Cargando…

Mechanical Assist Device-Assisted Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The Use of Impella Versus Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation as an Emerging Frontier in Revascularization in Cardiogenic Shock

The extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) procedure aids in the provision of prolonged cardiopulmonary support, whereas the Impella device (Abiomed, Danvers, MA) is a ventricular assist device that maintains circulation by pumping blood into the aorta from the left ventricle. Blood is circulate...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vora, Neel, Chaudhary, Rajvi, Upadhyay, Hetarth Vivek, Konat, Ashwati, Zalavadia, Parit, Padaniya, Arif, Patel, Parth, Patel, Nihar, Prajjwal, Priyadarshi, Sharma, Kamal
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cureus 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9898582/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36751242
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.33372
_version_ 1784882455782621184
author Vora, Neel
Chaudhary, Rajvi
Upadhyay, Hetarth Vivek
Konat, Ashwati
Zalavadia, Parit
Padaniya, Arif
Patel, Parth
Patel, Nihar
Prajjwal, Priyadarshi
Sharma, Kamal
author_facet Vora, Neel
Chaudhary, Rajvi
Upadhyay, Hetarth Vivek
Konat, Ashwati
Zalavadia, Parit
Padaniya, Arif
Patel, Parth
Patel, Nihar
Prajjwal, Priyadarshi
Sharma, Kamal
author_sort Vora, Neel
collection PubMed
description The extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) procedure aids in the provision of prolonged cardiopulmonary support, whereas the Impella device (Abiomed, Danvers, MA) is a ventricular assist device that maintains circulation by pumping blood into the aorta from the left ventricle. Blood is circulated in parallel with the heart by Impella. It draws blood straight into the aorta from the left ventricle, hence preserving the physiological flow. ECMO bypasses the left atrium and the left ventricle, and the end consequence is a non-physiological flow. In this article, we conducted a detailed analysis of various publications in the literature and examined various modalities pertaining to the use of ECMO and Impella for cardiogenic shocks, such as efficacy, clinical outcomes, cost-effectiveness, device-related complications, and limitations. The Impella completely unloads the left ventricle, thereby significantly reducing the effort of the heart. Comparatively, ECMO only stabilizes a patient with cardiogenic shock for a short stretch of time and does not lessen the efforts of the left ventricle ("unload" it). In the acute setting, both devices reduced left ventricular end-diastolic pressure and provided adequate hemodynamic support. By comparing patients on Impella to those receiving ECMO, it was found that patients on Impella were associated with better clinical results, quicker recovery, limited complications, and reduced healthcare costs; however, there is a lack of conclusive studies performed demonstrating the reduction in long-term mortality rates. Considering the effectiveness of given modalities and taking into account the various studies described in the literature, Impella has reported better clinical outcomes although more clinical trials are needed for establishing the effectiveness of these interventional approaches in revascularization in cardiogenic shock.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9898582
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Cureus
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98985822023-02-06 Mechanical Assist Device-Assisted Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The Use of Impella Versus Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation as an Emerging Frontier in Revascularization in Cardiogenic Shock Vora, Neel Chaudhary, Rajvi Upadhyay, Hetarth Vivek Konat, Ashwati Zalavadia, Parit Padaniya, Arif Patel, Parth Patel, Nihar Prajjwal, Priyadarshi Sharma, Kamal Cureus Cardiac/Thoracic/Vascular Surgery The extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) procedure aids in the provision of prolonged cardiopulmonary support, whereas the Impella device (Abiomed, Danvers, MA) is a ventricular assist device that maintains circulation by pumping blood into the aorta from the left ventricle. Blood is circulated in parallel with the heart by Impella. It draws blood straight into the aorta from the left ventricle, hence preserving the physiological flow. ECMO bypasses the left atrium and the left ventricle, and the end consequence is a non-physiological flow. In this article, we conducted a detailed analysis of various publications in the literature and examined various modalities pertaining to the use of ECMO and Impella for cardiogenic shocks, such as efficacy, clinical outcomes, cost-effectiveness, device-related complications, and limitations. The Impella completely unloads the left ventricle, thereby significantly reducing the effort of the heart. Comparatively, ECMO only stabilizes a patient with cardiogenic shock for a short stretch of time and does not lessen the efforts of the left ventricle ("unload" it). In the acute setting, both devices reduced left ventricular end-diastolic pressure and provided adequate hemodynamic support. By comparing patients on Impella to those receiving ECMO, it was found that patients on Impella were associated with better clinical results, quicker recovery, limited complications, and reduced healthcare costs; however, there is a lack of conclusive studies performed demonstrating the reduction in long-term mortality rates. Considering the effectiveness of given modalities and taking into account the various studies described in the literature, Impella has reported better clinical outcomes although more clinical trials are needed for establishing the effectiveness of these interventional approaches in revascularization in cardiogenic shock. Cureus 2023-01-04 /pmc/articles/PMC9898582/ /pubmed/36751242 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.33372 Text en Copyright © 2023, Vora et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Cardiac/Thoracic/Vascular Surgery
Vora, Neel
Chaudhary, Rajvi
Upadhyay, Hetarth Vivek
Konat, Ashwati
Zalavadia, Parit
Padaniya, Arif
Patel, Parth
Patel, Nihar
Prajjwal, Priyadarshi
Sharma, Kamal
Mechanical Assist Device-Assisted Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The Use of Impella Versus Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation as an Emerging Frontier in Revascularization in Cardiogenic Shock
title Mechanical Assist Device-Assisted Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The Use of Impella Versus Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation as an Emerging Frontier in Revascularization in Cardiogenic Shock
title_full Mechanical Assist Device-Assisted Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The Use of Impella Versus Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation as an Emerging Frontier in Revascularization in Cardiogenic Shock
title_fullStr Mechanical Assist Device-Assisted Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The Use of Impella Versus Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation as an Emerging Frontier in Revascularization in Cardiogenic Shock
title_full_unstemmed Mechanical Assist Device-Assisted Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The Use of Impella Versus Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation as an Emerging Frontier in Revascularization in Cardiogenic Shock
title_short Mechanical Assist Device-Assisted Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The Use of Impella Versus Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation as an Emerging Frontier in Revascularization in Cardiogenic Shock
title_sort mechanical assist device-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention: the use of impella versus extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as an emerging frontier in revascularization in cardiogenic shock
topic Cardiac/Thoracic/Vascular Surgery
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9898582/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36751242
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.33372
work_keys_str_mv AT voraneel mechanicalassistdeviceassistedpercutaneouscoronaryinterventiontheuseofimpellaversusextracorporealmembraneoxygenationasanemergingfrontierinrevascularizationincardiogenicshock
AT chaudharyrajvi mechanicalassistdeviceassistedpercutaneouscoronaryinterventiontheuseofimpellaversusextracorporealmembraneoxygenationasanemergingfrontierinrevascularizationincardiogenicshock
AT upadhyayhetarthvivek mechanicalassistdeviceassistedpercutaneouscoronaryinterventiontheuseofimpellaversusextracorporealmembraneoxygenationasanemergingfrontierinrevascularizationincardiogenicshock
AT konatashwati mechanicalassistdeviceassistedpercutaneouscoronaryinterventiontheuseofimpellaversusextracorporealmembraneoxygenationasanemergingfrontierinrevascularizationincardiogenicshock
AT zalavadiaparit mechanicalassistdeviceassistedpercutaneouscoronaryinterventiontheuseofimpellaversusextracorporealmembraneoxygenationasanemergingfrontierinrevascularizationincardiogenicshock
AT padaniyaarif mechanicalassistdeviceassistedpercutaneouscoronaryinterventiontheuseofimpellaversusextracorporealmembraneoxygenationasanemergingfrontierinrevascularizationincardiogenicshock
AT patelparth mechanicalassistdeviceassistedpercutaneouscoronaryinterventiontheuseofimpellaversusextracorporealmembraneoxygenationasanemergingfrontierinrevascularizationincardiogenicshock
AT patelnihar mechanicalassistdeviceassistedpercutaneouscoronaryinterventiontheuseofimpellaversusextracorporealmembraneoxygenationasanemergingfrontierinrevascularizationincardiogenicshock
AT prajjwalpriyadarshi mechanicalassistdeviceassistedpercutaneouscoronaryinterventiontheuseofimpellaversusextracorporealmembraneoxygenationasanemergingfrontierinrevascularizationincardiogenicshock
AT sharmakamal mechanicalassistdeviceassistedpercutaneouscoronaryinterventiontheuseofimpellaversusextracorporealmembraneoxygenationasanemergingfrontierinrevascularizationincardiogenicshock