1
|
Thevathasan T, Füreder L, Fechtner M, Mørk SR, Schrage B, Westermann D, Linde L, Gregers E, Andreasen JB, Gaisendrees C, Unoki T, Axtell AL, Takeda K, Vinogradsky AV, Gonçalves-Teixeira P, Lemaire A, Alonso-Fernandez-Gatta M, Sern Lim H, Garan AR, Bindra A, Schwartz G, Landmesser U, Skurk C. Left-Ventricular Unloading With Impella During Refractory Cardiac Arrest Treated With Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Crit Care Med 2024; 52:464-474. [PMID: 38180032 PMCID: PMC10876179 DOI: 10.1097/ccm.0000000000006157] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/06/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) is the implementation of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) during refractory cardiac arrest. The role of left-ventricular (LV) unloading with Impella in addition to VA-ECMO ("ECMELLA") remains unclear during ECPR. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to characterize patients with ECPR receiving LV unloading and to compare in-hospital mortality between ECMELLA and VA-ECMO during ECPR. DATA SOURCES Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, and abstract websites of the three largest cardiology societies (American Heart Association, American College of Cardiology, and European Society of Cardiology). STUDY SELECTION Observational studies with adult patients with refractory cardiac arrest receiving ECPR with ECMELLA or VA-ECMO until July 2023 according to the Preferred Reported Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis checklist. DATA EXTRACTION Patient and treatment characteristics and in-hospital mortality from 13 study records at 32 hospitals with a total of 1014 ECPR patients. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CI were computed with the Mantel-Haenszel test using a random-effects model. DATA SYNTHESIS Seven hundred sixty-two patients (75.1%) received VA-ECMO and 252 (24.9%) ECMELLA. Compared with VA-ECMO, the ECMELLA group was comprised of more patients with initial shockable electrocardiogram rhythms (58.6% vs. 49.3%), acute myocardial infarctions (79.7% vs. 51.5%), and percutaneous coronary interventions (79.0% vs. 47.5%). VA-ECMO alone was more frequently used in pulmonary embolism (9.5% vs. 0.7%). Age, rate of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, and low-flow times were similar between both groups. ECMELLA support was associated with reduced odds of mortality (OR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.30-0.91]) and higher odds of good neurologic outcome (OR, 2.22 [95% CI, 1.17-4.22]) compared with VA-ECMO support alone. ECMELLA therapy was associated with numerically increased but not significantly higher complication rates. Primary results remained robust in multiple sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS ECMELLA support was predominantly used in patients with acute myocardial infarction and VA-ECMO for pulmonary embolism. ECMELLA support during ECPR might be associated with improved survival and neurologic outcome despite higher complication rates. However, indications and frequency of ECMELLA support varied strongly between institutions. Further scientific evidence is urgently required to elaborate standardized guidelines for the use of LV unloading during ECPR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tharusan Thevathasan
- Department of Cardiology, Angiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Deutsches Herzzentrum der Charité, Campus Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany
- Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Berlin, Berlin, Germany
- Institute of Medical Informatics, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
- Department of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus N, Denmark
- Department of Cardiology, University Heart and Vascular Centre Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Hamburg/Kiel/Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
- Department of Cardiology and Angiology, Medical Faculty, University Heart Center Freiburg, Bad Krozingen, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
- Department of Cardiology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
- Department of Cardiology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Department of Aneastesiology and Intensive Care, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
- Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
- Department of Cardiology and Intensive Care Unit, Saiseikai Kumamoto Hospital, Kumamoto, Japan
- Division of Cardiac Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
- Department of Surgery, Columbia University Medical Center/New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY
- Department of Cardiology, Centro Hospitalar de Vila Nova de Gaia/Espinho, Oporto, Portugal
- Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Rutgers-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ
- Cardiology Department, University Hospital of Salamanca, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de Salamanca (IBSAL), Salamanca, Spain
- Centro de Investigación biomédica en Red de Enfermadades Cardiovasculares (CIBER-CV), Madrid, Spain
- Department of Cardiology, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
- Division of Cardiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
- Center for Advanced Heart and Lung Disease, Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, TX
| | - Lisa Füreder
- Department of Cardiology, Angiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Deutsches Herzzentrum der Charité, Campus Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Marie Fechtner
- Department of Cardiology, Angiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Deutsches Herzzentrum der Charité, Campus Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany
| | | | - Benedikt Schrage
- Department of Cardiology, University Heart and Vascular Centre Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Hamburg/Kiel/Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Dirk Westermann
- Department of Cardiology and Angiology, Medical Faculty, University Heart Center Freiburg, Bad Krozingen, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Louise Linde
- Department of Cardiology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
| | - Emilie Gregers
- Department of Cardiology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Jo Bønding Andreasen
- Department of Aneastesiology and Intensive Care, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
| | | | - Takashi Unoki
- Department of Cardiology and Intensive Care Unit, Saiseikai Kumamoto Hospital, Kumamoto, Japan
| | - Andrea L Axtell
- Division of Cardiac Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Koji Takeda
- Department of Surgery, Columbia University Medical Center/New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY
| | - Alice V Vinogradsky
- Department of Surgery, Columbia University Medical Center/New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY
| | | | - Anthony Lemaire
- Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Rutgers-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Marta Alonso-Fernandez-Gatta
- Cardiology Department, University Hospital of Salamanca, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de Salamanca (IBSAL), Salamanca, Spain
- Centro de Investigación biomédica en Red de Enfermadades Cardiovasculares (CIBER-CV), Madrid, Spain
| | - Hoong Sern Lim
- Department of Cardiology, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Arthur Reshad Garan
- Division of Cardiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Amarinder Bindra
- Center for Advanced Heart and Lung Disease, Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, TX
| | - Gary Schwartz
- Center for Advanced Heart and Lung Disease, Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, TX
| | - Ulf Landmesser
- Department of Cardiology, Angiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Deutsches Herzzentrum der Charité, Campus Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany
- Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Berlin, Berlin, Germany
- Institute of Medical Informatics, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
- Department of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus N, Denmark
- Department of Cardiology, University Heart and Vascular Centre Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Hamburg/Kiel/Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
- Department of Cardiology and Angiology, Medical Faculty, University Heart Center Freiburg, Bad Krozingen, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
- Department of Cardiology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
- Department of Cardiology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Department of Aneastesiology and Intensive Care, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
- Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
- Department of Cardiology and Intensive Care Unit, Saiseikai Kumamoto Hospital, Kumamoto, Japan
- Division of Cardiac Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
- Department of Surgery, Columbia University Medical Center/New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY
- Department of Cardiology, Centro Hospitalar de Vila Nova de Gaia/Espinho, Oporto, Portugal
- Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Rutgers-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ
- Cardiology Department, University Hospital of Salamanca, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de Salamanca (IBSAL), Salamanca, Spain
- Centro de Investigación biomédica en Red de Enfermadades Cardiovasculares (CIBER-CV), Madrid, Spain
- Department of Cardiology, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
- Division of Cardiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
- Center for Advanced Heart and Lung Disease, Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, TX
| | - Carsten Skurk
- Department of Cardiology, Angiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Deutsches Herzzentrum der Charité, Campus Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Cherbi M, Bouisset F, Bonnefoy E, Lamblin N, Gerbaud E, Bonello L, Levy B, Lim P, Joffre J, Beuzelin M, Roland Y, Niquet L, Favory R, Khachab H, Harbaoui B, Vanzetto G, Combaret N, Marchandot B, Lattuca B, Leurent G, Lairez O, Puymirat E, Roubille F, Delmas C. Characteristics, management, and mid-term prognosis of older adults with cardiogenic shock admitted to intensive care units: Insights from the FRENSHOCK registry. Int J Cardiol 2024; 395:131578. [PMID: 37956759 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2023.131578] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/12/2023] [Revised: 10/25/2023] [Accepted: 11/09/2023] [Indexed: 11/15/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The incidence of heart failure and cardiogenic shock (CS) in older adults is continually increasing due to population aging. To date, prospective data detailing the specific characteristics, management and outcomes of CS in this population are scarce. METHODS FRENSHOCK is a prospective registry including 772 CS patients from 49 centers. We studied 1-month and 1-year mortality among patients over 75-year-old, adjusted for independent predictors of 1-month and 1-year mortalities. RESULTS Out of 772 patients included, 236 (30.6%) were 75 years old or more (mean age 81.9 ± 4.7 years, 63.6% male). Compared to patients <75 years old, older adults had a higher prevalence of comorbidities including hypertension, dyslipidemia, chronic kidney disease, and history of heart disease. Older adults were characterized by a lower blood pressure, as well as higher creatinine and lower haemoglobin levels at presentation. Yet, they were less likely to be treated with norepinephrine, epinephrine, invasive ventilation, and renal replacement therapy. They showed a higher 1-month (aHR: 2.5 [1.86-3.35], p < 0.01) and 1-year mortality (aHR: 2.01 [1.58-2.56], p < 0.01). Analysis of both 1-month and 1-year mortality stratified by age quartiles showed a gradual relationship between aging and mortality in CS patients. CONCLUSION A third of patient with CS in critical care unit are older than 75 years and their risk of death at one month and one year is more than double compared to the younger ones. Further research is essential to identify best therapeutic strategy in this population. NCT02703038.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Miloud Cherbi
- Intensive Cardiac Care Unit, Cardiology department, Toulouse University Hospital, Institute of Metabolic and Cardiovascular Diseases (I2MC), UMR-1048, National Institute of Health and Medical Research (INSERM), 31059 Toulouse, France
| | - Frédéric Bouisset
- Intensive Cardiac Care Unit, Cardiology department, Toulouse University Hospital, Institute of Metabolic and Cardiovascular Diseases (I2MC), UMR-1048, National Institute of Health and Medical Research (INSERM), 31059 Toulouse, France
| | - Eric Bonnefoy
- Intensive Cardiac Care Unit, Lyon Brom University Hospital, Lyon, France
| | - Nicolas Lamblin
- Urgences et Soins Intensifs de Cardiologie, CHU Lille, University of Lille, Inserm U1167, F-59000 Lille, France
| | - Edouard Gerbaud
- Intensive Cardiac Care Unit and Interventional Cardiology, Hôpital Cardiologique du Haut Lévêque, Bordeaux Cardio-Thoracic Research Centre, U1045, Bordeaux University, Hôpital Xavier Arnozan, Avenue du Haut Lévêque, 5 Avenue de Magellan, 33600 Pessac, France
| | - Laurent Bonello
- Aix-Marseille Université, Intensive Care Unit, Department of Cardiology, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Marseille, Hôpital Nord, Mediterranean Association for Research and Studies in Cardiology (MARS Cardio), F-13385 Marseille, France
| | - Bruno Levy
- CHRU Nancy, Réanimation Médicale Brabois, Vandoeuvre-les Nancy, France
| | - Pascal Lim
- Univ Paris Est Créteil, INSERM, IMRB, AP-HP, Hôpital Universitaire Henri-Mondor, Service de Cardiologie, F-94010 Créteil, France
| | | | | | - Yves Roland
- IHU HealthAge, Gerontopole of Toulouse, Institute of Ageing, Toulouse University Hospital (CHU Toulouse), Toulouse, France
| | - Louis Niquet
- Intensive Care Unit, CH Intercommunal des Vallées de l'Ariège, France
| | - Raphael Favory
- Intensive Care Unit, Hôpital Roger Salengro, CHU de Lille, France
| | - Hadi Khachab
- Intensive Cardiac Care Unit, Department of Cardiology, CH d'Aix en Provence, Avenue des Tamaris, 13616, Aix-en-Provence cedex 1, France
| | - Brahim Harbaoui
- Cardiology Department, Hôpital Croix-Rousse and Hôpital Lyon Sud, Hospices Civils de Lyon, University of Lyon, CREATIS UMR5220, INSERM U1044, INSA-15, Lyon, France
| | - Gerald Vanzetto
- Department of Cardiology, Hôpital de Grenoble, 38700 La Tronche, France
| | - Nicolas Combaret
- Department of Cardiology, CHU Clermont-Ferrand, CNRS, Université Clermont Auvergne, Clermont-Ferrand, France
| | - Benjamin Marchandot
- Université de Strasbourg, Pôle d'Activité Médico-Chirurgicale Cardio-Vasculaire, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire, 67091 Strasbourg, France
| | - Benoit Lattuca
- Department of Cardiology, Nîmes University Hospital, Montpellier University, Nîmes, France
| | - Guillaume Leurent
- Department of Cardiology, CHU Rennes, Inserm, LTSI-UMR 1099, Univ Rennes 1, F-35000 Rennes, France
| | - Olivier Lairez
- Cardiology department, Toulouse University Hospital, Institute of Metabolic and Cardiovascular Diseases (I2MC), UMR-1048, National Institute of Health and Medical Research (INSERM), Toulouse 31059, France
| | - Etienne Puymirat
- Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Department of Cardiology, 75015 Paris, Université de Paris, 75006 Paris, France
| | - François Roubille
- PhyMedExp, Université de Montpellier, INSERM, CNRS, Cardiology Department, CHU de Montpellier, France
| | - Clément Delmas
- Intensive Cardiac Care Unit, Cardiology department, Toulouse University Hospital, Institute of Metabolic and Cardiovascular Diseases (I2MC), UMR-1048, National Institute of Health and Medical Research (INSERM), 31059 Toulouse, France; REICATRA, Institut Saint Jacques, CHU de Toulouse, Toulouse, France.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Marschall A, Martí Sánchez D, Ferreiro JL, Lopez Palop R, Ojeda S, Avanzas P, Jimenez Mazuecos JM, Carrillo Sáez P, Gutierrez-Barrios A, de la Torre Hernandez JM. Outcomes Prediction in Complex High-Risk Indicated Percutaneous Coronary Interventions in the Older Patients. Am J Cardiol 2023; 205:465-472. [PMID: 37666020 DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2023.07.166] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2023] [Revised: 07/27/2023] [Accepted: 07/31/2023] [Indexed: 09/06/2023]
Abstract
Complex high-risk indicated percutaneous coronary intervention (CHIP-PCI) is a poorly defined concept, which has not been validated in an older population before. This study aimed to evaluate the predictive value of the CHIP-PCI score in a large cohort of elderly patients and to identify potential further risk factors. This is a pooled analysis of 3 registries that included patients aged ≥75 years who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention from 2012 to 2019: the multicenter prospective EPIC05-Sierra 75 study, the multicenter retrospective PACO-PCI (EPIC-15) registry, and the single-center, prospective Elderly-HCD registry. A total of 2,725 patients with a mean age of 81 ± 4 years were included in the study; 269 patients (10%) met the primary end point of 1-year major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs), and 51 patients (2%) had in-hospital MACCEs. Of the 12 investigated original CHIP-PCI score variables, 5 were independent predictors: previous myocardial infarction, left ventricular ejection fraction <30%, chronic kidney disease, left main coronary artery percutaneous coronary intervention, and nonradial access. Furthermore, diabetes mellitus, anemia, and severe calcification showed to be significant predictors of MACCEs. The additional variables improved the discriminatory value of the CHIP-PCI score for 1-year MACCEs (modified CHIP-PCI score: area under the curve [AUC] 0.647 vs original CHIP-PCI score: AUC 0.598, p = 0.02) and in-hospital MACCEs (AUC 0.729 vs 0.657, p = 0.003, respectively). In conclusion, the CHIP-PCI score retains its prognostic value in older patients for in-hospital MACCEs; however, it is of limited value at 1-year follow-up. The modified CHIP-PCI score, including the 5 patient-related and 3 procedure-related factors, significantly improved its discriminatory potential.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexander Marschall
- Department of Cardiology, Central Defense Hospital Gómez Ulla, Madrid, Spain; University of Alcalá, Madrid, Spain.
| | - David Martí Sánchez
- Department of Cardiology, Central Defense Hospital Gómez Ulla, Madrid, Spain; University of Alcalá, Madrid, Spain
| | - José Luis Ferreiro
- Department of Cardiology, Bellvitge University Hospital, CIBER-CV, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Ramon Lopez Palop
- Department of Cardiology, San Juan University Hospital, Alicante, Spain
| | - Soledad Ojeda
- Department of Cardiology, Reina Sofia University Hospital, University of Córdoba, Maimonides Institute for Research in Biomedicine of Córdoba (IMIBIC), Cordoba, Spain
| | - Pablo Avanzas
- Department of Cardiology, Central de Asturias University Hospital, Department of Medicine, University of Oviedo, Oviedo, Spain; Health Research Institute of Asturias, ISPA, Oviedo, Spain
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Rajsic S, Treml B, Jadzic D, Breitkopf R, Oberleitner C, Popovic Krneta M, Bukumiric Z. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for cardiogenic shock: a meta-analysis of mortality and complications. Ann Intensive Care 2022; 12:93. [PMID: 36195759 PMCID: PMC9532225 DOI: 10.1186/s13613-022-01067-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/11/2022] [Accepted: 09/23/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (va-ECMO) is an advanced life support for critically ill patients with refractory cardiogenic shock. This temporary support bridges time for recovery, permanent assist, or transplantation in patients with high risk of mortality. However, the benefit of this modality is still subject of discussion and despite the continuous development of critical care medicine, severe cardiogenic shock remains associated with high mortality. Therefore, this work aims to analyze the current literature regarding in-hospital mortality and complication rates of va-ECMO in patients with cardiogenic shock. METHODS We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the most recent literature to analyze the outcomes of va-ECMO support. Using the PRISMA guidelines, Medline (PubMed) and Scopus (Elsevier) databases were systematically searched up to May 2022. Meta-analytic pooled estimation of publications variables was performed using a weighted random effects model for study size. RESULTS Thirty-two studies comprising 12756 patients were included in the final analysis. Between 1994 and 2019, 62% (pooled estimate, 8493/12756) of patients died in the hospital. More than one-third of patients died during ECMO support. The most frequent complications were renal failure (51%, 693/1351) with the need for renal replacement therapy (44%, 4879/11186) and bleeding (49%, 1971/4523), bearing the potential for permanent injury or death. Univariate meta-regression analyses identified age over 60 years, shorter ECMO duration and presence of infection as variables associated with in-hospital mortality, while the studies reporting a higher incidence of cannulation site bleeding were unexpectedly associated with a reduced in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is an invasive life support with a high risk of complications. We identified a pooled in-hospital mortality of 62% with patient age, infection and ECMO support duration being associated with a higher mortality. Protocols and techniques must be developed to reduce the rate of adverse events. Finally, randomized trials are necessary to demonstrate the effectiveness of va-ECMO in cardiogenic shock.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sasa Rajsic
- Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Medical University Innsbruck, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria
| | - Benedikt Treml
- Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Medical University Innsbruck, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria
| | - Dragana Jadzic
- Anesthesia and Intensive Care Department, Pain Therapy Service, Cagliari University, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Robert Breitkopf
- Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Medical University Innsbruck, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria
| | - Christoph Oberleitner
- Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Medical University Innsbruck, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria
| | | | - Zoran Bukumiric
- Institute of Medical Statistics and Informatics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade, 11000, Belgrade, Serbia.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Pang S, Miao G, Zhao X. Effects and safety of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in the treatment of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Cardiovasc Med 2022; 9:963002. [PMID: 36237911 PMCID: PMC9552800 DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.963002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/07/2022] [Accepted: 09/05/2022] [Indexed: 11/27/2022] Open
Abstract
Background There is a lack of large randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that comprehensively evaluate the effects of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A ECMO)- assisted treatment of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) combined with Cardiogenic shock (CS). This meta-analysis aims to identify predictors of short-term mortality, and the incidence of various complications in patients with STEMI and CS treated with V-A ECMO. Methods We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and the Wanfang Database from 2008 to January 2022 for studies evaluating patients with STEMI and CS treated with V-A ECMO. Studies that reported on mortality in ≥ 10 adult (>18 years) patients were included. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used by two independent reviewers to assess methodological quality. Mantel-Haenszel models were used to pool the data for meta-analysis. Results Sixteen studies (1,162 patients) were included with a pooled mortality estimate of 50.9%. Age > 65 years, BMI > 25 kg/m2, lactate > 8 mmol/L, anterior wall infarction, longer CPR time, and longer time from arrest to extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) were risk predictors of mortality. Achieving TIMI-3 flow after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was a protective factor of mortality. The prevalence of bleeding, cerebral infarction, leg ischemia, and renal failure were 22, 9.9, 7.4, and 49.4%, respectively. Conclusion Our study identified Age, BMI, lactate, anterior wall infarction, TIMI-3 flow after PCI, CPR time, and time from arrest to ECPR significantly influence mortality in STEMI patients with CS requiring V-A ECMO. These factors may help clinicians to detect patients with poor prognoses earlier and develop new mortality prediction models.
Collapse
|
6
|
von Lewinski D, Herold L, Stoffel C, Pätzold S, Fruhwald F, Altmanninger-Sock S, Kolesnik E, Wallner M, Rainer P, Bugger H, Verheyen N, Rohrer U, Manninger-Wünscher M, Scherr D, Renz D, Yates A, Zirlik A, Toth GG. PRospective REgistry of PAtients in REfractory cardiogenic shock-The PREPARE CardShock registry. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2022; 100:319-327. [PMID: 35830719 PMCID: PMC9539512 DOI: 10.1002/ccd.30327] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/15/2021] [Revised: 05/02/2022] [Accepted: 06/26/2022] [Indexed: 12/04/2022]
Abstract
Aim Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a hemodynamically complex multisystem syndrome associated with persistently high morbidity and mortality. As CS is characterized by progressive failure to provide adequate systemic perfusion, supporting end‐organ perfusion using mechanical circulatory support (MCS) seems intriguing. Since most patients with CS present in the catheterization laboratory, percutaneously implantable systems have the widest adoption in the field. We evaluated feasibility, outcomes, and complications after the introduction of a full‐percutaneous program for both the Impella CP device and venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenator (VA‐ECMO). Methods PREPARE CardShock (PRospective REgistry of PAtients in REfractory cardiogenic shock) is a prospective single‐center registry, including 248 consecutive patients between May 2019 and April 2021, who underwent cardiac catheterization and displayed advanced cardiogenic shock. The median age was 70 (58–77) years and 28% were female. Sixty‐five percent of the cases had cardiac arrest, of which 66% were out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest. A local standard operating procedure (SOP) indicating indications as well as relative and absolute contraindications for different means of MCS (Impella CP or VA‐ECMO) was used to guide MCS use. The primary endpoint was in‐hospital death and secondary endpoints were spontaneous myocardial infarction and major bleedings during the hospital stay. Results Overall mortality was 50.4% with a median survival of 2 (0–6) days. Significant independent predictors of mortality were cardiac arrest during the index event (odds ratio [OR] with 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.53 [1.43–4.51]; p = 0.001), age > 65 years (OR: 2.05 [1.03–4.09]; p = 0.036]), pH < 7.30 (OR: 2.69 [1.56–4.66]; p < 0.001), and lactate levels > 2 mmol/L (OR: 4.51 [2.37–8.65]; p < 0.001). Conclusions Conclusive SOPs assist target‐orientated MCS use in CS. This study provides guidance on the implementation, validation, and modification of newly established MCS programs to aid centers that are establishing such programs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Lukas Herold
- Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | | | - Sascha Pätzold
- Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | | | | | - Ewald Kolesnik
- Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Markus Wallner
- Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Peter Rainer
- Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Heiko Bugger
- Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Nicolas Verheyen
- Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Ursula Rohrer
- Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | | | - Daniel Scherr
- Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Dietmar Renz
- Cardiovascular Perfusionists Department of Cardiac Surgery, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Ameli Yates
- Department of Cardiac Surgery, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Andreas Zirlik
- Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Gabor G Toth
- Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Møller JE, Kjaergaard J, Terkelsen CJ, Hassager C. Impella to Treat Acute Myocardial Infarct-Related Cardiogenic Shock. J Clin Med 2022; 11:2427. [PMID: 35566553 PMCID: PMC9101440 DOI: 10.3390/jcm11092427] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/16/2022] [Revised: 04/08/2022] [Accepted: 04/21/2022] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (AMICS), is characterized by critically low cardiac output and decreased myocardial contractility. In this situation, a treatment that unloads the myocardium and restores CO without increasing the myocardial oxygen demand is theoretically appealing. Axial flow pumps offer hemodynamic support without increasing myocardial oxygen consumption. Consequently, the use of axial flow pumps, especially the Impella devices, is increasing. It is likely that the SCAI C patient with predominantly left ventricular failure and without prolonged cardiac arrest is the best candidate for these devices. Registry data suggest that pre-PCI Impella may be advantageous to post-PCI placement. However, several gaps in knowledge exist regarding optimal patient selection, futility criteria, timing, weaning and escalation strategy, and until data from adequately sized randomized trials are available, immediate individual evaluation for mechanical circulatory support by a shock team is warranted when a patient is diagnosed with AMICS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jacob Eifer Møller
- Department of Cardiology, Odense University Hospital, 5000 Odense, Denmark
- Heart Center, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark; (J.K.); (C.H.)
| | - Jesper Kjaergaard
- Heart Center, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark; (J.K.); (C.H.)
| | | | - Christian Hassager
- Heart Center, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark; (J.K.); (C.H.)
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
ECMO Predictors of Mortality: A 10-Year Referral Centre Experience. J Clin Med 2022; 11:jcm11051224. [PMID: 35268314 PMCID: PMC8911127 DOI: 10.3390/jcm11051224] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/29/2022] [Revised: 02/20/2022] [Accepted: 02/23/2022] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a specialised life support modality for patients with refractory cardiac or respiratory failure. Multiple studies strived to evaluate the benefits of ECMO support, but its efficacy remains controversial with still inconsistent and sparse information. Methods: This retrospective analysis included patients with ECMO support, admitted between January 2010 and December 2019 at a tertiary university ECMO referral centre in Austria. The primary endpoint of the study was overall all-cause three-month mortality with risk factors and predictors of mortality. Secondary endpoints covered the analysis of demographic and clinical characteristics of patients needing ECMO, including incidence and type of adverse events during support. Results: In total, 358 patients fulfilled inclusion criteria and received ECMO support due to cardiogenic shock (258, 72%), respiratory failure (88, 25%) or hypothermia (12, 3%). In total, 41% (145) of patients died within the first three months, with the median time to death of 9 (1−87) days. The multivariate analysis identified hypothermia (HR 3.8, p < 0.001), the Simplified Acute Physiology Score III (HR 1.0, p < 0.001), ECMO initiation on weekends (HR 1.6, p = 0.016) and haemorrhage during ECMO support (HR 1.7, p = 0.001) as factors with higher risk for mortality. Finally, the most frequent adverse event was haemorrhage (160, 45%) followed by thrombosis. Conclusions: ECMO is an invasive advanced support system with a high risk of complications. Nevertheless, well-selected patients can be successfully rescued from life-threatening conditions by prolonging the therapeutic window to either solve the underlying problem or install a long-term assist device. Hypothermia, disease severity, initiation on weekends and haemorrhage during ECMO support increase the risk for mortality. In the case of decision making in a setting of limited (ICU) resources, the reported risk factors for mortality may be contemplable, especially when judging a possible ECMO support termination.
Collapse
|