Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Elective High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Interventions

Standby extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a better strategy for high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention

Background

The incidence of cardiac arrest (CA) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is relatively rare. However, when it does occur, the mortality rate is extremely high. Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) has shown promising survival rates for in-hospital cardiac arrests (IHCA), with low-flow time being an independent prognostic factor for CA. However, there is no definitive answer on how to reduce low-flow time.

Methods

This retrospective study, conducted at a single center, included 39 patients who underwent ECPR during PCI between January 2016 and December 2022. The patients were divided into two cohorts based on whether standby extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) was utilized during PCI: standby ECPR (SBE) (n = 13) and extemporaneous ECPR (EE) (n = 26). We compared the 30-day mortality rates between these two cohorts and investigated factors associated with survival.

Results

Compared to the EE cohort, the SBE cohort showed significantly lower low-flow time (P < 0.01), ECMO operation time (P < 0.01), and a lower incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) (P = 0.017), as well as peak lactate (P < 0.01). Stand-by ECMO was associated with improved 30-day survival (p = 0.036), while prolonged low-flow time (p = 0.004) and a higher SYNTAX II score (p = 0.062) predicted death at 30 days.

Conclusions

Standby ECMO can provide significant benefits for patients who undergo ECPR for CA during PCI. It is a viable option for high-risk PCI cases and may enhance the overall prognosis. The low-flow time remains a critical determinant of survival.

Mechanical Circulatory Support for High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review will focus on the indications of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) for high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and then analyze in detail all MCS devices available to the operator, evaluating their mechanisms of action, pros and cons, contraindications, and clinical data supporting their use.

RECENT FINDINGS

Over the last decade, the interventional cardiology arena has witnessed an increase in the complexity profile of the patients and lesions treated in the catheterization laboratory. Patients with significant comorbidity burden, left ventricular dysfunction, impaired hemodynamics, and/or complex coronary anatomy often cannot tolerate extensive percutaneous revascularization. Therefore, a variety of MCS devices have been developed and adopted for high-risk PCI. Despite the variety of MCS available to date, a detailed characterization of the patient requiring MCS is still lacking. A precise selection of patients who can benefit from MCS support during high-risk PCI and the choice of the most appropriate MCS device in each case are imperative to provide extensive revascularization and improve patient outcomes. Several new devices are being tested in early feasibility studies and randomized clinical trials and the experience gained in this context will allow us to provide precise answers to these questions in the coming years.

Scrutinizing the Role of Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: Has Clinical Practice Outpaced the Evidence?

The use of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) for temporary mechanical circulatory support in various clinical scenarios has been increasing consistently, despite the lack of sufficient evidence regarding its benefit and safety from adequately powered randomized controlled trials. Although the ARREST trial (Advanced Reperfusion Strategies for Patients with Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest and Refractory Ventricular Fibrillation) and a secondary analysis of the PRAGUE OHCA trial (Prague Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest) provided some evidence in favor of VA-ECMO in the setting of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, the INCEPTION trial (Early Initiation of Extracorporeal Life Support in Refractory Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest) has not found a relevant improvement of short-term mortality with extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation. In addition, the results of the recently published ECLS-SHOCK trial (Extracorporeal Life Support in Cardiogenic Shock) and ECMO-CS trial (Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in the Therapy of Cardiogenic Shock) discourage the routine use of VA-ECMO in patients with infarct-related cardiogenic shock. Ongoing clinical trials (ANCHOR [Assessment of ECMO in Acute Myocardial Infarction Cardiogenic Shock, NCT04184635], REVERSE [Impella CP With VA ECMO for Cardiogenic Shock, NCT03431467], UNLOAD ECMO [Left Ventricular Unloading to Improve Outcome in Cardiogenic Shock Patients on VA-ECMO, NCT05577195], PIONEER [Hemodynamic Support With ECMO and IABP in Elective Complex High-risk PCI, NCT04045873]) may clarify the usefulness of VA-ECMO in specific patient subpopulations and the efficacy of combined mechanical circulatory support strategies. Pending further data to refine patient selection and management recommendations for VA-ECMO, it remains uncertain whether the present usage of this device improves outcomes.

Successful percutaneous coronary intervention with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in a patient with acute inferior wall myocardial infarction complicated by electrical storm, cardiogenic shock, and cardiac arrest: a case report

BACKGROUND

High-risk patients with coronary heart disease who develop acute myocardial infarction (AMI) have severe coronary lesions. If severe complications occur, such as malignant ventricular arrhythmia, cardiogenic shock, and cardiac arrest, implementation of emergency percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) may be hindered, leading to a higher perioperative mortality rate. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) can pave the way for rapid myocardial reperfusion therapy. When cardiac arrest occurs, hemodynamic support with ECMO can facilitate revascularization with PCI, which can increase the time available for further salvage and treatment and reduce intraoperative risk during PCI.

CASE PRESENTATION

Herein, we report a case of a 61-year-old man with AMI who suffered electrical storm of sustained malignant ventricular fibrillation, cardiogenic shock, and cardiac arrest and was successfully treated with PCI with ECMO support. During PCI, repeated aspiration and removal of the right coronary artery thrombus were performed, and blood flow was restored after right coronary artery balloon dilation. One episode of defibrillation was delivered to restore sinus rhythm. Then, stents were implanted in the distal and proximal right coronary artery lesions to achieve revascularization. After PCI with ECMO support, irreversible malignant arrhythmia returned to sinus rhythm through coronary perfusion, which prevented death following unsuccessful cardiopulmonary resuscitation. After applying active treatments, including anti-shock, mechanical ventilation, anti-inflammation, and organ support, the patient was discharged after his condition and vital signs stabilized. The patient was followed up once a week after hospital discharge, and his cardiopulmonary function recovered well.

CONCLUSIONS

With ECMO support, PCI should be performed immediately in patients with inferior wall AMI complicated by electrical storm of sustained ventricular fibrillation, cardiogenic shock, and cardiac arrest to facilitate stent placement, achieve complete revascularization, restore coronary perfusion, and avoid death.