TY - JOUR
T1 - Acute biventricular mechanical circulatory support for cardiogenic shock
AU - Kuchibhotla, Sudeep
AU - Esposito, Michele L.
AU - Breton, Catalina
AU - Pedicini, Robert
AU - Mullin, Andrew
AU - O'Kelly, Ryan
AU - Anderson, Mark
AU - Morris, Dennis L.
AU - Batsides, George
AU - Ramzy, Danny
AU - Grise, Mark
AU - Pham, Duc Thinh
AU - Kapur, Navin K.
N1 - Funding Information:
Dr Kapur receives research funding from Maquet Inc, Cardiac Assist Inc, Abiomed Inc, St Jude Inc, and Boston Scientific Inc and speaker/consultant honoraria from Maquet Inc, Abiomed Inc, St. Jude Inc, and Heartware Inc.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 The Authors.
PY - 2017/10/1
Y1 - 2017/10/1
N2 - Background--Biventricular failure is associated with high in-hospital mortality. Limited data regarding the efficacy of biventricular Impella axial flow catheters (BiPella) support for biventricular failure exist. The aim of this study was to explore the clinical utility of percutaneously delivered BiPella as a novel acute mechanical support strategy for patients with cardiogenic shock complicated by biventricular failure. Methods and Results--We retrospectively analyzed data from 20 patients receiving BiPella for biventricular failure from 5 tertiarycare hospitals in the United States. Left ventricular support was achieved with an Impella 5.0 (n=8), Impella CP (n=11), or Impella 2.5 (n=1). All patients received the Impella RP for right ventricular (RV) support. BiPella use was recorded in the setting of acute myocardial infarction (n=11), advanced heart failure (n=7), and myocarditis (n=2). Mean flows achieved were 3.4 1.2 and 3.5 0.5 for left ventricular and RV devices, respectively. Total in-hospital mortality was 50%. No intraprocedural mortality was observed. Major complications included limb ischemia (n=1), hemolysis (n=6), and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction major bleeding (n=7). Compared with nonsurvivors, survivors were younger, had a lower number of inotropes or vasopressors used before BiPella, and were more likely to have both devices implanted simultaneously during the same procedure. Compared with nonsurvivors, survivors had lower pulmonary artery pressures and RV stroke work index before BiPella. Indices of RV afterload were quantified for 14 subjects. Among these patients, nonsurvivors had higher pulmonary vascular resistance (6.8; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 5.5-8.1 versus 1.9; 95% CI, 0.8-3.0; P<0.01), effective pulmonary artery elastance (1129; 95% CI, 876-1383 versus 458; 95% CI, 263-653; P<0.01), and lower pulmonary artery compliance (1.5; 95% CI, 0.9-2.1 versus 2.7; 95% CI, 1.8-3.6; P<0.05). Conclusions--This is the largest, retrospective analysis of BiPella for cardiogenic shock. BiPella is feasible, reduces cardiac filling pressures and improves cardiac output across a range of causes for cardiogenic shock. Simultaneous left ventricular and RV device implantation and lower RV afterload may be associated with better outcomes with BiPella. Future prospective studies of BiPella for cardiogenic shock are required.
AB - Background--Biventricular failure is associated with high in-hospital mortality. Limited data regarding the efficacy of biventricular Impella axial flow catheters (BiPella) support for biventricular failure exist. The aim of this study was to explore the clinical utility of percutaneously delivered BiPella as a novel acute mechanical support strategy for patients with cardiogenic shock complicated by biventricular failure. Methods and Results--We retrospectively analyzed data from 20 patients receiving BiPella for biventricular failure from 5 tertiarycare hospitals in the United States. Left ventricular support was achieved with an Impella 5.0 (n=8), Impella CP (n=11), or Impella 2.5 (n=1). All patients received the Impella RP for right ventricular (RV) support. BiPella use was recorded in the setting of acute myocardial infarction (n=11), advanced heart failure (n=7), and myocarditis (n=2). Mean flows achieved were 3.4 1.2 and 3.5 0.5 for left ventricular and RV devices, respectively. Total in-hospital mortality was 50%. No intraprocedural mortality was observed. Major complications included limb ischemia (n=1), hemolysis (n=6), and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction major bleeding (n=7). Compared with nonsurvivors, survivors were younger, had a lower number of inotropes or vasopressors used before BiPella, and were more likely to have both devices implanted simultaneously during the same procedure. Compared with nonsurvivors, survivors had lower pulmonary artery pressures and RV stroke work index before BiPella. Indices of RV afterload were quantified for 14 subjects. Among these patients, nonsurvivors had higher pulmonary vascular resistance (6.8; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 5.5-8.1 versus 1.9; 95% CI, 0.8-3.0; P<0.01), effective pulmonary artery elastance (1129; 95% CI, 876-1383 versus 458; 95% CI, 263-653; P<0.01), and lower pulmonary artery compliance (1.5; 95% CI, 0.9-2.1 versus 2.7; 95% CI, 1.8-3.6; P<0.05). Conclusions--This is the largest, retrospective analysis of BiPella for cardiogenic shock. BiPella is feasible, reduces cardiac filling pressures and improves cardiac output across a range of causes for cardiogenic shock. Simultaneous left ventricular and RV device implantation and lower RV afterload may be associated with better outcomes with BiPella. Future prospective studies of BiPella for cardiogenic shock are required.
KW - Cardiogenic shock
KW - Hemodynamics
KW - Mechanical circulatory support
KW - Right ventricle-pulmonary arterial coupling
KW - Right ventricular failure
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85032208099&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85032208099&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1161/JAHA.117.006670
DO - 10.1161/JAHA.117.006670
M3 - Article
C2 - 29054842
AN - SCOPUS:85032208099
SN - 2047-9980
VL - 6
JO - Journal of the American Heart Association
JF - Journal of the American Heart Association
IS - 10
M1 - e006670
ER -