Literature DB >> 27061705

Effectiveness and Safety of the Impella 5.0 as a Bridge to Cardiac Transplantation or Durable Left Ventricular Assist Device.

Brian Lima1, Parag Kale2, Gonzalo V Gonzalez-Stawinski3, Johannes J Kuiper2, Sandra Carey2, Shelley A Hall2.   

Abstract

Many patients with end-stage heart failure require mechanical circulatory support as a temporizing measure to enable multidisciplinary assessment for the most suitable therapeutic strategy. Impella 5.0 can be used as a bridge to decision to evaluate patients for potential recovery or bridge to next therapy (bridge to heart transplantation [BTHT] or bridge to durable left ventricular assist device or VAD [BLVAD]. Our goal was to examine single-center outcomes with the Impella 5.0 device as a bridge to next therapy (BTHT or BTLVAD). Forty patients underwent Impella 5.0 support from December 2009 to December 2015 with the intent of BTHT (n = 20) or BTLVAD (n = 20). The primary end point was survival to next therapy. Secondary end points included hemodynamic assessments and in-hospital/30-day complications. All patients were inotrope-dependent, with severely depressed left ventricular ejection fraction (12%) and renal insufficiency (creatinine 2.0 mg/dl). Most were Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) 2 (66%) with biventricular failure (65%). Thirty patients (75%) survived to next therapy, including transplant (n = 13), durable LVAD (n = 15), and recovery of native heart function (n = 2). No strokes or major bleeding events requiring surgery were observed. Acute renal dysfunction, bleeding requiring transfusion, hemolysis, device malfunction, limb ischemia occurred in 13 (33%), 11 (28%), 3 (8%), 4 (10%), and 1 (3%) patients, respectively. Survival rate to discharge and/or 30 days was 68% (27 of 40). Temporary support with the Impella 5.0 allows for an effective bridge to decision strategy for hemodynamic stabilization and multidisciplinary heart team assessment of critically ill patients with heart failure. In conclusion, many of these patients can be subsequently bridged to the next therapy with favorable outcomes.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27061705     DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2016.02.038

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cardiol        ISSN: 0002-9149            Impact factor:   2.778


  14 in total

1.  A case of Takotsubo cardiomyopathy with cardiogenic shock after influenza infection successfully recovered by IMPELLA support.

Authors:  Makiko Nakamura; Masaki Nakagaito; Masakazu Hori; Hiroshi Ueno; Koichiro Kinugawa
Journal:  J Artif Organs       Date:  2019-06-21       Impact factor: 1.731

Review 2.  Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices in Cardiogenic Shock.

Authors:  Aditya Mandawat; Sunil V Rao
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 6.546

3.  Sustained Use of the Impella 5.0 Heart Pump Enables Bridge to Clinical Decisions in 34 Patients.

Authors:  Daniel W Nelson; Sakthi Sundararajan; Evan Klein; Lyle D Joyce; Lucian A Durham; David L Joyce; Asim A Mohammed
Journal:  Tex Heart Inst J       Date:  2021-07-01

4.  Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump Bridging to Heart Transplantation: Impact of the 2018 Allocation Change.

Authors:  Lauren V Huckaby; Laura M Seese; Michael A Mathier; Gavin W Hickey; Arman Kilic
Journal:  Circ Heart Fail       Date:  2020-08-06       Impact factor: 8.790

5.  Transcaval access for the emergency delivery of 5.0 liters per minute mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  Majed Afana; Mahmoud Altawil; Mir Basir; Mohammad Alqarqaz; Khaldoon Alaswad; Marvin Eng; William W O'Neill; Robert J Lederman; Adam B Greenbaum
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2020-09-09       Impact factor: 2.585

6.  Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support for Refractory Cardiogenic Shock Before Left Ventricular Assist Device Surgery.

Authors:  Saraschandra Vallabhajosyula; Shilpkumar Arora; Sopan Lahewala; Varun Kumar; Ghanshyam P S Shantha; Jacob C Jentzer; John M Stulak; Bernard J Gersh; Rajiv Gulati; Charanjit S Rihal; Abhiram Prasad; Abhishek J Deshmukh
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2018-11-20       Impact factor: 5.501

Review 7.  Mechanical Circulatory Support in the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory for Cardiogenic Shock.

Authors:  Matt Ryan; Natalia Briceno; Divaka Perera
Journal:  Korean Circ J       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 3.243

8.  Impella CP use in patients with non-ischaemic cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  Octavian Maniuc; Tim Salinger; Fabian Anders; Jonas Müntze; Dan Liu; Kai Hu; Georg Ertl; Stefan Frantz; Peter Nordbeck
Journal:  ESC Heart Fail       Date:  2019-05-16

9.  A case of cardiogenic shock due to acute coronary syndrome successfully recovered by percutaneous and paracorporeal left ventricular assist device.

Authors:  Makiko Nakamura; Masakazu Hori; Masaki Nakagaito; Hiroyuki Kuwahara; Osamu Kinoshita; Minoru Ono; Shigeki Yokoyama; Toshio Doi; Kazuaki Fukahara; Koichiro Kinugawa
Journal:  J Artif Organs       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 1.731

10.  A novel catheter with retractable stent that can prevent aortic insufficiency during left ventricular assist.

Authors:  Jing Lin; Zhen Qin; Hong Qian; Yajiao Li; Nanfu Luo; Lei Du
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-04-02       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.