K Lackermair1, S Sattler2, B C Huber3, U Grabmaier4, L T Weckbach3, A Bauer4, H D Theiss3, J Hausleiter4, J Mehilli4, S Massberg4, S Brunner3. 1. Department of Cardiology, Munich University Clinic, Ludwig-Maximilians University, Munich, Germany. Electronic address: Korbinian.Lackermair@med.uni-muenchen.de. 2. Department of Cardiology, Munich University Clinic, Ludwig-Maximilians University, Munich, Germany; Department of Cardiology, The Heart Centre, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark. 3. Department of Cardiology, Munich University Clinic, Ludwig-Maximilians University, Munich, Germany. 4. Department of Cardiology, Munich University Clinic, Ludwig-Maximilians University, Munich, Germany; Munich Heart Alliance, Deutsches Zentrum für Herz-Kreislauf-Forschung E.V., Munich, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In cardiogenic shock (CS) the Impella CP® device provides a fast available left ventricular circulatory support of up to 4.0L/min. However, the use of the Impella CP® device was not systematically analysed yet. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 28 consecutive patients suffering from severe therapy refractory CS treated with Impella CP®. Mortality was estimated using the SAPS II-Score. Primary outcome was 30-day survival. We compared the different aetiologies of CS and the effect of additional extracorporeal life support (ECLS). RESULTS: Aetiology of CS was acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in 15 patients, 9 patients received additional therapy with ECLS. SAPS II was 73±14, representing an estimated mortality of 87.1%. 18 patients deceased representing a 30-day survival of 36%. Comparing the different aetiologies, ACS-CS patients show a trend towards better survival. Additional therapy with ECLS did not change 30-day survival. In 3 cases, vascular complication needing surgical treatment occurred. All other patients showed no relevant complications except for the commonly seen haemolysis with consecutive need of transfusion. CONCLUSION: Our data could demonstrate that the Impella CP® application in these severely diseased patients is feasible and safe. Compared to the estimated mortality, the 30-day survival seems to be improved.
BACKGROUND: In cardiogenic shock (CS) the Impella CP® device provides a fast available left ventricular circulatory support of up to 4.0L/min. However, the use of the Impella CP® device was not systematically analysed yet. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 28 consecutive patients suffering from severe therapy refractory CS treated with Impella CP®. Mortality was estimated using the SAPS II-Score. Primary outcome was 30-day survival. We compared the different aetiologies of CS and the effect of additional extracorporeal life support (ECLS). RESULTS: Aetiology of CS was acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in 15 patients, 9 patients received additional therapy with ECLS. SAPS II was 73±14, representing an estimated mortality of 87.1%. 18 patients deceased representing a 30-day survival of 36%. Comparing the different aetiologies, ACS-CS patients show a trend towards better survival. Additional therapy with ECLS did not change 30-day survival. In 3 cases, vascular complication needing surgical treatment occurred. All other patients showed no relevant complications except for the commonly seen haemolysis with consecutive need of transfusion. CONCLUSION: Our data could demonstrate that the Impella CP® application in these severely diseased patients is feasible and safe. Compared to the estimated mortality, the 30-day survival seems to be improved.
Authors: Dagmar M Ouweneel; Justin de Brabander; Mina Karami; Krischan D Sjauw; Annemarie E Engström; M Marije Vis; Joanna J Wykrzykowska; Marcel A Beijk; Karel T Koch; Jan Baan; Robbert J de Winter; Jan J Piek; Wim K Lagrand; Thomas Gv Cherpanath; Antoine Hg Driessen; Riccardo Cocchieri; Bas Ajm de Mol; Jan Gp Tijssen; José Ps Henriques Journal: Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care Date: 2018-11-07
Authors: Khaled Q A Abdullah; Jana V Roedler; Juergen Vom Dahl; Istvan Szendey; Hendrik Haake; Lars Eckardt; Albert Topf; Bernhard Ohnewein; Peter Jirak; Lukas J Motloch; Bernhard Wernly; Robert Larbig Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-02-26 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Clemens Scherer; Enzo Lüsebrink; Danny Kupka; Thomas J Stocker; Konstantin Stark; Christopher Stremmel; Mathias Orban; Tobias Petzold; Antonia Germayer; Katharina Mauthe; Stefan Kääb; Julinda Mehilli; Daniel Braun; Hans Theiss; Stefan Brunner; Jörg Hausleiter; Steffen Massberg; Martin Orban Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2020-11-24 Impact factor: 4.241