Cargando…
Prophylactic Impella CP versus VA-ECMO in Patients Undergoing Complex High-Risk Indicated PCI
OBJECTIVES: To compare two different forms of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in patients with complex high-risk indicated PCI (CHIP): the Impella CP system and veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). BACKGROUND: To prevent hemodynamic instability in CHIP, various MCS syste...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Hindawi
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9663242/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36447936 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/8167011 |
_version_ | 1784830829602537472 |
---|---|
author | van den Buijs, Deborah M. F. Wilgenhof, Adriaan Knaapen, Paul Zivelonghi, Carlo Meijers, Tom Vermeersch, Paul Arslan, Fatih Verouden, Niels Nap, Alex Sjauw, Krischan van den Brink, Floris S. |
author_facet | van den Buijs, Deborah M. F. Wilgenhof, Adriaan Knaapen, Paul Zivelonghi, Carlo Meijers, Tom Vermeersch, Paul Arslan, Fatih Verouden, Niels Nap, Alex Sjauw, Krischan van den Brink, Floris S. |
author_sort | van den Buijs, Deborah M. F. |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: To compare two different forms of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in patients with complex high-risk indicated PCI (CHIP): the Impella CP system and veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). BACKGROUND: To prevent hemodynamic instability in CHIP, various MCS systems are available. However, comparable data on different forms of MCS are not at hand. METHODS: In this multicenter observational study, we retrospectively evaluated all CHIP procedures with the support of an Impella CP or VA-ECMO, who were declined surgery by the heart team. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE), mortality at discharge, and 30-day mortality were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 41 patients were included, of which 27 patients were supported with Impella CP and 14 patients with VA-ECMO. Baseline characteristics were well-balanced in both groups. No significant difference in periprocedural hemodynamic instability was observed between both groups (3.7% vs. 14.3%; p = 0.22). The composite outcome of MACE showed no significant difference (30.7% vs. 21.4%; p = 0.59). Bleeding complications were higher in the Impella CP group, but showed no significant difference (22.2% vs. 7.1%; p = 0.22) and occurred more at the non-Impella access site. In-hospital mortality was 7.4% in the Impella CP group versus 14.3% in the VA-ECMO group and showed no significant difference (p = 0.48). 30-Day mortality showed no significant difference (7.4% vs. 21.4%; p = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CHIP, there were no significant differences in hemodynamic instability and overall MACE between VA-ECMO or Impella CP device as mechanical circulatory support. Based on this study, the choice of either VA-ECMO or Impella CP does not alter the outcome. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9663242 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Hindawi |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-96632422022-11-28 Prophylactic Impella CP versus VA-ECMO in Patients Undergoing Complex High-Risk Indicated PCI van den Buijs, Deborah M. F. Wilgenhof, Adriaan Knaapen, Paul Zivelonghi, Carlo Meijers, Tom Vermeersch, Paul Arslan, Fatih Verouden, Niels Nap, Alex Sjauw, Krischan van den Brink, Floris S. J Interv Cardiol Research Article OBJECTIVES: To compare two different forms of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in patients with complex high-risk indicated PCI (CHIP): the Impella CP system and veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). BACKGROUND: To prevent hemodynamic instability in CHIP, various MCS systems are available. However, comparable data on different forms of MCS are not at hand. METHODS: In this multicenter observational study, we retrospectively evaluated all CHIP procedures with the support of an Impella CP or VA-ECMO, who were declined surgery by the heart team. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE), mortality at discharge, and 30-day mortality were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 41 patients were included, of which 27 patients were supported with Impella CP and 14 patients with VA-ECMO. Baseline characteristics were well-balanced in both groups. No significant difference in periprocedural hemodynamic instability was observed between both groups (3.7% vs. 14.3%; p = 0.22). The composite outcome of MACE showed no significant difference (30.7% vs. 21.4%; p = 0.59). Bleeding complications were higher in the Impella CP group, but showed no significant difference (22.2% vs. 7.1%; p = 0.22) and occurred more at the non-Impella access site. In-hospital mortality was 7.4% in the Impella CP group versus 14.3% in the VA-ECMO group and showed no significant difference (p = 0.48). 30-Day mortality showed no significant difference (7.4% vs. 21.4%; p = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CHIP, there were no significant differences in hemodynamic instability and overall MACE between VA-ECMO or Impella CP device as mechanical circulatory support. Based on this study, the choice of either VA-ECMO or Impella CP does not alter the outcome. Hindawi 2022-11-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9663242/ /pubmed/36447936 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/8167011 Text en Copyright © 2022 Deborah M.F. van den Buijs et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article van den Buijs, Deborah M. F. Wilgenhof, Adriaan Knaapen, Paul Zivelonghi, Carlo Meijers, Tom Vermeersch, Paul Arslan, Fatih Verouden, Niels Nap, Alex Sjauw, Krischan van den Brink, Floris S. Prophylactic Impella CP versus VA-ECMO in Patients Undergoing Complex High-Risk Indicated PCI |
title | Prophylactic Impella CP versus VA-ECMO in Patients Undergoing Complex High-Risk Indicated PCI |
title_full | Prophylactic Impella CP versus VA-ECMO in Patients Undergoing Complex High-Risk Indicated PCI |
title_fullStr | Prophylactic Impella CP versus VA-ECMO in Patients Undergoing Complex High-Risk Indicated PCI |
title_full_unstemmed | Prophylactic Impella CP versus VA-ECMO in Patients Undergoing Complex High-Risk Indicated PCI |
title_short | Prophylactic Impella CP versus VA-ECMO in Patients Undergoing Complex High-Risk Indicated PCI |
title_sort | prophylactic impella cp versus va-ecmo in patients undergoing complex high-risk indicated pci |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9663242/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36447936 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/8167011 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vandenbuijsdeborahmf prophylacticimpellacpversusvaecmoinpatientsundergoingcomplexhighriskindicatedpci AT wilgenhofadriaan prophylacticimpellacpversusvaecmoinpatientsundergoingcomplexhighriskindicatedpci AT knaapenpaul prophylacticimpellacpversusvaecmoinpatientsundergoingcomplexhighriskindicatedpci AT zivelonghicarlo prophylacticimpellacpversusvaecmoinpatientsundergoingcomplexhighriskindicatedpci AT meijerstom prophylacticimpellacpversusvaecmoinpatientsundergoingcomplexhighriskindicatedpci AT vermeerschpaul prophylacticimpellacpversusvaecmoinpatientsundergoingcomplexhighriskindicatedpci AT arslanfatih prophylacticimpellacpversusvaecmoinpatientsundergoingcomplexhighriskindicatedpci AT veroudenniels prophylacticimpellacpversusvaecmoinpatientsundergoingcomplexhighriskindicatedpci AT napalex prophylacticimpellacpversusvaecmoinpatientsundergoingcomplexhighriskindicatedpci AT sjauwkrischan prophylacticimpellacpversusvaecmoinpatientsundergoingcomplexhighriskindicatedpci AT vandenbrinkfloriss prophylacticimpellacpversusvaecmoinpatientsundergoingcomplexhighriskindicatedpci |