Literature DB >> 24522337

Percutaneous Hemodynamic Support in PCI.

Jason Hatch1, Dmitri Baklanov.   

Abstract

OPINION STATEMENT: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedures are attempted with increasingly frequency in hemodynamically unstable, high-risk, and complex patients. Hemodynamic support can be advantageous in select patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock. The need for hemodynamic support has recently shifted from patients with hemodynamic collapse to support of patients during high-risk complex PCI procedures during elective cases such as left main disease, multivessel disease, or low-flow heart failure. Currently, the three most common types of percutaneous hemodynamic support devices available in the United States are the intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) and the left ventricular assist devices TandemHeart and Impella. Each of these devices has its advantages and disadvantages, and an understanding of the role each plays in various pathophysiologic conditions is necessary, as this will assist the practitioner in making the correct decision as to which device will optimize patient outcomes. Recent studies have called into question the need for certain devices in specific situations. However, ongoing clinical trials will provide further insight into the comparative advantages and disadvantages of each and whether one or more is beneficial over another in reducing cardiovascular events and mortality. With continued refinements in device technology, technique, and application, it is anticipated that percutaneous device-based procedures will continue to improve patient outcomes in the most critically ill and highest-risk patients.

Entities:  

Year:  2014        PMID: 24522337     DOI: 10.1007/s11936-014-0293-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med        ISSN: 1092-8464


  41 in total

1.  Peripheral insertion techniques for the Impella 5.0 circulatory support system.

Authors:  Jamil Bashir; Matt Klas; Anson Cheung
Journal:  Innovations (Phila)       Date:  2010-09

2.  The changing paradigm of hemodynamic support device selection for high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions.

Authors:  Morton J Kern
Journal:  J Invasive Cardiol       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 2.022

3.  Diastolic balloon pumping (with carbon dioxide) in the aorta--a mechanical assistance to the failing circulation.

Authors:  S D MOULOPOULOS; S TOPAZ; W J KOLFF
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  1962-05       Impact factor: 4.749

4.  A prospective, randomized evaluation of prophylactic intraaortic balloon counterpulsation in high risk patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with primary angioplasty. Second Primary Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction (PAMI-II) Trial Investigators.

Authors:  G W Stone; D Marsalese; B R Brodie; J J Griffin; B Donohue; C Costantini; C Balestrini; T Wharton; P Esente; M Spain; J Moses; M Nobuyoshi; M Ayres; D Jones; D Mason; L Grines; W W O'Neill; C L Grines
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 24.094

Review 5.  The science behind percutaneous hemodynamic support: a review and comparison of support strategies.

Authors:  Daniel Burkhoff; Srihari S Naidu
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2012-04-18       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Randomized comparison of intra-aortic balloon support with a percutaneous left ventricular assist device in patients with revascularized acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  Holger Thiele; Peter Sick; Enno Boudriot; Klaus-Werner Diederich; Rainer Hambrecht; Josef Niebauer; Gerhard Schuler
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2005-02-25       Impact factor: 29.983

Review 7.  Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices vs. intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation for treatment of cardiogenic shock: a meta-analysis of controlled trials.

Authors:  Jin M Cheng; Corstiaan A den Uil; Sanne E Hoeks; Martin van der Ent; Lucia S D Jewbali; Ron T van Domburg; Patrick W Serruys
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2009-07-18       Impact factor: 29.983

8.  Feasibility and long-term safety of elective Impella-assisted high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: a pilot two-centre study.

Authors:  Francesco Burzotta; Leonardo Paloscia; Carlo Trani; Marco Mascellanti; Rocco Mongiardo; Guido Materazzo; Giampaolo Niccoli; Massimo Di Marco; Antonio Maria Leone; Italo Porto; Mario Attilio Mazzari; Antonio Giuseppe Rebuzzi; Giovanni Schiavoni; Filippo Crea
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown)       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 2.160

9.  Percutaneous closure of an iatrogenic atrial septal defect.

Authors:  James P Sur; Francis D Pagani; Mauro Moscucci
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2009-02-01       Impact factor: 2.692

10.  A randomized clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a percutaneous left ventricular assist device versus intra-aortic balloon pumping for treatment of cardiogenic shock caused by myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Melchior Seyfarth; Dirk Sibbing; Iris Bauer; Georg Fröhlich; Lorenz Bott-Flügel; Robert Byrne; Josef Dirschinger; Adnan Kastrati; Albert Schömig
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2008-11-04       Impact factor: 24.094

View more
  2 in total

1.  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

Review 2.  The evolution of temporary percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices: a review of the options and evidence in cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  Freddy Abnousi; Celina Mei Yong; William Fearon; Dipanjan Banerjee
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 2.931

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.