impella™ is increasingly used in cardiogenic shock. However, thromboembolic and bleeding events are frequent during percutaneous mechanical circulatory support (pMCS).

OBJECTIVE

Therefore, we aimed to explore the optimal anticoagulation regime for pMCS to prevent thromboembolism and bleedings.

METHODS

This hypothesis-generating multi-center cohort study investigated 170 patients with left-Impella™ support. We (A) compared bleeding/thrombotic events in two centers with therapeutic range (TR-aPTT) activated partial thromboplastin time (60-80s) and (B) compared events of these centers with one center with intermediate range aPTT (40-60s).

RESULTS

After matching, there were no differences in patients' characteristics. In centers aiming at TR-aPTT, major bleeding was numerically lower with aPTT <60s within 48 h of left-Impella™ support, versus patients that achieved the aimed aPTT of ≥60s [aPTT ≥60s: 22 (37.3%) vs. aPTT<60s 14 (23.7%); Hazard ratio [HR], 0.62 (95%) CI, 0.28-1.38; p = 0.234]. Major cardiovascular and cerebrovascular adverse events (MACCE) did not differ between groups. In comparison of centers, TR-aPTT strategy showed higher major bleeding rates [TR: 8 (47.1%) vs. intermediate range: 1 (5.9%); HR, 0.06 (95%) CI, 0.01-0.45; p = 0.006]. MACCE were lower in the intermediate range aPTT group as well [TR 12 (70.6%) vs. intermediate range 5 (29.4%) HR, 0.32 (95%) CI, 0.11-0.92; p = 0.034].

CONCLUSION

This pilot analysis showed that lowering UFH-targets in left-Impella™ supported CS patients seems to be a safe and promising strategy for reducing major bleedings without increasing MACCE. This needs to be validated in larger, randomized clinical trials.

Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices in refractory cardiac arrest: The role of chest compressions

Background

Recent studies describe an emerging role for percutaneous left ventricular assist devices such as Impella CP® as rescue therapy for refractory cardiac arrest. We hypothesized that the addition of mechanical chest compressions to percutaneous left ventricular assist device assisted CPR would improve hemodynamics by compressing the right ventricle and augmenting pulmonary blood flow and left ventricular filling. We performed a pilot study to test this hypothesis using a swine model of prolonged cardiac arrest.

Methods

Eight Yorkshire swine were anesthetized, intubated, and instrumented for hemodynamic monitoring. They were subjected to untreated ventricular fibrillation for 5.75 (SD 2.90) minutes followed by mechanical chest compressions for a mean of 20.0 (SD 5.0) minutes before initiation of percutaneous left ventricular assist device. After percutaneous left ventricular assist device initiation, mechanical chest compressions was stopped (n = 4) or continued (n = 4). Defibrillation was attempted 4, 8 and 12 minutes after initiating percutaneous left ventricular assist device circulatory support.

Results

The percutaneous left ventricular assist device + mechanical chest compressions group had significantly higher percutaneous left ventricular assist device flow prior to return of spontaneous heartbeat at four- and twelve-minutes after percutaneous left ventricular assist device initiation, and significantly higher end tidal CO2 at 4-minutes after percutaneous left ventricular assist device initiation, when compared with the percutaneous left ventricular assist device alone group. Carotid artery flow was not significantly different between the two groups.

Conclusion

The addition of mechanical chest compressions to percutaneous left ventricular assist device support during cardiac arrest may generate higher percutaneous left ventricular assist device and carotid artery flow prior to return of spontaneous heartbeat compared to percutaneous left ventricular assist device alone. Further studies are needed to determine if this approach improves other hemodynamic parameters or outcomes after prolonged cardiac arrest.

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.

Clinical outcomes and predictors of success with Impella weaning in cardiogenic shock: a single-center experience

Introduction

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a severe syndrome with poor prognosis. Short-term mechanical circulatory support with Impella devices has emerged as an increasingly therapeutic option, unloading the failing left ventricle (LV) and improving hemodynamic status of affected patients. Impella devices should be used for the shortest time necessary to allow LV recovery because of time-dependent device-related adverse events. The weaning from Impella, however, is mostly performed in the absence of established guidelines, mainly based on the experience of the individual centres.

Methods

The aim of this single center study was to retrospectively evaluate whether a multiparametrical assessment before and during Impella weaning could predict successful weaning. The primary study outcome was death occurring during Impella weaning and secondary endpoints included assessment of in-hospital outcomes.

Results

Of a total of 45 patients (median age, 60 [51-66] years, 73% male) treated with an Impella device, 37 patients underwent impella weaning/removal and 9 patients (20%) died after the weaning. Non-survivors patients after impella weaning more commonly had a previous history of known heart failure (p = 0.054) and an implanted ICD-CRT (p = 0.01), and were more frequently treated with continuous renal replacement therapy (p = 0.02). In univariable logistic regression analysis, lactates variation (%) during the first 12-24 h of weaning, lactate value after 24 h of weaning, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) at the beginning of weaning, and inotropic score after 24 h from weaning beginning were associated with death. Stepwise multivariable logistic regression identified LVEF at the beginning of weaning and lactates variation (%) in the first 12-24 h from weaning beginning as the most accurate predictors of death after weaning. The ROC analysis indicated 80% accuracy (95% confidence interval = 64%-96%) using the two variables in combination to predict death after weaning from Impella.

Conclusions

This single-center experience on Impella weaning in CS showed that two easily accessible parameters as LVEF at the beginning of weaning and lactates variation (%) in the first 12-24 h from weaning begin were the most accurate predictors of death after weaning.

DCM Support: cell therapy and circulatory support for dilated cardiomyopathy patients with severe ventricular impairment

AIMS

The DCM Support trial (NCT03572660) uses a percutaneous circulatory support device (Impella CP, Abiomed, Danvers, MA, USA) to improve the safety of an intracoronary cell infusion procedure in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) and a severely reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

DCM Support is a single-site, single-arm Phase II trial enrolling 20 symptomatic DCM patients with an LVEF ≤ 35% despite optimal medical and device therapy. After 5 days of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor therapy and a subsequent bone marrow aspiration, patients undergo an intracoronary infusion of autologous bone-marrow-derived mononuclear cells. The Impella CP device is used to provide haemodynamic support during the infusion procedure. The trial's primary endpoint is change in LVEF from baseline at 3 months. Secondary efficacy endpoints are change in LVEF from baseline at 12 months, and change in exercise capacity, New York Heart Association class, quality of life, and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels from baseline at 3 and 12 months. Safety endpoints include procedural safety and major adverse cardiac events at 3 and 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first trial to assess the safety and efficacy of cytokine and autologous intracoronary cell therapy with a procedural circulatory support device for patients with severe left ventricular impairment. This novel combination may allow us to target a patient population most at need of this therapy.

[The Role of the Percutaneous Impella Pump in Anesthesia and Intensive Care]

The use of temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) devices and in particular the increasing use of the Impella device family has gained significant interest over the last two decades. Nowadays, its use plays a well-established key role in both the treatment of cardiogenic shock, and as a preventive and protective therapeutic option during high-risk procedures in both cardiac surgery and cardiology, such as complex percutaneous interventions (protected PCI). Thus, it is not surprising that the Impella device is more and more present in the perioperative setting and especially in patients on intensive care units. Despite the numerous advantages such as cardiac resting and hemodynamic stabilization, potential adverse events exist, which may lead to severe, but preventable complications, so that adequate education, early recognition of such events and a subsequent adequate management are crucial in patients with tMCS. This article provides an overview especially for anesthesiologists and intensivists focusing on technical basics, indications and contraindications for its use with special focus on the intra- and postoperative management. Furthermore, troubleshooting for most common complications for patients on Impella support is provided.

IABP versus Impella Support in Cardiogenic Shock: “In Silico” Study

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is part of a clinical syndrome consisting of acute left ventricular failure causing severe hypotension leading to inadequate organ and tissue perfusion. The most commonly used devices to support patients affected by CS are Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump (IABP), Impella 2.5 pump and Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation. The aim of this study is the comparison between Impella and IABP using CARDIOSIM© software simulator of the cardiovascular system. The results of the simulations included baseline conditions from a virtual patient in CS followed by IABP assistance in synchronised mode with different driving and vacuum pressures. Subsequently, the same baseline conditions were supported by the Impella 2.5 with different rotational speeds. The percentage variation with respect to baseline conditions was calculated for haemodynamic and energetic variables during IABP and Impella assistance. The Impella pump driven with a rotational speed of 50,000 rpm increased the total flow by 4.36% with a reduction in left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) by ≅15% to ≅30%. A reduction in left ventricular end systolic volume (LVESV) by ≅10% to ≅18% (≅12% to ≅33%) was observed with IABP (Impella) assistance. The simulation outcome suggests that assistance with the Impella device leads to higher reduction in LVESV, LVEDV, left ventricular external work and left atrial pressure-volume loop area compared to IABP support.

Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support: Left, Right, and Biventricular Devices

Temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS) encompasses a wide array of invasive devices, which provide short-term hemodynamic support for multiple clinical indications. Although initially developed for the management of cardiogenic shock, indications for MCS have expanded to include prophylactic insertion prior to high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention, treatment of acute circulatory failure following cardiac surgery, and bridging of end-stage heart failure patients to more definitive therapies, such as left ventricular assist devices and cardiac transplantation. A wide variety of devices are available to provide left ventricular, right ventricular, or biventricular support. The choice of a temporary MCS device requires consideration of the clinical scenario, patient characteristics, institution protocols, and provider familiarity and training. In this review, the most common forms of left, right, and biventricular temporary MCS are discussed, along with their indications, contraindications, complications, cannulations, hemodynamic effects, and available clinical data.

Surgically Implanted Impella Device for Patients on Impella CP Support Experiencing Refractory Hemolysis

The Impella CP (Abiomed Inc., Danvers, MA) is widely used in cardiac catheterization laboratories for patients presenting with cardiogenic shock, but it is also known to cause significant hemolysis. The risk of hemolysis can be reduced by properly positioning the device, ensuring an adequate volume status, and using full anticoagulation strategies; however, in some cases hemolysis persists. We present a case series of eight patients that were diagnosed with cardiogenic shock, underwent Impella CP placement, and then suffered from refractory hemolysis which was treated by upgrading the Impella device to the 5.0 or 5.5 version. Fifty percent (4/8) of the patients in this series were already receiving continuous renal replacement therapy, and the levels of plasma free hemoglobin (pFHb) and lactate dehydrogenase continued to increase after the implantation of the Impella CP. The median time between Impella CP placement and the diagnosis of refractory hemolysis was 16.5 hours (interquartile range [IQR], 8.0-26.0). The median time between the diagnosis of hemolysis to Impella upgrade was 6.0 hours (IQR, 4.0-7.0). A total of 87.5% (7/8) of patients experienced a drop in pFHb to below 40 mg/dl at 72 hours post-Impella upgrade, and they were discharged without any further need of dialysis. One patient expired due to irreversible multiple organ failure. We propose that early identification of hemolysis by close monitoring of pFHb and upgrading to the Impella 5.5 reduces hemolysis, prevents further kidney damage, and significantly improves clinical outcomes.

Optimized patient selection in high-risk protected percutaneous coronary intervention

Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support (pMCS) is increasingly used in patients with poor left-ventricular (LV) function undergoing elective high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions (HR-PCIs). These patients are often in critical condition and not suitable candidates for coronary artery bypass graft surgery. For the definition of HR-PCI, there is a growing consensus that multiple factors must be considered to define the complexity of PCI. These include haemodynamic status, left-ventricular ejection fraction, clinical characteristics, and concomitant diseases, as well as the complexity of the coronary anatomy/lesions. Although haemodynamic support by percutaneous LV assist devices is commonly adopted in HR-PCI (protected PCI), there are no clear guideline recommendations for indication due to limited published data. Therefore, decisions to use a nonsurgical, minimally invasive procedure in HR-PCI patients should be based on a risk-benefit assessment by a multidisciplinary team. Here, the current evidence and indications for protected PCI will be discussed.

What is known in pre-, peri-, and post-procedural anticoagulation in micro-axial flow pump protected percutaneous coronary intervention?

Interest in the use of percutaneous left ventricular assist devices (p-LVADs) for patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is growing rapidly. The Impella™ (Abiomed Inc.) is a catheter-based continuous micro-axial flow pump that preserves haemodynamic support during high-risk PCI. Anticoagulation is required to counteract the activation of the coagulation system by the patient's procoagulant state and the foreign-body surface of the pump. Excessive anticoagulation and the effect of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) increase the risk of bleeding. Inadequate anticoagulation leads to thrombus formation and device dysfunction. The precarious balance between bleeding and thrombosis in patients with p-LVAD support is often the primary reason that patients' outcomes are jeopardized. In this chapter, we will discuss anticoagulation strategies and anticoagulant management in the setting of protected PCI. This includes anticoagulant therapy with unfractionated heparin, direct thrombin inhibitors, DAPT, purge blockage prevention by bicarbonate-based purge solution, and monitoring by activated clotting time, partial thromboplastin time, as well as anti-factor Xa levels. Here, we provide a standardized approach to the management of peri-interventional anticoagulation in patients undergoing protected PCI.

Microaxial Left Ventricular Assist Device in Cardiogenic Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Microaxial left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) are increasingly used to support patients with cardiogenic shock; however, outcome results are limited to single-center studies, registry data and select reviews. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, searching three databases for relevant studies reporting on microaxial LVAD use in adults with cardiogenic shock. We conducted a random-effects meta-analysis (DerSimonian and Laird) based on short-term mortality (primary outcome), long-term mortality and device complications (secondary outcomes). We assessed the risk of bias and certainty of evidence using the Joanna Briggs Institute and the GRADE approaches, respectively. A total of 63 observational studies (3896 patients), 6 propensity-score matched (PSM) studies and 2 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included (384 patients). The pooled short-term mortality from observational studies was 46.5% (95%-CI: 42.7–50.3%); this was 48.9% (95%-CI: 43.8–54.1%) amongst PSM studies and RCTs. The pooled mortality at 90 days, 6 months and 1 year was 41.8%, 51.1% and 54.3%, respectively. Hemolysis and access-site bleeding were the most common complications, each with a pooled incidence of around 20%. The reported mortality rate of microaxial LVADs was not significantly lower than extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) or intra-aortic balloon pumps (IABP). Current evidence does not suggest any mortality benefit when compared to ECMO or IABP.

Patient Selection for Protected Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Who Benefits the Most?

The evolution of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) enables a complete revascularization of complex coronary lesions. However, simultaneously, patients are presenting nowadays with higher rates of comorbidities, which may lead to a lower physiologic tolerance for complex PCI. To avoid hemodynamic instability during PCI and achieve safe complete revascularization, protected PCI using mechanical circulatory support devices has been developed. However, which patients would benefit from the protected PCI is still in debate. Hence, this review provides practical approaches for the selection of patients by outlining current clinical data assessing utility of protected PCI in high-risk patients.

Predictors and Prognostic Impact of Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Recovery after Impella-Supported Percutaneous Coronary Interventions in Acute Myocardial Infarction

Aim: The aim of our study is to assess the predictors and the prognostic role of left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) recovery after Impella-supported percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Methods: This retrospective, observational study included patients admitted for AMI who underwent Impella-supported PCI in two Italian high-volume cardiac catheterization laboratories. Only patients who underwent an echocardiographic assessment of left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) before the procedure (acute LVEF) and during follow-up (follow-up LVEF) were included in the present analysis. Patients with a baseline LVEF ≥40% were excluded from the present analysis. LVEF recovery was calculated as the difference between follow-up LVEF and acute LVEF. A delta ≥5% was considered significant and was used to define the responder group. Results: From April 2007 to December 2020, 64 consecutive patients were included in our study. A total of 55 patients (86%) received hemodynamic support with Impella 2.5, and 9 patients (14%) with Impella CP. Median LVEF at follow-up was significantly higher compared to baseline (36% (30−42) vs. 30% (24−33), p < 0.001). Based on LVEF recovery, 37 patients (57.8%) were deemed responders. According to multivariate analysis, complete functional revascularization was an independent predictor of a significant EF recovery (OR: 0.159; 95% CI: 0.038−0.668; p = 0.012). At three-year follow-up, lack of LVEF recovery was the only predictor of mortality (HR: 5.315; 95% CI: 1.100−25.676; p = 0.038). Conclusions: Functional complete revascularization is an independent predictor of the recovery of LVEF in patients presenting with AMI who underwent Impella-supported PCI. The recovery of LV function is associated with improved prognosis and could be used to stratify the risk of future events at long-term follow-up.

Biventricular Compared to Left Ventricular Impella and Norepinephrine Support in a Porcine Model of Severe Cardiogenic Shock

Contemporary management of cardiogenic shock (CS) with vasopressors is associated with increased cardiac workload and despite the use of unloading devices such as the Impella pump, concomitant vasopressors are often necessary. Therefore, we compared if cardiac workload could be reduced and end-organ perfusion preserved with biventricular support (Bipella) compared to ImpellaCP and norepinephrine in pigs with left ventricular (LV) CS caused by left main coronary microembolization. Cardiac workload was calculated from heart rate × ventricular pressure-volume area obtained from conductance catheters placed in the LV and right ventricle (RV), whereas organ perfusion was measured from venous oxygen saturation in the pulmonary artery (SvO 2 ) and the kidney- and the cerebral vein. A cross-over design was used to access the difference after 30 minutes of ImpellaCP and norepinephrine 0.1 µg/kg/min versus Bipella for 60 minutes. Bipella treatment reduced LV workload ( p = 0.0078) without significant difference in RV workload from ImpellaCP and norepinephrine, however a decrease in SvO 2 (49[44-58] vs . 66[63-73]%, p = 0.01) and cerebral venous oxygen saturations (62[48-66] vs . 71[63-77]%, p = 0.016) was observed during Bipella compared to ImpellaCP and norepinephrine. We conclude that Bipella reduced LV workload but did not preserve end-organ perfusion compared to ImpellaCP and norepinephrine in short-term LV CS.

Manual compression versus MANTA device for access management after impella removal on the ICU

To compare the safety and efficacy of manual compression versus use of the MANTA closure device for access management after Impella removal on the intensive care unit (ICU). The number of patients treated with percutaneous left ventricular assist devices (pLVAD), namely Impella and ECMO, for complex cardiac procedures or shock, is growing. However, removal of pLVAD and large bore arteriotomy closure among such patients on the ICU remains challenging, since it is associated with a high risk for bleeding and vascular complications. Patients included in a prospective registry between 2017 and 2020 were analyzed. Bleeding and vascular access site complications were assessed and adjudicated according to VARC-2 criteria. We analyzed a cohort of 87 consecutive patients, who underwent access closure after Impella removal on ICU by using either the MANTA device or manual compression. The cohort´s mean age was 66.1 ± 10.7 years and 76 patients (87%) were recovering from CS. Mean support time was 40 h (interquartile range 24–69 h). MANTA was used in 31 patients (35.6%) and manual compression was applied in 56 patients (64.4%). Overall access related bleedings were significantly lower in the MANTA group (6.5% versus 39.3% (odds ratio (OR) 0.10, 95% CI 0.01–0.50; p = 0.001), and there was no significant difference in vascular complications between the two groups (p = 0.55). Our data suggests that the application of the MANTA device directly on the ICU is safe. In addition, it seems to reduce access related bleeding without increasing the risk of vascular complications.

Escalating and De-escalating Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support in Cardiogenic Shock: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

The use of temporary mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock has increased dramatically despite a lack of randomized controlled trials or evidence guiding clinical decision-making. Recommendations from professional societies on temporary mechanical circulatory support escalation and de-escalation are limited. This scientific statement provides pragmatic suggestions on temporary mechanical circulatory support device selection, escalation, and weaning strategies in patients with common cardiogenic shock causes such as acute decompensated heart failure and acute myocardial infarction. The goal of this scientific statement is to serve as a resource for clinicians making temporary mechanical circulatory support management decisions and to propose standardized approaches for their use until more robust randomized clinical data are available.

Impella 5.5 Support beyond 50 Days as Bridge to Heart Transplant in End-Stage Heart Failure Patients

Prolonged mechanical circulatory support (MCS) for severe left ventricular dysfunction in cardiogenic shock as a bridge to heart transplantation (HTx) generally requires a surgical procedure. Typically, a surgically implanted temporary extracorporeal left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is chosen because of superior flow and durability compared with a percutaneously delivered endovascular LVAD (pVAD). However, compared with its predecessors, the Impella 5.5 trans-valvular pVAD provides higher hemodynamic support and features improved durability. Here, we present four successful cases with prolonged Impella 5.5 support as a bridge to HTx, with a mean support duration of 70 days (maximum 83 days). These cases highlight several potential benefits of Impella 5.5. The minimally invasive implantation procedure of the device reduces bleeding, decreases the postoperative recovery period, and enables early patient ambulation to reduce physical deconditioning before HTx surgery. Furthermore, Impella 5.5 adequately unloads the left ventricle and provides hemodynamic support to maintain end-organ function to further optimize hemodynamics before HTx. The evolution of Impella 5.5 technology may provide an alternative bridging strategy to traditional surgically implanted temporary MCS in select cases.

Rational and Initiative of the Impella in Cardiac Surgery (ImCarS) Register Platform

OBJECTIVES

 Cardiac support systems are being used increasingly more due to the growing prevalence of heart failure and cardiogenic shock. Reducing cardiac afterload, intracardiac pressure, and flow support are important factors. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and intracardiac microaxial pump systems (Impella) as non-permanent MCS (mechanical circulatory support) are being used increasingly.

METHODS

 We reviewed the recent literature and developed an international European registry for non-permanent MCS.

RESULTS

 Life-threatening conditions that are observed preoperatively often include reduced left ventricular function, systemic hypoperfusion, myocardial infarction, acute and chronic heart failure, myocarditis, and valve vitia. Postoperative complications that are commonly observed include severe systemic inflammatory response, ischemia-reperfusion injury, trauma-related disorders, which ultimately may lead to low cardiac output (CO) syndrome and organ dysfunctions, which necessitates a prolonged ICU stay. Choosing the appropriate device for support is critical. The management strategies and complications differ by system. The "heart-team" approach is inevitably needed.However despite previous efforts to elucidate these topics, it remains largely unclear which patients benefit from certain systems, when is the right time to initiate (MCS), which support system is appropriate, what is the optimal level and type of support, which therapeutic additive and supportive strategies should be considered and ultimately, what are the future prospects and therapeutic developments.

CONCLUSION

 The European cardiac surgical register ImCarS has been established as an IIT with the overall aim to evaluate data received from the daily clinical practice in cardiac surgery. Interested colleagues are cordially invited to join the register.

CLINICAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

 DRKS00024560.

POSITIVE ETHICS VOTE

 AZ 246/20 Faculty of Medicine, Justus-Liebig-University-Gießen.

Percutaneous Transvalvular Microaxial Flow Pump Support in Cardiology

The Impella device (Impella, Abiomed, Danvers, MA) is a percutaneous transvalvular microaxial flow pump that is currently used for (1) cardiogenic shock, (2) left ventricular unloading (combination of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and Impella concept), (3) high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions, (4) ablation of ventricular tachycardia, and (5) treatment of right ventricular failure. Impella-assisted forward blood flow increased mean arterial pressure and cardiac output, peripheral tissue perfusion, and coronary blood flow in observational studies and some randomized trials. However, because of the need for large-bore femoral access (14 F for the commonly used Impella CP device) and anticoagulation, the incidences of bleeding and ischemic complications are as much as 44% and 18%, respectively. Hemolysis is reported in as many as 32% of patients and stroke in as many as 13%. Despite the rapidly growing use of the Impella device, there are still insufficient data on its effect on outcome and complications on the basis of large, adequately powered randomized controlled trials. The only 2 small and also underpowered randomized controlled trials in cardiogenic shock comparing Impella versus intra-aortic balloon pump did not show improved mortality. Several larger randomized controlled trials are currently recruiting patients or are in preparation in cardiogenic shock (DanGer Shock [Danish-German Cardiogenic Shock Trial; NCT01633502]), left ventricular unloading (DTU-STEMI [Door-To-Unload in ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction; NCT03947619], UNLOAD ECMO [Left Ventricular Unloading to Improve Outcome in Cardiogenic Shock Patients on VA-ECMO], and REVERSE [A Prospective Randomised Trial of Early LV Venting Using Impella CP for Recovery in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock Managed With VA ECMO; NCT03431467]) and high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (PROTECT IV [Impella-Supported PCI in High-Risk Patients With Complex Coronary Artery Disease and Reduced Left Ventricular Function; NCT04763200]).

Ventricular Unloading Using the ImpellaTM Device in Cardiogenic Shock

Cardiogenic shock (CS) remains a leading cause of hospital death. However, the use of mechanical circulatory support has fundamentally changed CS management over the last decade and is rapidly increasing. In contrast to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as well as counterpulsation with an intraaortic balloon pump, ventricular unloading by the Impella™ device actively reduces ventricular volume as well as pressure and augments systemic blood flow at the same time. By improving myocardial oxygen supply and enhancing systemic circulation, the Impella device potentially protects myocardium, facilitates ventricular recovery and may interrupt the shock spiral. So far, the evidence supporting the use of Impella™ in CS patients derives mostly from observational studies, and there is a need for adequate randomized trials. However, the Impella™ device appears a promising technology for management of CS patients. But a profound understanding of the device, its physiologic impact and clinical application are all important when evaluating CS patients for percutaneous circulatory support. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the percutaneous assist device Impella™. Moreover, it highlights in depth the rationale for ventricular unloading in CS and describes practical aspects to optimize care for patients requiring hemodynamic support.

Perioperative Management of Patients Receiving Short-term Mechanical Circulatory Support with the Transvalvular Heart Pump

Use of the transvalvular heart pump to provide short-term circulatory support in the perioperative setting is growing. The considerations for the perioperative management of patients receiving transvalvular heart pump support are reviewed for the anesthesiologist.

Concept and Design of a Novel Pulsatile Left Heart Assist Device-The PERKAT Left Ventricle System

Cardiogenic shock is associated with high mortality. Patients often require temporary mechanical circulatory support. We aimed to develop a percutaneously implantable, assist device that unloads the left ventricle (LV) in a pulsatile way. The PERkutane KATheter pump technologie (PERKAT LV) device consists of a nitinol pump chamber, which is covered by foils carrying outflow valves. A flexible tube with a pigtail-shaped tip and inflow holes represents the distal part of the pump. The system is designed for 16F percutaneous implantation. The nitinol chamber is placed in the descending aorta while the flexible tube bypasses aortic arch and ascending aorta with its tip in the LV. An intra-aortic balloon pump is placed into the chamber and connected to a console. Balloon deflation generates a blood flow from the LV into the pump chamber. During balloon inflation, blood leaves the system through the outflow foil valves in the descending aorta. Under different afterload settings using a 30 cc intra-aortic balloon pump and varying inflation/deflations rates, we recorded flow rates up to 3.0 L/min. Based on this, we believe that PERKAT LV is a promising approach for temporary LV support. The proposed design and its excellent performance give basis for in vivo tests in an animal model.

Impella in Transport: Physiology, Mechanics, Complications, and Transport Considerations

Cardiogenic shock (CS) represents a spectrum of hemodynamic deficits in which the cardiac output is insufficient to provide adequate tissue perfusion. The Impella (Abiomed Inc, Danvers, MA) device, a contemporary percutaneous ventricular support, is most often indicated for classic, deteriorating, and extremis Society for Coronary Angiography and Intervention stages of CS, which describe CS that is not responsive to optimal medical management and conventional treatment measures. Impella devices are an evolving field of mechanical support that is used with increasing frequency. Critical care transport medicine crews are required to transport patient support by the Impella device with increasing frequency. It is important that critical care transport medicine crews are familiar with the Impella device and are able to troubleshoot complications that may arise in the transport environment. This article reviews many aspects of the Impella device critical to the transport of this complex patient population.

CVIT expert consensus document on primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) update 2022

Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) has significantly contributed to reducing the mortality of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) even in cardiogenic shock and is now the standard of care in most of Japanese institutions. The Task Force on Primary PCI of the Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Interventional and Therapeutics (CVIT) society proposed an expert consensus document for the management of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) focusing on procedural aspects of primary PCI in 2018. Updated guidelines for the management of AMI were published by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) in 2017 and 2020. Major changes in the guidelines for STEMI patients included: (1) radial access and drug-eluting stents (DES) over bare-metal stents (BMS) were recommended as a Class I indication, (2) complete revascularization before hospital discharge (either immediate or staged) is now considered as Class IIa recommendation. In 2020, updated guidelines for Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (NSTEMI) patients, the followings were changed: (1) an early invasive strategy within 24 h is recommended in patients with NSTEMI as a Class I indication, (2) complete revascularization in NSTEMI patients without cardiogenic shock is considered as Class IIa recommendation, and (3) in patients with atrial fibrillation following a short period of triple antithrombotic therapy, dual antithrombotic therapy (e.g., DOAC and single oral antiplatelet agent preferably clopidogrel) is recommended, with discontinuation of the antiplatelet agent after 6 to 12 months. Furthermore, an aspirin-free strategy after PCI has been investigated in several trials those have started to show the safety and efficacy. The Task Force on Primary PCI of the CVIT group has now proposed the updated expert consensus document for the management of AMI focusing on procedural aspects of primary PCI in 2022 version.

A Meta-Analysis Comparing Venoarterial (VA) Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO) to Impella for Acute Right Ventricle Failure

The right ventricular complication happens when the right ventricle (RV) fails to move sufficient blood through the pulmonary circle to enable enough left ventricular pumping. A significant pulmonary embolism/right-sided myocardial infarction may cause this to develop suddenly in a previously healthy heart, but many of the patients treated in the critical care unit have gradual, compensated RV failure as a result of chronic heart and lung disease. RV failure management aims to decrease afterload and improve right-side filling pressures. Vasoactive medications have a lower effect on lowering vascular obstruction in the pulmonary circulation than in the systemic circle because the vascular tone is lower in the pulmonary circulation. Any factors that induce an elevation in pulmonary vascular tone must be addressed, and selective pulmonary vasodilators must be administered in a prescription that does not result in systemic hypotension or compromise oxygenation. The system-based systolic arterial pressure should be kept near the RV systolic pressure to ensure RV perfusion. When these efforts prove futile, judicious application of inotropic medications for better RV contractility may help ensure cardiac output. After obtaining the finest medical treatment, certain individuals may need the implantation of a mechanical circulatory support device. This meta-analysis is intended to compare the Impella and venoarterial (VA) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) mechanical supports for patients with acute right ventricular failure. This comparison should demonstrate the best mechanical support between the two through thorough analysis. The analysis was begun by data collection from relevant sites; PUBMED and EMBASE were searched in collaboration with Google Scholar. Keywords were searched: Impella for acute right ventricle failure and VA ECMO for acute right ventricle failure. The results that were close to the search titles had their respective articles downloaded for further scrutiny. The search finally brought 1001 related articles that were exposed to further analysis to find more refined and closer articles within the needs of this meta-analysis. After extensive scrutiny, 23 articles were found to be the best for these analyses. The data showed that VA ECMO had better results than Impella for acute RV failure. However, the data were not statistically significant, as either the numbers of the studies were not enough or the null hypothesis was true and there was no true difference between them. More studies will be needed to confirm this.

Case Report: Key Role of the Impella Device to Achieve Complete Revascularization in a Patient With Complex Multivessel Disease and Severely Depressed Left Ventricular Function

Background: Left ventricle (LV) assist devices may be required to stabilize hemodynamic status during complex, high-risk, and indicated procedures (CHIP). We present a case in which elective hemodynamic support with the Impella CP device was essential to achieve complete revascularization with PCI in a patient with complex multivessel disease and severely depressed LV function. Case Summary: A 45-year-old male with no previous history of cardiovascular disease presented to the emergency department for new onset exertional dyspnoea. Echocardiography showed severely depressed LV function (EF 27%) that was confirmed with cardiac magnetic resonance. Two chronic total occlusions (CTOs) of the proximal right coronary artery (RCA) and left circumflex coronary artery (LCx) were found at coronary angiography. After Heart Team evaluation, PCI with Impella hemodynamic support was planned. After crossing and predilating the CTO of the LCx, ventricular fibrillation (VF) occurred. No direct current (DC) shock was performed because the patient was conscious thanks to the support provided by the Impella pump. About 1 min later, spontaneous termination of VF occurred. Afterwards, the two CTOs were successfully treated with good result and no complications. Recovery of LV function was observed at discharge. At 9 months, the patient had no symptoms and echocardiography showed an EF of 60%. Discussion: In this complex high-risk patient, hemodynamic support was essential to allow successful PCI. It is remarkable that the patient remained conscious and hemodynamically stable during VF that spontaneously terminated after 1 min, likely because the Impella pump provided preserved coronary perfusion and LV unloading. This case confirms the pivotal role of Impella in supporting CHIP, particularly in patients with multivessel disease and depressed LV function.

Temporary mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock

Cardiogenic shock (CS) represents one of the foremost concerns in the field of acute cardiovascular medicine. Despite major advances in treatment, mortality of CS remains high. International societies recommend the development of expert CS centers with standardized protocols for CS diagnosis and treatment. In these terms, devices for temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS) can be used to support the compromised circulation and could improve clinical outcome in selected patient populations presenting with CS. In the past years, we have witnessed an immense increase in the utilization of MCS devices to improve the clinical problem of low cardiac output. Although some treatment guidelines include the use of temporary MCS up to now no large randomized controlled trial confirmed a reduction in mortality in CS patients after MCS and additional research evidence is necessary to fully comprehend the clinical value of MCS in CS. In this article, we provide an overview of the most important diagnostic and therapeutic modalities in CS with the main focus on contemporary MCS devices, current state of art and scientific evidence for its clinical application and outline directions of future research efforts.

Temporary extracorporeal femoro-femoral crossover bypass to treat acute limb ischemia due to occlusive femoral transaortic microaxial left ventricular assist device - A novel technique and case series

BACKGROUND

The Impella transaortic microaxial left ventricular assist device (MLVAD) bears the risk of severe ipsilateral limb ischemia due to its percutaneous insertion through the common femoral artery (CFA). As long as the MLVAD is required for cardio - circulatory support, treatment options are limited. Therefore, we developed a temporary extracorporeal femoral - femoral crossover bypass to restore and maintain perfusion of the affected leg.

METHODS

From October 2018, we treated all patients with severe limb ischemia due to the MLAVD with a femoral - femoral crossover bypass. For comparison, a consecutive cohort of patients undergoing placement of the MLAVD between January 2011 and October 2018 was identified. The primary outcome is the feasibility and safety of our percutaneously established extracorporeal femoral - femoral crossover bypass.

RESULTS

Between January 2011 and July 2019, 25 of 245 (10.3%) patients developed a severe ipsilateral limb ischemia following the MLVAD placement. Until October 2018, 20 patients were treated conventionally (C - cohort) and since October 2018, five (consecutive) patients have been treated by an extracorporeal femoral - femoral cross over bypass (BP - Cohort). Following the BP - procedure, an immediate improvement of the perfusion was seen in all patients. Limb salvage was documented in 100% of our patients and 30 - day mortality was 60% in both groups.

CONCLUSION

This is the first case series reporting on this novel technique. We demonstrated that the percutaneous creation of an extracorporeal crossover bypass is feasible, safe and effective and should therefore be promoted.

Anomalous origin of the left main from the right coronary sinus presenting with sudden cardiac death: utility of mechanical circulatory support

Anomalies involving the origin of the coronary arteries are extremely rare, with the left main artery coronary artery (LMCA) originating from the right coronary sinus (RCS) one of its rarest forms. Anomalous origin of left main from right coronary sinus poses a high risk of sudden cardiac arrest. In our report, we shed light on the case of a 43-year-old female who suffered a witnessed cardiac arrest due to underlying anomalous origin of the left main artery from right coronary sinus. The patient was initially pronounced dead until return of spontaneous rhythm with concomitant myocardial infarction led to the diagnosis of anomalous coronary artery. This case stresses important points to consider when dealing with the acute management and chronic treatment plan for this subset of high-risk patients. We also consider the utility of mechanical circulatory support in the management of this condition.

Use of Right Ventricular Assisted Device for Right Heart Failure in a Patient With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is one of the common etiologies of acute right ventricular dysfunction (RVD) with or without right heart failure (RHF). We present a case of a 40-year-old patient who developed severe ARDS due to massive aspiration of gastric content, secondary to predisposing anatomy of his post-surgical upper gastrointestinal tract. He subsequently developed right ventricular failure. He was treated with a right ventricular mechanical device. Despite all heroic measures, the young patient lost the battle of his life.

Predictors of Short-term Survival in Cardiogenic Shock Patients Requiring Left Ventricular Support Using the Impella CP or 5.0

Background

Percutaneous ventricular assist devices (pVADs) have been used to support patients who are in cardiogenic shock (CS). There is limited data on 30-day mortality predictors in patients supported by an Impella pVAD.

Methods

All CS patients requiring left-sided Impella implantation in Harefield Hospital (Greater London, United Kingdom) between 2017 and 2020 were included in the current study. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors of 30-day mortality.

Results

A total of 92 patients were included. The mean age was 53.8 ± 14.9 years, and 78.3% were male. CS etiology was predominantly acute coronary syndromes (44.6%), followed by decompensated dilated cardiomyopathy (28.3%). Survival at 30 days was 63% (58 of 92). Deceased patients had a lower left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (15.1 ± 9.6 vs 21.8 ± 14.2, P < 0.001), higher serum lactate levels (2.8[1.6 to 5.4] vs 1.45 [1.08 to 3.53], P = 0.012), a higher percentage of prolonged invasive ventilation (> 24 hours) (64.7% vs 13.8%, P < 0.001), and worse renal and liver function. Serum lactate, baseline LVEF, and prolonged ventilation (> 24 hours) were independent predictors of 30-day survival with an area under the curve of 0.85 (95% confidence interval 0.769 to 0.930), P < 0.001.

Conclusions

In the current retrospective registry of patients requiring Impella pVAD implantation, independent 30-day mortality predictors included serum lactate, baseline LVEF, and prolonged invasive ventilation (> 24 hours). These parameters could highlight patients who would benefit from earlier mechanical circulatory support escalation or neurologic assessment to inform withdrawal decisions.

Adverse Events of Percutaneous Microaxial Left Ventricular Assist Devices-A Retrospective, Single-Centre Cohort Study

Worldwide, the left ventricular assist device Impella^® (Abiomed, Danvers, MA, USA) is increasingly implanted in patients with acute cardiogenic shock or undergoing high-risk cardiac interventions. Despite its long history of use, few studies have assessed its safety and possible complications associated with its use. All patients treated with a left-sided Impella^® device at the University Hospital of Basel from 1 January 2011 to 31 December 2019 were enrolled. The primary endpoint was the composite rate of mortality and adverse events (bleeding, acute kidney injury, and limb ischemia). Out of 281 included patients, at least one adverse event was present in 262 patients (93%). Rates of in-hospital, 90-day, and one-year mortality were 48%, 47%, and 50%, respectively. BARC type 3 bleeding (62%) and hemolysis (41.6%) were the most common complications. AKI was observed in 50% of all patients. Renal replacement therapy was required in 97 (35%) of all patients. Limb ischemia occurred in 13% of cases. Bleeding and hemolysis are common Impella^®-associated complications. Additionally, we found a high rate of AKI. A careful selection of patients receiving microaxial LV support and defining the indication for its use are essential measures to be taken for the benefits to outweigh potential complications.

The sheep as a pre-clinical model for testing intra-aortic percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices

The save deployment of intra-aortic percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices is highly dependent on the inner aortic diameter. Finding the anatomically and ethically most suitable animal model for performance testing of new pMCS devices remains challenging. For this study, an ovine model using adult ewes of a large framed breed (Swiss White Alpine Sheep) was developed to test safety, reliability, and biocompatibility of catheter-mounted mechanical support devices placed in the descending thoracic aorta. Following the drawback of fluctuating aortic diameter and device malfunction in the first four animals, the model was improved by stenting the following animals with an aortic stent. Stenting the animals with an intra-aortic over the balloon stent was found to standardize the experimental set-up and to avoid early termination of the experiment due to non-device related issues.

Joint EAPCI/ACVC expert consensus document on percutaneous ventricular assist devices

There has been a significant increase in the use of short-term percutaneous ventricular assist devices (pVADs) as acute circulatory support in cardiogenic shock and to provide haemodynamic support during interventional procedures, including high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions. Although frequently considered together, pVADs differ in their haemodynamic effects, management, indications, insertion techniques, and monitoring requirements. This consensus document summarizes the views of an expert panel by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) and the Association for Acute Cardiovascular Care (ACVC) and appraises the value of short-term pVAD. It reviews the pathophysiological context and possible indications for pVAD in different clinical settings and provides guidance regarding the management of pVAD based on existing evidence and best current practice.

Outcomes of systemic anticoagulation with bivalirudin for Impella 5.0

Temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) devices are used for the management of cardiogenic shock. The Impella 5.0 (Abiomed; Danvers, MA) (IMP5) is a commonly used, surgically implanted, tMCS device that requires systemic anticoagulation and purge solution to avoid pump failure. To avoid heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) from unfractionated heparin (UFH) use, our program has explored the utility of bivalirudin (BIV) for systemic anticoagulation in IMP5. This single center, retrospective study included patients supported on IMP5 with BIV based AC. The efficacy and safety end points were recovery, bridge to left ventricular assist device (LVAD), cardiac transplant (HTX), or death as well as clinically significant bleeding, incidence of Tissue Plasminogen Activator (tPA) use for suspected pump thrombosis, stroke, and device failure. There were 31 patients included, and 26 (84%) received BIV purge solutions. The median duration of IMP5 was 6 (IQR 4-10) days. Most patients were bridged to LVAD (39%, 12); 16% (5) were bridged to HTX, 16% (5) recovered, and 29% (9) died. One patient (3%) suffered from ischemic stroke and 12% (4) patients developed clinically significant bleeding. tPA was administered to 8 (26%) patients. Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that duration of IMP5 was a significant predictor of tPA use (OR 1.28; 95% Confidence Interval 1.04-1.56). There were no cases of pump failure. Our experience highlights the feasibility of utilizing BIV for routine AC use in IMP5.