Thirty-five day Impella 5.0 support via right axillary side graft cannulation for acute cardiogenic shock

Differential Effects of Pharmacologic and Mechanical Support on Right-Left Ventricular Coupling

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous ventricular assist devices are increasingly relied on to maintain perfusion for cardiogenic shock patients. Optimal medical management strategies however remain uncertain from limited understanding of interventricular effects. This study analyzed the effects of pharmacologic and left-sided mechanical support on right ventricular function.

METHODS

A porcine model was developed to assess biventricular function during bolus pharmacologic administration before and after left-sided percutaneous ventricular assist and in cardiogenic shock.

RESULTS

The presence of mechanical support increased right ventricular load and stress with respect to the left ventricle. This shifted and exaggerated the relative effects of commonly used vasoactive agents. Furthermore, induction of cardiogenic shock led to differential pulmonary vascular and right ventricular responses.

CONCLUSIONS

Left ventricular ischemia and mechanical support altered interventricular coupling. Resulting impacts of pharmacologic agents indicate differential right heart responses and sensitivity to treatments and the need for further study to optimize biventricular function in shock patients.

Reconsidering FDA Guidelines: A Single-Center Experience of Prolonged Impella 5.5 Support

OBJECTIVE

Impella 5.5 (Abiomed, Danvers, MA, USA) is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for mechanical circulatory support for ≤14 days. It is unknown whether prolonged support is associated with worse outcomes. We sought to review our single-center experience with Impella 5.5 and compare outcomes based on support duration.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed adult patients (≥18 years old) supported with Impella 5.5 at our institution (May 2020 to April 2023). Patients on prolonged support (>14 days) were compared with those supported for ≤14 days.

RESULTS

There were 31 patients supported with Impella 5.5 including 14 (45.2%) supported >14 days. Median support duration for those on prolonged support was 43.5 (interquartile range [IQR] 25 to 63.5) days versus 8 (IQR 6, 13) days for those who were not (P < 0.001). Overall, the device-related complication rate was 9.7% and did not differ between groups (P = 0.08). Overall, 30-day postimplant survival was 71% and did not differ by support duration (P = 0.2). In-hospital mortality was 32% and did not differ between cohorts (P > 0.99). Among those surviving to explant (n = 22), long-term strategy included bridge to durable ventricular assist device (18%, n = 4), cardiac transplant (55%, n = 12), and cardiac recovery (27%, n = 6).

CONCLUSIONS

High-risk patients with cardiogenic shock may be supported with Impella 5.5 beyond the FDA-approved duration without increased risk of complications or mortality.

Impella flow pump reinsertion after axillary graft thrombectomy: Technical points in replacing axillary Impella

Axillary Impella devices are increasingly employed for long-term support of patients with systolic heart failure and shock. Axillary access allows for awake support and ambulation, which carries an inherent risk of disconnection or malposition. We report a series of two cases where device replacement due to dysfunction and malposition can be completed safely through the original axillary graft using axillary graft thrombectomy, given that the clot burden could be a major source of morbidity to the patient.

Thrombosis of the innominate artery during prolonged cardiac support by right transaxillary Impella 5.0 device

We describe an unexpected complication in a 46-years-old man affected by ischemic cardiomyopathy who received a prolonged mechanical cardiac support by means of right transaxillary Impella 5.0. The postoperative course was complicated by recurrent septicemia from multi-durg resistant Acinetobacter baumanii. He underwent implantation of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation because of refractory cardiac arrest, followed by Impella removal that has been complicated by embolic stroke. The likely source of the embolus was a large thrombus inside the innominate artery. After a long-standing right transaxillary device implantation, particularly in patients with intercurrent septic episodes, a CT angiographic scan should be planned to exclude arterial thrombosis before removal of the transarterial device.

Outcomes of heart transplantation in patients bridged with Impella 5.0: Comparison with native chest transplanted patients without preoperative mechanical circulatory support

The Impella (Abiomed, Danvers, MA, USA) has become an important adjunct treatment modality in bridging patients with end-stage heart failure to recovery or orthotopic heart transplantation (HTx). We compared the outcome of patients directly bridged to HTx with the Impella 5.0 versus patients without mechanical circulatory support (MCS). Patients with no previous sternotomy or MCS, who were transplanted between September 2014 and March 2019 were included in this retrospective analysis. Impella 5.0 was implanted using surgical access and transesophageal echocardiography guidance. Forty-two out of 155 transplanted patients fulfilled the insertion criteria. Eight (19%) were bridged with Impella 5.0 to HTx. Recipient and donor baseline characteristics were comparable in both groups. There were no significant differences in survival between the groups at 30-day (94% no MCS vs. 87.5% Impella group, P = .47) or 6 months (94% vs. 87.5%, P = .51). Patients on Impella 5.0 showed a significant recovery of hemodynamic parameters and end-organ function. Average duration of support to HTx was 16 ± 17 days. Impella 5.0, when used in suitable patients in a timely fashion can be a good strategy for bridging patients to HTx. The axillary approach allows for early extubation and mobilization. Outcomes of patients bridged to HTx with Impella 5.0 in acute cardiogenic shock are comparable to those of patients with no MCS.

Management of Anticoagulation with Impella® Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Devices and Review of New Literature

Cardiogenic shock is a life-threatening condition that may occur secondary to a variety of cardiac conditions, and may require temporary support with percutaneous ventricular devices like the Impella®. Anticoagulation in patients with Impella® devices can often be complicated due to unpredictable purge flow rates, pre-existing coagulopathy, or heparin allergies. The purpose of this article is to discuss the various options for anticoagulation in the setting of Impella®. The article will also describe recent updates (2014-current) in literature surrounding anticoagulation therapy for Impella® devices. At total of 228 articles were initially obtained through the PubMed search, with inclusion of 6 articles. A total of 51 patients had data in the six studies that were included in the review. Heparin for anticoagulation in the purge solution, at two different dextrose concentrations (5% and 20%), was associated with similar therapeutic activated partial thromboplastin time rates, thrombotic and bleeding events. One case series described the use of argatroban in the purge solution for anticoagulation in two patients with suspected heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, without bleeding or thrombotic complications. Pump thrombosis was not reported in any of the six studies. Anticoagulation in the setting of mechanical circulatory support devices is a challenging aspect of critical care. Institutions should have set protocols that clearly define the options for anticoagulation. Future studies that look at longer durations of support and possible operation of the Impella® device with a heparin-free purge solution are needed.

Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Using Impella Devices for Decompensated Cardiogenic Shock: A Pediatric Heart Center Experience

Cardiogenic shock remains a significant cause of mortality and morbidity in children with heart failure. Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support may be an additional tool to augment left heart support and decompression in addition to conventional therapies. This report aims to review the clinical and hemodynamic outcomes of the Impella device at a pediatric center. A retrospective review of all implants between October 2014 and November 2016 was conducted. Clinical outcomes, device implant techniques, complications, and hemodynamic data were collected. Statistical analysis was performed on hemodynamic and echocardiographic data. There were 10 Impella device placements in 8 patients with a median age of 17 years (6.5-25) and support duration of 8 days (1-21). Implant diagnosis included 5 patients with either posttransplant rejection or allograft vasculopathy, 2 patients with myocarditis, and 1 patient with refractory ventricular tachycardia. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support was required in 4 patients. Significant reduction in pulmonary capillary wedge pressures/left atrial pressures (p = 0.031) and increase in near infrared spectroscopy (p = 0.039) was seen pre- and post-Impella implant. All patients survived to discharge from the intensive care unit with one late death. Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support is a viable option in experienced pediatric centers as a mode to augment cardiac output or to decompress the left heart in patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or with cardiogenic shock.

Use of the Impella 5.0 Device as a Bridge to Recovery in Adult Fulminant Viral Myocarditis

We present a case of a 48-year-old female patient successfully bridged to recovery with the Impella 5.0 microaxial pump (Abiomed, Danvers, MA USA) after presenting with cardiogenic shock secondary to acute fulminant viral myocarditis. After 1 week of flu-like symptoms, the patient presented to her community emergency department with chest pain and hypotension. A diagnosis of inferior ST elevation myocardial infarction was made; subsequent angiography demonstrated normal coronary arteries and a left ventricular ejection fraction of 10%. A provisional diagnosis of viral myocarditis was made. As her condition deteriorated further, she underwent insertion of an Impella 5.0 after failure of supportive medical therapy. Myocardial recovery occurred, and the Impella was removed after 1 week. After a prolonged cardiac intensive care unit stay requiring temporary hemodialysis, the patient recovered sufficiently to tolerate device explant, transfer to the recovery ward, and ultimate discharge home. This case report highlights the benefit of mechanical circulatory support in a patient with cardiogenic shock from viral myocarditis as well as some of the complications that can occur in this critically ill subset of patients.

Effectiveness and Safety of the Impella 5.0 as a Bridge to Cardiac Transplantation or Durable Left Ventricular Assist Device

Many patients with end-stage heart failure require mechanical circulatory support as a temporizing measure to enable multidisciplinary assessment for the most suitable therapeutic strategy. Impella 5.0 can be used as a bridge to decision to evaluate patients for potential recovery or bridge to next therapy (bridge to heart transplantation [BTHT] or bridge to durable left ventricular assist device or VAD [BLVAD]. Our goal was to examine single-center outcomes with the Impella 5.0 device as a bridge to next therapy (BTHT or BTLVAD). Forty patients underwent Impella 5.0 support from December 2009 to December 2015 with the intent of BTHT (n = 20) or BTLVAD (n = 20). The primary end point was survival to next therapy. Secondary end points included hemodynamic assessments and in-hospital/30-day complications. All patients were inotrope-dependent, with severely depressed left ventricular ejection fraction (12%) and renal insufficiency (creatinine 2.0 mg/dl). Most were Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) 2 (66%) with biventricular failure (65%). Thirty patients (75%) survived to next therapy, including transplant (n = 13), durable LVAD (n = 15), and recovery of native heart function (n = 2). No strokes or major bleeding events requiring surgery were observed. Acute renal dysfunction, bleeding requiring transfusion, hemolysis, device malfunction, limb ischemia occurred in 13 (33%), 11 (28%), 3 (8%), 4 (10%), and 1 (3%) patients, respectively. Survival rate to discharge and/or 30 days was 68% (27 of 40). Temporary support with the Impella 5.0 allows for an effective bridge to decision strategy for hemodynamic stabilization and multidisciplinary heart team assessment of critically ill patients with heart failure. In conclusion, many of these patients can be subsequently bridged to the next therapy with favorable outcomes.

The increasing importance of percutaneous mechanical circulatory assist device therapy in heart failure management

Introduction:

Advances in medical and surgical care have made it possible for an increasing number of patients with Congenital Heart disease (CHD) to live into adulthood. Transposition of the great vessels (TGV) is the most common cyanotic congenital cardiac disease where the right ventricle serves as systemic ventricle. It is not uncommon for these patients to have systemic ventricular failure requiring transplantation.

Study Design:

Hemodynamic decompensation in these patients can be swift and difficult to manage. Increasingly percutaneous LVAD's such as the Impella (Abiomed, Mass, USA) are gaining popularity in these situations owing to their relative ease of placement, both in and outside of the operating room.

Conclusion:

In this paper we demonstrate that Impella (IMP) CP placement through the axillary artery approach shows to be suitable option for short term cardiac support and improvement of end organ perfusion in anticipation of cardiac transplantation.