Cargando…

Management and outcome of patients supported with Impella 5.0 for refractory cardiogenic shock

INTRODUCTION: Cardiogenic shock refractory to standard therapy with inotropes and/or intra-aortic balloon pump is accompanied with an unacceptable high mortality. Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices may provide a survival benefit for these very sick patients. In this study, we describe our...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gaudard, Philippe, Mourad, Marc, Eliet, Jacob, Zeroual, Norddine, Culas, Geraldine, Rouvière, Philippe, Albat, Bernard, Colson, Pascal
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4600310/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26453047
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-015-1073-8
_version_ 1782394407625949184
author Gaudard, Philippe
Mourad, Marc
Eliet, Jacob
Zeroual, Norddine
Culas, Geraldine
Rouvière, Philippe
Albat, Bernard
Colson, Pascal
author_facet Gaudard, Philippe
Mourad, Marc
Eliet, Jacob
Zeroual, Norddine
Culas, Geraldine
Rouvière, Philippe
Albat, Bernard
Colson, Pascal
author_sort Gaudard, Philippe
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Cardiogenic shock refractory to standard therapy with inotropes and/or intra-aortic balloon pump is accompanied with an unacceptable high mortality. Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices may provide a survival benefit for these very sick patients. In this study, we describe our experience with the Impella 5.0 device used in the setting of refractory cardiogenic shock. METHODS: In this observational, retrospective, single-center study we included all the consecutive patients supported with Impella 5.0, between May 2008 and December 2013, for refractory cardiogenic shock. Patients’ baseline and procedural characteristics, hemodynamics and outcome to the first 48 h of support, to ICU discharge and day-28 visit were collected. RESULTS: A total of 40 patients were included in the study. Median age was 57 years and 87.5 % were male. Cardiogenic shock resulted from acute myocardial infarction in 17 patients (43 %), dilated cardiomyopathy in 12 (30 %) and postcardiotomy cardiac failure in 7 (18 %). In 15 patients Impella 5.0 was added to an ECMO to unload the left ventricle. The median SOFA score for the entire cohort prior to circulatory support was 12 [10–14] and the duration of Impella support was 7 [5–10] days. We observed a significant decrease of the inotrope score (10 [1–17] vs. 1 [0–9]; p = 0.04) and the lactate values (3.8 [1.7–5.9] mmol/L vs. 2.5 [1.5–3.4] mmol/L; p = 0.01) after 6 h of support with Impella 5.0. Furthermore, at Impella removal the patients’ left ventricular ejection fraction improved significantly (p < 0.001) when compared to baseline. Cardiac recovery, bridge to left ventricular assist device or heart transplantation was possible in 28 patients (70 %). Twenty-six patients (65 %) survived at day 28. A multivariate analysis showed a higher risk of mortality for patients with acute myocardial infarction (hazard ratio = 4.1 (1.2–14.2); p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Impella 5.0 allowed fast weaning of inotropes and might facilitate myocardial recovery. Despite high severity scores at admission, day-28 mortality rate was better than predicated.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4600310
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46003102015-10-11 Management and outcome of patients supported with Impella 5.0 for refractory cardiogenic shock Gaudard, Philippe Mourad, Marc Eliet, Jacob Zeroual, Norddine Culas, Geraldine Rouvière, Philippe Albat, Bernard Colson, Pascal Crit Care Research INTRODUCTION: Cardiogenic shock refractory to standard therapy with inotropes and/or intra-aortic balloon pump is accompanied with an unacceptable high mortality. Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices may provide a survival benefit for these very sick patients. In this study, we describe our experience with the Impella 5.0 device used in the setting of refractory cardiogenic shock. METHODS: In this observational, retrospective, single-center study we included all the consecutive patients supported with Impella 5.0, between May 2008 and December 2013, for refractory cardiogenic shock. Patients’ baseline and procedural characteristics, hemodynamics and outcome to the first 48 h of support, to ICU discharge and day-28 visit were collected. RESULTS: A total of 40 patients were included in the study. Median age was 57 years and 87.5 % were male. Cardiogenic shock resulted from acute myocardial infarction in 17 patients (43 %), dilated cardiomyopathy in 12 (30 %) and postcardiotomy cardiac failure in 7 (18 %). In 15 patients Impella 5.0 was added to an ECMO to unload the left ventricle. The median SOFA score for the entire cohort prior to circulatory support was 12 [10–14] and the duration of Impella support was 7 [5–10] days. We observed a significant decrease of the inotrope score (10 [1–17] vs. 1 [0–9]; p = 0.04) and the lactate values (3.8 [1.7–5.9] mmol/L vs. 2.5 [1.5–3.4] mmol/L; p = 0.01) after 6 h of support with Impella 5.0. Furthermore, at Impella removal the patients’ left ventricular ejection fraction improved significantly (p < 0.001) when compared to baseline. Cardiac recovery, bridge to left ventricular assist device or heart transplantation was possible in 28 patients (70 %). Twenty-six patients (65 %) survived at day 28. A multivariate analysis showed a higher risk of mortality for patients with acute myocardial infarction (hazard ratio = 4.1 (1.2–14.2); p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Impella 5.0 allowed fast weaning of inotropes and might facilitate myocardial recovery. Despite high severity scores at admission, day-28 mortality rate was better than predicated. BioMed Central 2015-10-09 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4600310/ /pubmed/26453047 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-015-1073-8 Text en © Gaudard et al. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Gaudard, Philippe
Mourad, Marc
Eliet, Jacob
Zeroual, Norddine
Culas, Geraldine
Rouvière, Philippe
Albat, Bernard
Colson, Pascal
Management and outcome of patients supported with Impella 5.0 for refractory cardiogenic shock
title Management and outcome of patients supported with Impella 5.0 for refractory cardiogenic shock
title_full Management and outcome of patients supported with Impella 5.0 for refractory cardiogenic shock
title_fullStr Management and outcome of patients supported with Impella 5.0 for refractory cardiogenic shock
title_full_unstemmed Management and outcome of patients supported with Impella 5.0 for refractory cardiogenic shock
title_short Management and outcome of patients supported with Impella 5.0 for refractory cardiogenic shock
title_sort management and outcome of patients supported with impella 5.0 for refractory cardiogenic shock
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4600310/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26453047
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-015-1073-8
work_keys_str_mv AT gaudardphilippe managementandoutcomeofpatientssupportedwithimpella50forrefractorycardiogenicshock
AT mouradmarc managementandoutcomeofpatientssupportedwithimpella50forrefractorycardiogenicshock
AT elietjacob managementandoutcomeofpatientssupportedwithimpella50forrefractorycardiogenicshock
AT zeroualnorddine managementandoutcomeofpatientssupportedwithimpella50forrefractorycardiogenicshock
AT culasgeraldine managementandoutcomeofpatientssupportedwithimpella50forrefractorycardiogenicshock
AT rouvierephilippe managementandoutcomeofpatientssupportedwithimpella50forrefractorycardiogenicshock
AT albatbernard managementandoutcomeofpatientssupportedwithimpella50forrefractorycardiogenicshock
AT colsonpascal managementandoutcomeofpatientssupportedwithimpella50forrefractorycardiogenicshock