Impella RP Support and Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis to Treat Right Ventricular Failure Caused by Pulmonary Embolism in 2 Patients

Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices in Patients with High-Risk Pulmonary Embolism

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a common acute cardiovascular condition. Within this review, we discuss the incidence, pathophysiology, and treatment options for patients with high-risk and massive pulmonary embolisms. In particular, we focus on the role of mechanical circulatory support devices and their possible therapeutic benefits in patients who are unresponsive to standard therapeutic options. Moreover, attention is given to device selection criteria, weaning protocols, and complication mitigation strategies. Finally, we underscore the necessity for more comprehensive studies to corroborate the benefits and safety of MCS devices in PE management.

Mechanical Support in High-Risk Pulmonary Embolism: Review Article

Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) may manifest with mild nonspecific symptoms or progress to a more severe hemodynamic collapse and sudden cardiac arrest. A substantial thrombotic burden can precipitate sudden right ventricular strain and failure. Traditionally, systemic thrombolytics have been employed in such scenarios; however, patients often present with contraindications, or these interventions may prove ineffective. Outcomes for this medically complex patient population are unfavorable, necessitating a compelling argument for advanced therapeutic modalities or alternative approaches. Moreover, patients frequently experience complications beyond hemodynamic instability, such as profound hypoxia and multiorgan failure, necessitating assertive early interventions to avert catastrophic consequences. The existing data on the utilization of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices are not exhaustive. Various options for percutaneous MCS devices exist, each possessing distinct advantages and disadvantages. There is an imminent imperative to develop a tailored approach for this high-risk patient cohort to enhance their overall outcomes.

Use of Ultrasound-Assisted, Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis in a Patient With High-Risk Pulmonary Embolism

High-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) is a complex clinical entity associated with high mortality rates. Ultrasound-assisted, catheter-directed thrombolysis, typically used for intermediate-risk PE, may be a viable treatment approach for high-risk PE, particularly in patients at increased risk for major bleeding. This report describes a case in which ultrasound-assisted, catheter-directed thrombolysis was successfully used to treat high-risk PE in a female patient with extensive peritoneal metastases from gastric adenocarcinoma. Other examples from the literature, in which ultrasound-assisted, catheter-directed thrombolysis was used to treat high-risk PE, are also provided.

ProtekDuo percutaneous ventricular support system-physiology and clinical applications

The ProtekDuo (LivaNova, London, UK) cannula is a dual-lumen device, typically inserted into the right internal jugular (IJ) vein through a percutaneous approach, with fluoroscopy or ultrasound guidance. When connected to a pump, such as the TandemHeart (LivaNova, London, UK) or CentriMag (Abbott, Pleasanton, CA, USA), it can function as a right ventricular (RV) mechanical circulatory support (MCS). When an oxygenator is also added [veno-pulmonary (V-P)], it can provide extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the device's physiology and clinical applications. In the setting of RV failure (RVF), the ProtekDuo cannula, with its outflow in the main pulmonary artery (PA), can bypass the failing RV, improving pulmonary flow, left atrial (LA) filling pressures, and left ventricular (LV) preload. This can also reduce ventricular interdependence and leftward shift of the interventricular septum that occurs in RVF. In this review, the key sections expand on the use of the ProtekDuo cannula in the management of critically ill patients, specifically, the use of ProtekDuo for RV myocardial infarction (MI) RVF, LV assist device (LVAD) implantation-associated RVF, RVF post-heart transplantation, temporary biventricular MCS as bridge to recovery (ECpella 2.0 or PROpella), biventricular support as bridge to recovery or decision, isolated LV failure, post lung transplantation (LT) care, and other miscellaneous clinical scenarios. ProtekDuo is an important tool in the armory of RVF management. The ProtekDuo system is expected to gain more popularity given its clear advantages such as groin-free approach allowing for mobility, easy percutaneous deployment, compatibility with various pumps and oxygenators, and the versatility to be integrated in numerous configurations. In an era of expanding MCS options, further research is needed to better understand the optimal tool for specific patient subsets.

Peripartum Cardiogenic Shock and Mechanical Circulatory Support

Despite remarkable improvements in the past two decades, the annual cardiovascular mortality rate has remained higher for women than for men. Pregnant women represent an underinvestigated population in clinical research, and the mechanisms of long-term cardiovascular complications in women with obstetric complications remain to be elucidated. Regarding advanced heart failure during pregnancy, interventional approaches are effective but still underutilised. Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support is a valuable option for peripartum cardiogenic shock, although its use during pregnancy is still limited. Survival rates have improved in recent years, but further emphasis on the importance of early recognition and initiation of heart failure treatment in this patient group is warranted. The aims of this review are to summarise the current literature on the implementation of mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock during pregnancy and delivery and to understand the role of percutaneous ventricular assist devices in the management of such conditions.

Surgical pulmonary embolectomy: state of the art

Acute pulmonary embolism is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Patients in life-threatening conditions require timely and effective interventions to improve pulmonary perfusion. The indications for surgical embolectomy in the thrombolysis era have been limited. This article discusses surgical techniques and outlines the position of surgical embolectomy concerning other treatment modalities.

Surgical Management and Mechanical Circulatory Support in High-Risk Pulmonary Embolisms: Historical Context, Current Status, and Future Directions: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Acute pulmonary embolism is the third leading cause of cardiovascular death, with most pulmonary embolism-related mortality associated with acute right ventricular failure. Although there has recently been increased clinical attention to acute pulmonary embolism with the adoption of multidisciplinary pulmonary embolism response teams, mortality of patients with pulmonary embolism who present with hemodynamic compromise remains high when current guideline-directed therapy is followed. Because historical data and practice patterns affect current consensus treatment recommendations, surgical embolectomy has largely been relegated to patients who have contraindications to other treatments or when other treatment modalities fail. Despite a selection bias toward patients with greater illness, a growing body of literature describes the safety and efficacy of the surgical management of acute pulmonary embolism, especially in the hemodynamically compromised population. The purpose of this document is to describe modern techniques, strategies, and outcomes of surgical embolectomy and venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and to suggest strategies to better understand the role of surgery in the management of pulmonary embolisms.

Mechanical Circulatory Support for Right Ventricular Failure

Right ventricular (RV) failure is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, with in-hospital mortality rates estimated as high as 70–75%. RV failure may occur following cardiac surgery in conjunction with left ventricular failure, or may be isolated in certain circumstances, such as inferior MI with RV infarction, pulmonary embolism or following left ventricular assist device placement. Medical management includes volume optimisation and inotropic and vasopressor support, and a subset of patients may benefit from mechanical circulatory support for persistent RV failure. Increasingly, percutaneous and surgical mechanical support devices are being used for RV failure. Devices for isolated RV support include percutaneous options, such as micro-axial flow pumps and extracorporeal centrifugal flow RV assist devices, surgically implanted RV assist devices and veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. In this review, the authors discuss the indications, candidate selection, strategies and outcomes of mechanical circulatory support for RV failure.

Percutaneous Transvalvular Microaxial Flow Pump Support in Cardiology

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

Percutaneous thrombectomy and right ventricular mechanical circulatory support for pulmonary embolism in a coronavirus disease 2019 patient: case report, 1-year update, and echocardiographic findings

Background

We previously described percutaneous thrombectomy and right ventricular (RV) mechanical support of a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patient with a massive pulmonary embolism. Here, we present a detailed echocardiographic and clinical timeline with 1-year follow-up.

Case summary

A 57-year-old female with COVID-19 went into shock from a massive pulmonary embolism. After percutaneous removal of a large thrombus burden (AngioVac system; AngioDynamics Inc., Latham, NY, USA), she became severely hypotensive, requiring cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and hemodynamic support with an Impella RP device (Abiomed, Danvers, MA, USA). A paediatric transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE) probe monitored the procedure because an adult probe would not pass (S7-3t—Philips Medical Systems, Andover, MA, USA). Post-thrombectomy, surface imaging documented gradual resolution of RV dysfunction, tricuspid regurgitation, and elevated pulmonary artery pressure. Her course was complicated by renal failure requiring temporary dialysis. She was discharged home on apixaban. Hypercoagulability work-up was negative. Two months later, vocal cord surgery was performed for persistent stridor. Esophagoscopy at that time was prevented by osteophyte obstruction. At 10 months, she received the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. At 1 year, the patient remains healthy on apixaban, and her echocardiogram is normal.

Discussion

This case illustrates the pivotal role of echocardiography in the diagnosis, percutaneous treatment, and near- and long-term follow-up and management of a patient with massive pulmonary embolism due to COVID-19 with documentation of complete recovery from severe RV dysfunction and haemodynamic collapse. A paediatric TOE probe was a crucial alternative to the adult probe because of possible osteophyte obstruction.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for patients with pulmonary embolism undergoing thrombolysis

Patients with massive pulmonary embolism undergoing catheter-directed therapy are at high risk for cardiopulmonary arrest in the periprocedural period due to severe right ventricular dysfunction. We report the outcomes of three patients with massive pulmonary embolism treated successfully with catheter-directed thrombolytic therapy and veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

Mechanical Circulatory Support to Treat Pulmonary Embolism: Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation and Right Ventricular Assist Devices

Mechanical circulatory support may help patients with massive pulmonary embolism who are not candidates for systemic thrombolysis, pulmonary embolectomy, or catheter-directed therapy, or in whom these established interventions have failed. Little published literature covers this topic, which led us to compare outcomes of patients whose massive pulmonary embolism was managed with the use of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) or a right ventricular assist device (RVAD). We searched the medical literature from January 1990 through September 2018 for reports of adults hospitalized for massive or high-risk pulmonary embolism complicated by hemodynamic instability, and who underwent VA-ECMO therapy or RVAD placement. Primary outcomes included weaning from mechanical circulatory support and discharge from the hospital. We found 16 reports that included 181 patients (164 VA-ECMO and 17 RVAD). All RVAD recipients were successfully weaned from support, as were 122 (74%) of the VA-ECMO patients. Sixteen (94%) of the RVAD patients were discharged from the hospital, as were 120 (73%) of the VA-ECMO patients. Of note, the 8 RVAD patients who had an Impella RP System were all weaned and discharged. For patients with massive pulmonary embolism who are not candidates for conventional interventions or whose conditions are refractory, mechanical circulatory support in the form of RVAD placement or ECMO may be considered. Larger comparative studies are needed.

Cardiovascular Implications of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Global Perspective

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), represents the pandemic of the century, with approximately 3.5 million cases and 250,000 deaths worldwide as of May 2020. Although respiratory symptoms usually dominate the clinical presentation, COVID-19 is now known to also have potentially serious cardiovascular consequences, including myocardial injury, myocarditis, acute coronary syndromes, pulmonary embolism, stroke, arrhythmias, heart failure, and cardiogenic shock. The cardiac manifestations of COVID-19 might be related to the adrenergic drive, systemic inflammatory milieu and cytokine-release syndrome caused by SARS-CoV-2, direct viral infection of myocardial and endothelial cells, hypoxia due to respiratory failure, electrolytic imbalances, fluid overload, and side effects of certain COVID-19 medications. COVID-19 has profoundly reshaped usual care of both ambulatory and acute cardiac patients, by leading to the cancellation of elective procedures and by reducing the efficiency of existing pathways of urgent care, respectively. Decreased use of health care services for acute conditions by non-COVID-19 patients has also been reported and attributed to concerns about acquiring in-hospital infection. Innovative approaches that leverage modern technologies to tackle the COVID-19 pandemic have been introduced, which include telemedicine, dissemination of educational material over social media, smartphone apps for case tracking, and artificial intelligence for pandemic modelling, among others. This article provides a comprehensive overview of the pathophysiology and cardiovascular implications of COVID-19, its impact on existing pathways of care, the role of modern technologies to tackle the pandemic, and a proposal of novel management algorithms for the most common acute cardiac conditions.

Management of Right Ventricular Failure in Pulmonary Embolism

Acute right ventricular failure remains the leading cause of mortality associated with acute pulmonary embolism (PE). This article reviews the pathophysiology behind acute right ventricular failure and strategies for managing right ventricular failure in acute PE. Immediate clot reduction via systemic thrombolytics, catheter based procedures, or surgery is always advocated for unstable patients. While waiting to mobilize these resources, it often becomes necessary to support the RV with vasoactive medications. Clinicians should carefully assess volume status and use caution with volume resuscitation. Right ventricular assist devices may have an expanding role in the future.

The Right Ventricle-You May Forget it, but It Will Not Forget You

Right ventricular (RV) dysfunction and failure are common and often overlooked causes of perioperative deterioration and adverse outcomes. Due to its unique pathophysiologic underpinnings, RV failure often does not respond to typical therapeutic measures such as volume resuscitation and often worsens when therapy is escalated and mechanical ventilation is begun, with a danger of irreversible cardiovascular collapse and death. The single most important factor in improving outcomes in the context of RV failure is anticipating and recognizing it. Once established, a vicious circle of systemic hypotension, and RV ischemia and dilation is set in motion, rapidly spiraling down into a state of shock culminating in multi-organ failure and ultimately death. Therapy of RV failure must focus on rapidly reestablishing RV coronary perfusion, lowering pulmonary vascular resistance and optimizing volemia. In parallel, underlying reversible causes should be sought and if possible treated. In all stages of diagnostics and therapy, echocardiography plays a central role. In severe cases of RV dysfunction there remains a role for the use of the pulmonary artery catheter. When these mostly simple measures are undertaken in a timely fashion, the spiral of death of RV failure can often be broken or even prevented altogether.

Impella RP in hemodynamically unstable patients with acute pulmonary embolism

Over the last years, different case reports/studies have demonstrated that in patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) and refractory shock mechanical circulatory support (MCS) with Impella RP^® (Abiomed, Inc, Danvers, Mass) increases the chances of survival, significantly unloading the right ventricle and improving both the cardiac output and the mean pulmonary artery pressure. We reviewed the medical literature about the use of Impella RP in patients with acute PE and refractory shock using PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, Cochrane library, and Google Scholar databases. The final research was conducted in July 2019. The results evidenced that available data are currently scant to definitively assess the real role Impella RP^® in patient with acute PE and refractory shock. However, preliminary data seems to be very promising. Further larger studies are needed to confirm the safety and efficacy of MCS in these patients. A multidisciplinary assessment, using the PERT team, must be performed case by case to determine the need of MCS.