Reversal of cardiogenic shock by percutaneous left atrial-to-femoral arterial bypass assistance

Postcardiotomy Shock Syndrome: A Narrative Review of Perioperative Diagnosis and Management

Postcardiotomy shock (PCS) is generally described as the inability to separate from cardiopulmonary bypass due to ineffective cardiac output after cardiotomy, which is caused by a primary cardiac disorder, resulting in inadequate tissue perfusion. Postcardiotomy shock occurs in 0.5% to 1.5% of contemporary cardiac surgery cases, and is accompanied by an in-hospital mortality of approximately 67%. In the last 2 decades, the incidence of PCS has increased, likely due to the increased age and baseline morbidity of patients requiring cardiac surgery. In this narrative review, the authors discuss the epidemiology and pathophysiology of PCS, the rationale and evidence behind the initiation, continuation, escalation, and discontinuation of mechanical support devices in PCS, and the anesthetic implications.

Rationale and Design of JenaMACS-Acute Hemodynamic Impact of Ventricular Unloading Using the Impella CP Assist Device in Patients with Cardiogenic Shock

INTRODUCTION

Cardiogenic shock due to myocardial infarction or heart failure entails a reduction in end organ perfusion. Patients who cannot be stabilized with inotropes and who experience increasing circulatory failure are in need of an extracorporeal mechanical support system. Today, small, percutaneously implantable cardiac assist devices are available and might be a solution to reduce mortality and complications. A temporary, ventricular, continuous flow propeller pump using magnetic levitation (Impella^®) has been approved for that purpose.

METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN

JenaMACS (Jena Mechanical Assist Circulatory Support) is a monocenter, proof-of-concept study to determine whether treatment with an Impella CP^® leads to improvement of hemodynamic parameters in patients with cardiogenic shock requiring extracorporeal, hemodynamic support. The primary outcomes of JenaMACS are changes in hemodynamic parameters measured by pulmonary artery catheterization and changes in echocardiographic parameters of left and right heart function before and after Impella^® implantation at different support levels after 24 h of support. Secondary outcome measures are hemodynamic and echocardiographic changes over time as well as clinical endpoints such as mortality or time to hemodynamic stabilization. Further, laboratory and clinical safety endpoints including severe bleeding, stroke, neurological outcome, peripheral ischemic complications and occurrence of sepsis will be assessed. JenaMACS addresses essential questions of extracorporeal, mechanical, cardiac support with an Impella CP^® device in patients with cardiogenic shock. Knowledge of the acute and subacute hemodynamic and echocardiographic effects may help to optimize therapy and improve the outcome in those patients.

CONCLUSION

The JenaMACS study will address essential questions of extracorporeal, mechanical, cardiac support with an Impella CP^® assist device in patients with cardiogenic shock. Knowledge of the acute and subacute hemodynamic and echocardiographic effects may help to optimize therapy and may improve outcome in those patients.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The protocol was approved by the institutional review board and ethics committee of the University Hospital of Jena. Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants of the study. The results of this study will be published in a renowned international medical journal, irrespective of the outcomes of the study. Strengths and Limitations: JenaMACS is an innovative approach to characterize the effect of additional left ventricular mechanical unloading during cardiogenic shock via a minimally invasive cardiac assist system (Impella CP^®) 24 h after onset and will provide valuable data for acute interventional strategies or future prospective trials. However, JenaMACS, due to its proof-of-concept design, is limited by its single center protocol, with a small sample size and without a comparison group.

Evolving Presentation of Cardiogenic Shock: A Review of the Medical Literature and Current Practices

Cardiogenic shock (CS) remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among patients with cardiovascular disease. In the past, acute myocardial infarction was the leading cause of CS. However, in recent years, other etiologies, such as decompensated chronic heart failure, arrhythmia, valvular disease, and post-cardiotomy, each with distinct hemodynamic profiles, have risen in prevalence. The number of treatment options, particularly with regard to device-mediated therapy has also increased. In this review, we sought to survey the medical literature and provide an update on current practices.

Mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock: a critical appraisal

INTRODUCTION

Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS) is a life-threatening condition frequently encounter in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (MVD).

AREAS COVERED

Despite prompt revascularization, in particular percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and therapeutic and technological advances, the mortality rate for CS related to AMI remains high. Differently from hemodynamically stable setting, a culprit lesion-only (CLO) revascularization strategy is currently suggested in AMI-CS patients, based on the results of a recent randomized evidence burdened by several limitations and conflicting results from non-randomized studies. Furthermore, mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices have raised as a key therapeutic option in CS, especially in case of an early implantation without delaying revascularization and before irreversible organ damage has occurred. We provide an in-depth review of current evidences on optimal revascularization strategies of multivessel CAD in infarct-related CS, assessing the role of MCS devices, and highlighting the importance of shock teams and medical care system networks to effectively impact on clinical outcomes.

EXPERT OPINION

Emerging observational experience suggested that an early implantation of MCS (prior to PCI), the performance of an extensive revascularization and the implementation of shock teams and networks are key factors for improving clinical outcomes.

A Comprehensive Review of Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices

Treatment strategies to combat cardiogenic shock (CS) have remained stagnant over the past decade. Mortality rates among patients who suffer CS after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remain high at 50%. Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices have evolved as novel treatment strategies to restore systemic perfusion to allow cardiac recovery in the short term, or as durable support devices in refractory heart failure in the long term. Haemodynamic parameters derived from right heart catheterization assist in the selection of an appropriate MCS device and escalation of mechanical support where needed. Evidence favouring the use of one MCS device over another is scant. An intra-aortic balloon pump is the most commonly used short-term MCS device, despite providing only modest haemodynamic support. Impella CP® has been increasingly used for CS in recent times and remains an important focus of research for patients with AMI-CS. Among durable devices, Heartmate® 3 is the most widely used in the USA. Adequately powered randomized controlled trials are needed to compare these MCS devices and to guide the operator for their use in CS. This article provides a brief overview of the types of currently available MCS devices and the indications for their use.

Imaging for Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices

Heart failure is an important cause of mortality and morbidity in the world. Changes in organ allocation for solid thoracic (lung and heart) transplantation has increased the number of patients on mechanical circulatory support. Temporary mechanical support devices include devices tht support the circulation directly or indirectly such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and temporary support for right-sided failure, left-sided failure or biventricular failure. Most often, these devices are placed percutaneously and require either guidance with echocardiography, continuous radiography (fluoroscopy) or both. Furthermore, these devices need imaging in the intensive care unit to confirm continued accurate placement. This review contains the imaging views and nuances of the temporary assist devices (including ECMO) at the time of placement and the complications that can be associated with each individual device.

Tipless transseptal cannula concept combines improved hemodynamic properties and risk-reduced placement: An in silico proof-of-concept

As a leading cause of death worldwide, heart failure is a serious medical condition in which many critically ill patients require temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS) as a bridge-to-recovery or bridge-to-decision. In many cases, the TandemHeart system is used to unload the left heart by draining blood from the left atrium (LA) to the femoral artery via a transseptal multistage cannula. However, even though the correct positioning of the cannula is crucial for a safe treatment, the long cannula tip currently used in transseptal cannulas complicates positioning, making the cannula vulnerable to displacement during MCS. To overcome these limitations, we propose the development of a new tipless transseptal cannula with improved hemodynamic properties. We discuss the tipless cannula concept by comparing it to the common multistage cannula concept using computational fluid dynamics simulations and assess the flow field in the LA, the wall shear stresses (WSS), and the pressure loss. Across the two distinct time points of end-systole and end-diastole and two drainage flow rates of 3.5 and 5.0 L/min, we find a more homogeneous inlet flow pattern for the tipless cannula concept, accompanied by a remarkably reduced area of platelet-activating WSS (up to 10-times smaller area compared to the multistage cannula). Moreover, pressure loss is up to 14.5% lower in the tipless cannula concept, confirming overall improved hemodynamic properties of the tipless cannula concept. Finally, a diameter-dependent study reveals that lower WSS and pressure losses can be further reduced by large-lumen designs for any simulation setting. Overall, our results suggest that a tipless cannula concept remedies the crucial disadvantages of a long-tip multistage cannula by reducing the risk of misplacement, and it furthermore promotes optimized hemodynamics. With this successful proof-of-concept, we underscore the potential for and encourage the realization of further experimental investigations regarding the development of a tipless transseptal cannula for MCS.

The Surgeon's Role in Cardiogenic Shock

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cardiogenic shock represents a very challenging patient population due to the undifferentiated pathologies presenting as cardiogenic shock, difficult decision-making, prognostication, and ever-expanding support options. The role of cardiac surgeons on this team is evolving.

RECENT FINDINGS

The implementation of a shock team is associated with improved outcomes in patients with cardiogenic shock. Early deployment of mechanical circulatory support devices may allow an opportunity to rescue these patients. Cardiothoracic surgeons are a critical component of the shock team who can deploy timely mechanical support and surgical intervention in selected patients for optimal outcomes.

Currently Available Options for Mechanical Circulatory Support for the Management of Cardiogenic Shock

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a complex condition with a high risk for morbidity and mortality. Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices were developed to support patients with CS in cases refractory to treatment with vasoactive medications. Current devices include intra-aortic balloon pumps, intravascular microaxial pumps, percutaneous LVAD, percutaneous RVAD, and VA ECMO. Data from limited observational studies and clinical trials show a clear difference in the level of hemodynamic support offered by each device. However, at this point, there are insufficient clinical trial data to guide MCS selection and, until ongoing clinical trials are completed, use of the right device for the right patient depends largely on clinical judgment.

Acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock: Should we unload the ventricle before percutaneous coronary intervention?

Despite early reperfusion and coordinated systems of care, cardiogenic shock (CS) remains the number one cause of morbidity and in-hospital mortality following acute myocardial infarction (AMI). CS is a complex clinical syndrome that begins with hemodynamic instability and can progress to multi-organ failure and profound hemo-metabolic compromise. To improve outcomes, a clear understanding of the treatment objectives in CS and developing time-sensitive management strategies aimed at stabilizing hemodynamics and restoring myocardial perfusion are critical. Left ventricular (LV) load has been identified as an independent predictor of heart failure and mortality following AMI. Decades of preclinical and clinical research have identified several effective LV unloading strategies. Recent initiatives from single and multi-center registries and more recently the Door to Unload (DTU)-STEMI pilot study have provided valuable insight to developing a standardized treatment approach to AMI, based on early invasive hemodynamics and tailored circulatory support to unload the LV. To follow is a review of the pathophysiology and prevalence of shock, limitations of current therapies, and the pre-clinical and translational basis for incorporating LV unloading into contemporary AMI and shock care.

Large Animal Models of Heart Failure: A Translational Bridge to Clinical Success

•

Preclinical large animal models play a critical and expanding role in translating basic science findings to the development and clinical approval of novel cardiovascular therapeutics.

•

This state-of-the-art review outlines existing methodologies and physiological phenotypes of several HF models developed in large animals. A comprehensive list of porcine, ovine, and canine models of disease are presented, and the translational importance of these studies to clinical success is highlighted through a brief overview of recent devices approved by the FDA alongside associated clinical trials and preclinical animal reports.

•

Increasing the use of large animal models of HF holds significant potential for identifying new mechanisms underlying this disease and providing valuable information regarding the safety and efficacy of new therapies, thus, improving physiological and economical translation of animal research to the successful treatment of human HF.

Preclinical large animal models of heart failure (HF) play a critical and expanding role in translating basic science findings to the development and clinical approval of novel therapeutics and devices. The complex combination of cardiovascular events and risk factors leading to HF has proved challenging for the development of new treatments for these patients. This state-of-the-art review presents historical and recent studies in porcine, ovine, and canine models of HF and outlines existing methodologies and physiological phenotypes. The translational importance of large animal studies to clinical success is also highlighted with an overview of recent devices approved by the Food and Drug Administration, together with preclinical HF animal studies used to aid both development and safety and/or efficacy testing. Increasing the use of large animal models of HF holds significant potential for identifying the novel mechanisms underlying the clinical condition and to improving physiological and economical translation of animal research to successfully treat human HF.

Incidence and clinical outcomes of bleeding complications and acute limb ischemia in STEMI and cardiogenic shock

BACKGROUND

Bleeding complications and acute limb ischemia (ALI) are devastating vascular complications in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Cardiogenic shock (CS) can further increase this risk due to multiorgan failure. In the contemporary era, percutaneous mechanical circulatory support is commonly used for management of CS. We hypothesized that vascular complications may be an important determinant of clinical outcomes for CS due to STEMI (CS-STEMI).

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated 10-year national trends, resource utilization and outcomes of bleeding complications, and ALI in CS-STEMI.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of CS-STEMI patients from a large U.S. national database (National Inpatient Sample) between 2005 and 2014. Events were then divided into four different groups: no MCS, with intra-aortic balloon pump, percutaneous ventricular assist device includes Impella or Tandem Heart or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

RESULTS

Bleeding complications and ALI were observed in 31,389 (18.2%) and 1,628 (0.9%) out of 172,491 admissions with CS-STEMI, respectively. Between 2005 and 2014, overall trends increased for ALI; however, the number of bleeding events decreased. ALI was associated with increased in-hospital mortality in comparison to those without any ALI. However, bleeding complications were not associated with increased in-hospital mortality. Compared to patients without complications, both bleeding and ALI were associated with increased length of stay (LOS) and hospitalization costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Bleeding and ALI are common complications associated with CS-STEMI in the contemporary era. Both complications are associated with increased hospital costs and LOS. These findings highlight the need to develop algorithms focused on vascular safety in CS-STEMI.

Mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cardiogenic shock remains a complex clinical syndrome with high morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this article is to review important landmark trials as well as the relevant recent literature for percutaneous mechanical circulatory support following acute myocardial infarction.

RECENT FINDINGS

The sole use of intraaortic balloon pumps for cardiogenic shock following acute myocardial infarction continues to be questioned with downgrading of its recommendation in recent years, there however may remain a role in patients with mechanical complications of their myocardial infarction. The combined use of extracorporeal circulatory support and a ventricular unloading device appears to be promising with increasing data supporting this strategy.

SUMMARY

Given the complex and heterogeneous nature of cardiogenic shock there remains somewhat limited robust data to guide clinical practice. Ongoing research is needed to help guide improvements in patient outcomes.

Pediatric ventricular assist devices: what are the key considerations and requirements?

Introduction: The development of ventricular assist devices (VADs) have enabled myocardial recovery and improved patient survival until heart transplantation. However, device options remain limited for children and lag in development.Areas covered: This review focuses on the evolution of pediatric VADs in becoming to be an accepted treatment option in advanced heart failure, discusses the classification of VADs available for children, i.e. types of pumps and duration of support, and defines implantation indications and explantation criteria, describes attendant complications and long-term outcome of VAD support. Furthermore, we emphasize the key considerations and requirements in the application of these devices in infants, children and adolescents.Expert opinion: Increasing use of VADs has facilitated a leading edge in management of advanced heart failure either as a bridge to transplantation or as a bridge to myocardial recovery. In newborns and small children, the EXCOR Pediatric VAD remains the only reliable option. In some patients ventricular unloading may lead to complete myocardial recovery. There is a strong need for pumps that are fully implantable, suitable for single ventricle physiology, such as the right ventricle.

Mechanical Circulatory Support in High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

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

Mechanical circulatory support devices: methods to optimize hemodynamics during use

INTRODUCTION

Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is an increasingly utilized mode of therapy in the management of advanced heart failure, both as bridge to heart transplantation and destination therapy. As MCS becomes more prevalent, it is ever more important to understand the complex hemodynamics of these devices, as well as the strategies for hemodynamic optimization. Areas covered: This review provides an overview of hemodynamics in the normal human heart and the failing heart. We discuss the various short-term mechanical circulatory support devices and their hemodynamic consequences. We will then discuss the differences between left ventricular assist devices, and the impact of these differences on hemodynamics. We will describe the strategies for hemodynamic optimization using echocardiographic and invasive ramp studies. Finally, we will discuss the impact of speed changes with exercise and discuss future directions for advancements in MCS therapies. Expert commentary: We advocate for a deeper understanding of the hemodynamics underpinning MCS devices. We also recommend the more widespread use of ramp studies for speed optimization, which have been well validated across a number of different left ventricular assist device types.

Advanced Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices for Cardiogenic Shock

OBJECTIVES

To review temporary percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices for the treatment of cardiogenic shock, including current evidence, contraindications, complications, and future directions.

DATA SOURCES

A MEDLINE search was conducted with MeSH terms: cardiogenic shock, percutaneous mechanical circulatory support, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, Impella, and TandemHeart.

STUDY SELECTION

Selected publications included randomized controlled trial data and observational studies describing experience with percutaneous mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock.

DATA EXTRACTION

Studies were chosen based on strength of association with and relevance to cardiogenic shock.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Until recently, there were few options if cardiogenic shock was refractory to vasopressors or intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation. Now, several percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices, including Impella (Abiomed, Danvers, MA), TandemHeart (CardiacAssist, Pittsburgh, PA), and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, are more accessible. Compared with intra-aortic balloon pump, Impella provides greater hemodynamic support but no reduction in mortality. Similarly, TandemHeart improves hemodynamic variables but not survival. Comparative studies have been underpowered for mortality because of small sample size. Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation offers the advantage of biventricular circulatory support and oxygenation, but there are significant vascular complications. Comparative studies with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation have not been completed. Despite lack of randomized controlled data, there has been a substantial increase in use of percutaneous mechanical circulatory support. Several ongoing prospective studies with larger sample sizes may provide answers, and newer devices may become smaller, easier to insert, and more effective.

CONCLUSIONS

Mortality from cardiogenic shock remains unacceptably high despite early coronary revascularization or other therapies. Although evidence is lacking and complications rates are high, improvements and experience with percutaneous mechanical circulatory support may offer the prospect of better outcomes.

Impact and management of left ventricular function on the prognosis of Takotsubo syndrome

BACKGROUND

Early research has proposed that patients with Takotsubo syndrome (TTS) could have a higher mortality rate than the general population. Our study was conducted to determine the short- and long-term outcome of TTS patients associated with a significantly compromised left ventricular function on hospital admission.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Our institutional database constituted a collective of 112 patients diagnosed with TTS between 2003 and 2015. The patients were classified into two groups based on the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), with those presenting with a LVEF > 35% on admission categorized into one group (n = 65, 58%) and those presenting with LVEF ≤ 35% (n=47, 42%) categorized into another group. The endpoint was the all-cause of mortality over a mean follow-up of 1529 ± 1121 days.

RESULTS

Preliminary results indicated that patients with an EF ≤ 35% had a significantly greater risk of developing life-threatening arrhythmias, and were much more likely to suffer from cardiogenic shock. Patients often required varying forms of mechanical respiratory support. The in-hospital mortality, 30-day mortality, 1-year mortality and ongoing long-term mortality was significantly higher in TTS patients with an EF ≤ 35%. In a multivariate Cox regression analysis, an EF ≤ 35% (HR 3·3, 95% CI: 1·2-9·2, P < 0·05) was identified as a strong independent predictor of the primary endpoint.

CONCLUSIONS

In-hospital events as well as short- and long-term mortality rates among TTS patients diagnosed with a significantly reduced LVEF on admission were significantly higher. There is an urgent need for randomized trials, which could help define uniform clinical management strategies for high risk TTS patients.

The role of acute circulatory support in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock

In the setting of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock, three primary treatment objectives include providing circulatory support, ventricular unloading, and restoring myocardial perfusion. In addition to primary percutaneous coronary intervention, each of these three objectives can be achieved with appropriate use of an acute mechanical circulatory support (AMCS) pump. Over the past decade, utilization of percutaneously-delivered AMCS devices including the Impella axial-flow catheter, TandemHeart left atrial-to-femoral artery bypass system, and veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) has grown exponentially. In this review, we will discuss the hemodynamic impact of each AMCS device and clinical data surrounding their use in the setting of STEMI complicated by cardiogenic shock.

Developing an Anti-Xa-Based Anticoagulation Protocol for Patients with Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Devices

Because of the complexities associated with anticoagulation in temporary percutaneous ventricular assist device (pVAD) recipients, a lack of standardization exists in their management. This retrospective analysis evaluates current anticoagulation practices at a single center with the aim of identifying an optimal anticoagulation strategy and protocol. Patients were divided into two cohorts based on pVAD implanted (CentriMag (Thoratec; Pleasanton, CA) / TandemHeart (CardiacAssist; Pittsburgh, PA) or Impella (Abiomed, Danvers, MA)), with each group individually analyzed for bleeding and thrombotic complications. Patients in the CentriMag/TandemHeart cohort were subdivided based on the anticoagulation monitoring strategy (activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) or antifactor Xa unfractionated heparin (anti-Xa) values). In the CentriMag/TandemHeart cohort, there were five patients with anticoagulation titrated based on anti-Xa values; one patient developed a device thrombosis and a major bleed, whereas another patient experienced major bleeding. Eight patients received an Impella pVAD. Seven total major bleeds in three patients and no thrombotic events were detected. Based on distinct differences between the devices, anti-Xa values, and outcomes, two protocols were created to guide anticoagulation adjustments. However, anticoagulation in patients who require pVAD support is complex with constantly evolving anticoagulation goals. The ideal level of anticoagulation should be individually determined using several coagulation laboratory parameters in concert with hemodynamic changes in the patient's clinical status, the device, and the device cannulation.

Subcutaneous Double "Purse String Suture"-A Safe Method for Femoral Vein Access Site Closure after Leadless Pacemaker Implantation

BACKGROUND

Leadless cardiac pacemaker (LCP) requires large-caliber venous sheaths for device placement. Sheath sizes for these procedures vary from 18- to 23-French (F). The most common complications are hematomas, pseudoaneurysms, and arteriovenous fistulas. Complete and secure closure of the venous access is an important step at the end of such a procedure.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients who had undergone LCP implantation at our institution. Patients and procedural characteristics as well as groin complications at 30 days and 3 months were evaluated. After sheath removal venous access sites were closed performing a so-called "purse-string" suture (PSS).

RESULTS

Seventy-seven patients received an LCP at our institution. In 27 (35%) of these patients a heparin bolus was given at the beginning of the procedure. Anticoagulation therapy with phenprocoumon was present in 32 (40%) of patients. In 76 (98.7%) patients, the LCP was implanted without complications. In one (1.3%) patient a perforation occurred during implantation, which required surgical intervention. Access site complications occurred in three (3.9%) patients, two (2.6%) groin hematomas, and one (1.3%) arteriovenous fistula. The hematomas disappeared completely after 3 weeks, and the fistula was not detectable by ultrasound anymore after 4 weeks.

CONCLUSION

Use of subcutaneous absorbable double PSS closure after removal of large-caliber venous sheaths is a safe technique to achieve immediate postprocedural hemostasis. Especially for sheath sizes with an inner diameter of 23F, this technique creates a very secure and also cosmetically appealing closure.

Diagnosis and management of acute heart failure

Acute heart failure (AHF) is a life threatening clinical syndrome with a progressively increasing incidence in general population. Turkey is a country with a high cardiovascular mortality and recent national statistics show that the population structure has turned to an 'aged' population.As a consequence, AHF has become one of the main reasons of admission to cardiology clinics. This consensus report summarizes clinical and prognostic classification of AHF, its worldwide and national epidemiology, diagnostic work-up, principles of approach in emergency department,intensive care unit and ward, treatment in different clinical scenarios and approach in special conditions and how to plan hospital discharge.

Use of left ventricular support devices during acute coronary syndrome and percutaneous coronary intervention

In an effort to improve outcomes in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), percutaneous ventricular assist devices (PVADs) have been investigated in (1) high-risk PCI, (2) acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS) and (3) in AMI without CS. PCI has become an increasing complex due to an ageing population with complex disease and the frequent presence of impaired LV function. Patients undergoing high-risk PCI in these circumstances are prone to acute cardiovascular collapse. Additionally, mortality in AMI complicated by CS remains high. Lastly, LV support during AMI may reduce infarct size and therefore preserve LV function. At present, four commercially available devices exist: intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation (IABP), Impella, TandemHeart and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). These devices are employed in an effort to increase cardiac output, mean arterial pressure (MAP) and coronary perfusion and to reduce pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP). The mechanism of action differs with each device, and there are advantages and disadvantages. In this update, we discuss recent data describing the use of PVADs to support patients with AMI with or without cardiogenic shock and during high-risk PCI. We focus on the unique features of each device, highlighting strengths, weaknesses and frequently encountered complications, which may be important when tailoring the most appropriate PVAD therapy to an individual patient's need.

Intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation (IABP) for myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock

BACKGROUND

Intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation (IABP) is currently the most commonly used mechanical assist device for patients with cardiogenic shock due to acute myocardial infarction. Although there has been only limited evidence from randomised controlled trials, the previous guidelines of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology (AHA/ACC) and the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) strongly recommended the use of the IABP in patients with infarction-related cardiogenic shock on the basis of pathophysiological considerations, non-randomised trials and registry data. The recent guidelines downgraded the recommendation based on a meta-analysis which could only include non-randomised trials showing conflicting results. Up to now, there have been no guideline recommendations and no actual meta-analysis including the results of the large randomised multicentre IABP-SHOCK II Trial which showed no survival benefit with IABP support. This systematic review is an update of the review published in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate, in terms of efficacy and safety, the effect of IABP versus non-IABP or other assist devices guideline compliant standard therapy on mortality and morbidity in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock.

SEARCH METHODS

Searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE (Ovid) and EMBASE (Ovid), LILACS, IndMed and KoreaMed, registers of ongoing trials and proceedings of conferences were updated in October 2013. Reference lists were scanned and experts in the field contacted to obtain further information. No language restrictions were applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials on patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data collection and analysis were performed according to the published protocol. Individual patient data were provided for six trials and merged with aggregate data. Summary statistics for the primary endpoints were hazard ratios (HRs) and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

Seven eligible studies were identified from a total of 2314 references. One new study with 600 patients was added to the original review. Four trials compared IABP to standard treatment and three to other percutaneous left assist devices (LVAD). Data from a total of 790 patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock were included in the updated meta-analysis: 406 patients were treated with IABP and 384 patients served as controls; 339 patients were treated without assisting devices and 45 patients with other LVAD. The HR for all-cause 30-day mortality of 0.95 (95% CI 0.76 to 1.19) provided no evidence for a survival benefit. Different non-fatal cardiovascular events were reported in five trials. During hospitalisation, 11 and 4 out of 364 patients from the intervention groups suffered from reinfarction or stroke, respectively. Altogether 5 out of 363 patients from the control group suffered from reinfarction or stroke. Reocclusion was treated with subsequent re-revascularization in 6 out of 352 patients from the intervention group and 13 out of 353 patients of the control group. The high incidence of complications such as moderate and severe bleeding or infection in the control groups has to be attributed to interventions with other LVAD. Possible reasons for bias were more frequent in small studies with high cross-over rates, early stopping and the inclusion of patients with IABP at randomisation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Available evidence suggests that IABP may have a beneficial effect on some haemodynamic parameters. However, this did not result in survival benefits so there is no convincing randomised data to support the use of IABP in infarct-related cardiogenic shock.

Temporary mechanical circulatory support: a review of the options, indications, and outcomes

Cardiogenic shock remains a challenging disease entity and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS) can be implemented in an acute setting to stabilize acutely ill patients with cardiomyopathy in a variety of clinical situations. Currently, several options exist for temporary MCS. We review the indications, contraindications, clinical applications, and evidences for a variety of temporary circulatory support options, including the intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), CentriMag blood pump, and percutaneous ventricular assist devices (pVADs), specifically the TandemHeart and Impella.

The Role of Percutaneous Haemodynamic Support in High-risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Cardiogenic Shock

The experience and usage of percutaneous cardiac assist devices in cardiogenic shock as well as high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention have increased over the years. Nonetheless, there is still little evidence of clinical benefit of these devices other than immediate haemodynamic improvement. Despite the fact that these devices are used to treat a rather complex patient population, clinical testing remains important in order to evaluate their true impact on clinical outcome before being adopted into clinical practice. Therefore, this review shows an overview of the current experience and evidence of the available percutaneous cardiac assist devices.

Short-term continuous-flow ventricular assist devices

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide a comprehensive update on the current state of short-term, continuous-flow ventricular assist devices (CF-VADs) in the treatment of refractory cardiogenic shock in Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) 1 patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

The mortality rate associated with refractory cardiogenic shock remains markedly elevated, with INTERMACS 1 profile repeatedly demonstrating the worst outcomes. Recent innovations in continuous-flow pump technology have not only contributed to improved outcomes with long-term left ventricular assist device technology, but have also led to the development of various short-term, percutaneous, and surgical CF-VADs. Short-term CF-VADs have several favorable features, but, most notably, they allow the effective temporary stabilization of otherwise refractory cardiogenic shock and serve as a bridge-to-decision therapy.

SUMMARY

Clinical evidence supporting the use of CF-VADs still remains at the level of small case series, but the data appear promising. However, further rigorous clinical investigation is necessary in order to prove the overall clinical efficacy of these devices in refractory cardiogenic shock.

Which is better: a miniaturized percutaneous ventricular assist device or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for patients with cardiogenic shock?

The purpose of this study is to compare outcomes associated with the use of Impella and TandemHeart short-term support devices with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) therapy for postinfarction- or decompensated cardiomyopathy-related cardiogenic shock. Between January 2006 and September 2011, 79 patients were supported with either an Impella axial flow pump (n = 7) or a TandemHeart centrifugal pump (n = 11), or with ECMO (n = 61) therapy for cardiogenic shock in a single institution. Pertinent variables and postprocedural events were analyzed in this cohort of patients using a prospectively maintained clinical database. The in-hospital mortality, successful weaning from mechanical circulatory support, bridge to long-term destination support device and heart transplantation, and limb complications did not differ between the 2 groups based on intention-to-treat analysis. Age was the only independent predictor for in-hospital survival. In this cohort of patients, short-term support devices and ECMO achieved comparable results. In the modern era of medical cost restraints, ECMO may be more cost effective for patients with postinfarction- or decompensated cardiomyopathy-related cardiogenic shock. Larger randomized trials may be necessary to further elucidate this topic.