Literature DB >> 20950980

The percutaneous ventricular assist device in severe refractory cardiogenic shock.

Biswajit Kar1, Igor D Gregoric, Sukhdeep S Basra, Gary M Idelchik, Pranav Loyalka.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of the percutaneous ventricular assist device (pVAD) in patients in severe refractory cardiogenic shock (SRCS) despite intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) and/or high-dose vasopressor support.
BACKGROUND: SRCS is associated with substantial mortality despite IABP counterpulsation. Until recently, there was no rapid, minimally invasive means of providing increased hemodynamic support in SRCS.
METHODS: A total of 117 patients with SRCS implanted with TandemHeart pVAD (CardiacAssist, Inc., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) were studied, of whom 56 patients (47.9%) underwent active cardiopulmonary resuscitation immediately before or at the time of implantation. Data was collected regarding clinical characteristics, hemodynamics, and laboratory values.
RESULTS: Eighty patients had ischemic and 37 patients had nonischemic cardiomyopathy. The average duration of support was 5.8 ± 4.75 days. After implantation, the cardiac index improved from median 0.52 (interquartile range [IQR]: 0.8) l/(min·m(2)) to 3.0 (IQR:0.9) l/(min·m(2)) (p < 0.001). The systolic blood pressure and mixed venous oxygen saturation increased from 75 (IQR:15) mm Hg to 100 (IQR:15) mm Hg (p < 0.001) and 49 (IQR:11.5) to 69.3 (IQR:10) (p < 0.001), respectively. The urine output increased from 70.7 (IQR: 70) ml/day to 1,200 (IQR: 1,620) ml/day (p < 0.001). The pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, lactic acid level, and creatinine level decreased, respectively, from 31.53 ± 10.2 mm Hg to 17.29 ± 10.82 mm Hg (p < 0.001), 24.5 (IQR: 74.25) mg/dl to 11 (IQR: 92) mg/dl (p < 0.001), and 1.5 (IQR: 0.95) mg/dl to 1.2 (IQR: 0.9) mg/dl (p = 0.009). The mortality rates at 30 days and 6 months were 40.2% and 45.3%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The pVAD rapidly reversed the terminal hemodynamic compromise seen in patients with SRCS refractory to IABP and vasopressor support.
Copyright © 2011 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20950980     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2010.08.613

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol        ISSN: 0735-1097            Impact factor:   24.094


  62 in total

1.  [Use of ECMO in adult patients with cardiogenic shock: a position paper of the Austrian Society of Cardiology].

Authors:  Philipp Pichler; Herwig Antretter; Martin Dünser; Stephan Eschertzhuber; Roman Gottardi; Gottfried Heinz; Gerhard Pölzl; Ingrid Pretsch; Angelika Rajek; Andrä Wasler; Daniel Zimpfer; Alexander Geppert
Journal:  Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 0.840

Review 2.  Options for temporary mechanical circulatory support.

Authors:  Areo Saffarzadeh; Pramod Bonde
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 2.895

3.  Intraaortic balloon counterpulsation and microcirculation in cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction: an IABP-SHOCK II substudy.

Authors:  Christian Jung; Georg Fuernau; Suzanne de Waha; Ingo Eitel; Steffen Desch; Gerhard Schuler; Hans R Figulla; Holger Thiele
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2015-02-27       Impact factor: 5.460

Review 4.  Management of refractory cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  Alex Reyentovich; Maya H Barghash; Judith S Hochman
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2016-06-30       Impact factor: 32.419

5.  Incidence and clinical outcomes of bleeding complications and acute limb ischemia in STEMI and cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  Mohit Pahuja; Sagar Ranka; Omar Chehab; Tushar Mishra; Emmanuel Akintoye; Oluwole Adegbala; Ahmed S Yassin; Tomo Ando; Katherine L Thayer; Palak Shah; Carey D Kimmelstiel; Payam Salehi; Navin K Kapur
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2020-05-30       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous ventricular assist device implantation for cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  David D Berg; Devraj Sukul; Molly O'Brien; Benjamin M Scirica; Piotr S Sobieszczyk; Benjamin A Olenchock; Erin A Bohula; David A Morrow
Journal:  Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care       Date:  2015-04-30

7.  Bridge-to-decision therapy with a continuous-flow external ventricular assist device in refractory cardiogenic shock of various causes.

Authors:  Hiroo Takayama; Lori Soni; Bindu Kalesan; Lauren K Truby; Takeyoshi Ota; Sophia Cedola; Zain Khalpey; Nir Uriel; Paolo Colombo; Donna M Mancini; Ulrich P Jorde; Yoshifumi Naka
Journal:  Circ Heart Fail       Date:  2014-07-15       Impact factor: 8.790

8.  [Use of ECMO in adult patients with cardiogenic shock: a position paper of the Austrian Society of Cardiology].

Authors:  Philipp Pichler; Herwig Antretter; Martin Dünser; Stephan Eschertzhuber; Roman Gottardi; Gottfried Heinz; Gerhard Pölzl; Ingrid Pretsch; Angelika Rajek; Andrä Wasler; Daniel Zimpfer; Alexander Geppert
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2015-03-28       Impact factor: 1.704

Review 9.  Defining the role for percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices for medically refractory heart failure.

Authors:  Navin K Kapur; Marwan F Jumean
Journal:  Curr Heart Fail Rep       Date:  2013-06

10.  Percutaneous Hemodynamic Support in PCI.

Authors:  Jason Hatch; Dmitri Baklanov
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2014-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.