OUP accepted manuscript

A Surviving Case of Myocardial Infarction with Ventricular Septal Rupture and Ventricular Aneurysm following Gastrointestinal Bleeding

A 55-year-old man presented to the emergency department with worsening shortness of breath 1 month after a gastrointestinal bleed. He had congestive heart failure, and an electrocardiogram suggested ischemic heart disease involvement. Echocardiography revealed a ventricular septal defect complicated by a left ventricular aneurysm in the inferior-posterior wall. Conservative treatment was started, but hemodynamic collapse occurred on the third day of admission and coronary angiography revealed a revascularizing lesion in the right fourth posterior descending coronary artery. Subsequently, his hemodynamic status continued to deteriorate, even with an Impella CP® heart pump, so ventricular septal defect patch closure and left ventricular aneurysm suture were performed. His condition improved and he was discharged on day 23 of admission and was not readmitted within 6 months after the procedure. Hemodynamic management of ventricular septal defects requires devices that reduce afterload, and clinicians should be aware of the risk of myocardial infarction after gastrointestinal bleeding.

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

The importance of temporary mechanical circulatory support for treating acute heart failure with cardiogenic shock is increasingly recognized, and Impella (Abiomed, Danvers, MA, USA) has received particular attention in this regard. Impella is an axial flow left ventricular assist device (LVAD) built into the tip of a catheter. It is inserted via a peripheral artery and implanted into the left ventricle. Although the morphology of Impella is different from a typical LVAD, it has similar actions and effects as an LVAD in terms of left ventricular drainage and aortic blood delivery. Impella increases mean arterial pressure (MAP) and systemic blood flow, thereby improving peripheral organ perfusion and promoting recovery from multiple organ failure. In addition, left ventricular unloading with increased MAP increases coronary perfusion and decreases myocardial oxygen demand, thereby promoting myocardial recovery. Impella is also useful as a mechanical vent of the left ventricle in patients supported with veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Indications for Impella include emergency use for cardiogenic shock and non-emergent use during high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention and ventricular tachycardia ablation. Its intended uses for cardiogenic shock include bridge to recovery, durable device, heart transplantation, and heart surgery. Prophylactic use of Impella in high-risk patients undergoing open heart surgery to prevent postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock is also gaining attention. While there have been many case reports and retrospective studies on the benefits of Impella, there is little evidence based on sufficiently large randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Currently, several RCTs are now ongoing, which are critical to determine when, for whom, and how these devices should be used. In this review, we summarize the principles, physiology, indications, and complications of the Impella support and discuss current issues and future expectations for the device.

Temporary mechanical circulatory support & enhancing recovery after cardiac surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review highlights the integration of enhanced recovery principles with temporary mechanical circulatory support associated with adult cardiac surgery.

RECENT FINDINGS

Enhanced recovery elements and efforts have been associated with improvements in quality and value. Temporary mechanical circulatory support technologies have been successfully employed, improved, and the value of their proactive use to maintain hemodynamic goals and preserve long-term myocardial function is accruing.

SUMMARY

Temporary mechanical circulatory support devices promise to enhance recovery by mitigating the risk of complications, such as postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock, organ dysfunction, and death, associated with adult cardiac surgery.

Temporary mechanical circulatory support with Impella in cardiac surgery: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Perioperative cardiogenic shock (CS) in cardiac surgery is still burdened by a high mortality risk. The introduction of Impella pumps in the therapeutic armory of temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) has potential implications to improve the management of complex cases, although it has never been systematically addressed. We performed a systematic review of the reported use of tMCS with Impella in cardiac surgery.

METHODS

We searched PubMed for all original studies on the Impella use in adult patients in cardiac surgery.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies (out of 151 identified by search string) were included. All studies were observational and all but one (95%) were retrospective. Seven studies focused on the implantation of Impella in the pre-operative setting (coronary or valvular surgery), either as a prophylactic device in high-risk cases (3 studies) or in patients with CS as stabilization tool prior to cardiac surgery procedure (4 studies). Three studies reported the use of Impella as periprocedural support for percutaneous valvular procedure, three as bridge to heart replacement, and six for postcardiotomy CS. Impella support had a low complication rate and was successful in supporting hemodynamics pre-, intra- and postoperatively. Most consistently reported data were left-ventricular ejection fraction at implant, short-term survival and weaning rate.

CONCLUSIONS

tMCS with Impella in cardiac surgery patients is feasible and successful. It can be applied in selected cardiac surgery patients and presents advantages over other types of support. Systematic prospective studies are needed to standardize indications for implant and management of surgical issues, and to identify which patients may benefit.

Modelling and Simulation of the Combined Use of IABP and Impella as a Rescue Procedure in Cardiogenic Shock: An Alternative for Non-Transplant Centres?

The treatment of critically ill patients remains an evolving and controversial issue. Mechanical circulatory support through a percutaneous approach for the management of cardiogenic shock has taken place in recent years. The combined use of IABP and the Impella 2.5 device may have a role to play for this group of patients. A simulation approach may help with a quantitative assessment of the achievable degree of assistance. In this paper, we analyse the interaction between the Impella 2.5 pump applied as the LVAD and IABP using the numerical simulator of the cardiovascular system developed in our laboratory. Starting with pathological conditions reproduced using research data, the simulations were performed by setting different rotational speeds for the LVAD and driving the IABP in full mode (1:1) or partial mode (1:2, 1:3 and 1:4). The effects induced by drug administration during the assistance were also simulated. The haemodynamic parameters under investigation were aa follows: mean aortic pressure, systolic and diastolic aortic pressure, mean pulmonary arterial pressure, mean left and right atrial pressure, cardiac output, cardiac index, left and right ventricular end-systolic volume, left ventricular end-diastolic volume and mean coronary blood flow. The energetic variables considered in this study were as follows: left and right ventricular external work and left and right atrial pressure-volume area. The outcome of our simulations shows that the combined use of IABP and Impella 2.5 achieves adequate support in the acute phase of cardiogenic shock compared to each standalone device. This would allow further stabilisation and transfer to a transplant centre should the escalation of treatment be required.

Association of timing of percutaneous left ventricular assist device insertion with outcomes in patients undergoing cardiac surgery

Objectives

The aim of this study was to explore the associations between percutaneous ventricular assist device (pVAD) insertion timing relative to cardiac surgery and patient outcomes.

Methods

The Nationwide Inpatient Sample was queried for patients undergoing cardiac surgery and pVAD insertion in the same admission from 2016 to 2019. Patients were stratified by timing of pVAD insertion. Preoperative characteristics, postoperative complications, and mortality were compared among groups.

Results

Overall, 3695 patients underwent cardiac surgery and pVAD insertion during the same hospitalization (pre: 1130, intra: 1690, and post: 875). The distribution of cardiac surgery procedures was similar across groups. Median Elixhauser Comorbidity Index was 13 for pre-, 15 for intra-, and 17 for postoperative pVAD patients (P = .021). Patients who received a postoperative pVAD were associated with increased mortality (pre: 18%, intra: 39%, and post: 54%; P < .01). Increased complication rates were also associated with postoperative pVAD insertion (pre: 61%, intra: 55%, and post: 75%; P < .01). Preoperative pVAD insertion was associated with increase rates of sepsis (pre: 18%, intra: 9.8%, and post: 17%; P = .01) and pneumonia (pre: 38%, intra: 23%, and post: 31%; P < .01). Postoperative pVAD insertion was associated with increased rates of gastrointestinal bleeding (pre: 2.2%, intra: 3.0%, and post: 7.4%; P = .01), renal failure (pre: 10%, intra: 9.2%, and post: 17%; P = .01), and prolonged ventilation (pre: 44%, intra: 41%, and post: 54%; P = .02).

Conclusions

Postoperative pVAD insertion following cardiac surgery was associated with increased complications and mortality compared with preoperative or intraoperative insertion. Further studies should explore optimal utilization and timing of pVAD insertion in patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

Perioperative Impella 5.5 Support for Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: Pull Back/Push Through Technique, Safeguards, and Pitfalls

In patients undergoing aortic valve surgery, preoperative reduced left ventricular ejection fraction is not uncommon and is associated with poor outcomes. Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) may be preemptively used in patients presenting with high periprocedural risk. The Impella 5.5 is a percutaneous left ventricular assist device that has been increasingly used in various cardiac surgeries. In this article, we present a step-by-step guide, safeguards, and pitfalls on how to replace the aortic valve and preserve this transaortic MCS device for postoperative support in patients with concomitant aortic valve pathology and left ventricular dysfunction.

Single center experience and early outcomes of Impella 5.5

Background

Acute decompensated heart failure (HF) and cardiogenic shock (CS) frequently are refractory to conservative treatment and require mechanical circulatory support (MCS). We report our early clinical experience and evaluate patient outcomes with the newer generation surgical Impella 5.5.

Methods

Seventy patients that underwent Impella 5.5 implantation between October 2019 and December 2021 at a single center were enrolled in this study. Pre-operative characteristics, peri-operative clinical course information, and post-operative outcomes were retrospectively collected.

Results

Fifty-seven (81%) patients survived to discharge, and 51 (76%) patients survived at the time of the first 30 days post-discharge visit. Thirty-one patients (44%) received Impella support for a bridge to advanced surgical heart failure therapy (transplant or durable left ventricular assist device [LVAD]), 27 (39%) cases were used for a bridge to recovery/decision and 12 (17.1%) cases was used for planned perioperative support for high-risk cardiac surgery procedure.

Conclusion

Our results suggest that Impella 5.5 provides favorable survival in the management of HF and CS, particularly used for a bridge to heart transplant or LVAD. Early extubation and mobilization with high flow circulatory support allowed effective tailoring of MCS approaches from peri-operative support for high-risk cardiac surgery, bridge to recovery, and to advanced surgical heart failure therapy.

Overview of Mechanical Circulatory Support for the Management of Post-Myocardial Infarction Ventricular Septal Rupture

Post-myocardial infarction ventricular septal rupture (PIVSR) is becoming increasingly rare in the percutaneous coronary intervention era; however, the mortality rates remain high. Surgical repair is the gold standard treatment for PIVSR but is associated with surgical difficulty and high mortality. Therefore, the timing of surgery is controversial (i.e. either undertake emergency surgery or wait for resolution of organ failure and scarring of the infarcted area). Although long-term medical management is usually ineffective, several mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices have been used to postpone surgery to an optimal timing. Recently, in addition to venous arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO), new MCS devices, such as Impella (Abiomed Inc., Boston, MA, USA), have been developed. Impella is a pump catheter that pumps blood directly from the left ventricle, in a progressive fashion, into the ascending aorta. VA-ECMO is a temporary MCS system that provides complete and rapid cardiopulmonary support, with concurrent hemodynamic support and gas exchange. When left and right heart failure and/or respiratory failure occur in cardiogenic shock or PIVSR after acute myocardial infarction, ECpella (Impella and VA-ECMO) is often introduced, as it can provide circulatory and respiratory assistance in a shorter period. This review outlines the basic concepts of MCS in PIVSR treatment strategies and its role as a bridge device, and discusses the efficacy and complications of ECpella therapy and the timing of surgery.