Literature DB >> 28419573

Impella 2.5 initiated prior to unprotected left main PCI in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock improves early survival.

Perwaiz M Meraj1, Rajkumar Doshi1, Theodore Schreiber2, Brijeshwar Maini3, William W O'Neill4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess post-procedural outcomes when Impella 2.5 percutaneous left ventricular assist device (pLVAD) support is initiated either prior to or after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) on unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) culprit lesion in the context of acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock (AMICS).
BACKGROUND: Initiation of Impella 2.5 pLVAD prior to PCI is associated with significant survival benefit in the setting of AMICS. Outcomes of those presenting with a ULMCA culprit lesion in this setting have not been well characterized.
METHODS: Thirty-six consecutive patients in the cVAD Registry supported with Impella 2.5 pLVAD for AMICS who underwent PCI on ULMCA culprit lesion were included in our multicenter study.
RESULTS: The average age was 69.8 ± 14.2 years, 77.8% were male, 72.7% were in CS at admission, 44.4% sustained one or multiple cardiac arrests, and 30.6% had anoxic brain injury. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the Pre-PCI group (n = 20) and Post-PCI group (n = 16). Non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction and greater coronary disease burden were significantly more frequent in the Pre-PCI group but they had significantly better survival to discharge (55.0% vs 18.8%, P = 0.041). Kaplan-Meier 30-day survival analysis showed very poor survival in Post-PCI group (48.1% vs 12.5%, Log-Rank P = 0.004).
CONCLUSIONS: Initiation of Impella 2.5 pLVAD prior to as compared with after PCI of ULMCA for AMICS culprit lesion is associated with significant early survival. As previously described, patients supported after PCI appear to have very poor survival at 30 days.
© 2017, Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Impella 2.5; acute myocardial infarction; anoxic brain injury; cardiogenic shock; percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI); unprotected left main coronary artery

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28419573     DOI: 10.1111/joic.12377

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Interv Cardiol        ISSN: 0896-4327            Impact factor:   2.279


  14 in total

1.  Acute Cardiac Unloading and Recovery: Proceedings of the 5th Annual Acute Cardiac Unloading and REcovery (A-CURE) symposium held on 14 December 2020.

Authors: 
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2021-03-23

2.  Use of Impella 2.5 in Patient with Multi-Vessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Cardiogenic Shock.

Authors:  Rajkumar Doshi; Rajiv Jauhar; Perwaiz Meraj
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2017-08-01

Review 3.  Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices for High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Authors:  Subrata Kar
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2018-01-19       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 4.  'Combat' Approach to Cardiogenic Shock.

Authors:  Alexander G Truesdell; Behnam Tehrani; Ramesh Singh; Shashank Desai; Patricia Saulino; Scott Barnett; Stephen Lavanier; Charles Murphy
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2018-05

Review 5.  When to Achieve Complete Revascularization in Infarct-Related Cardiogenic Shock.

Authors:  Giulia Masiero; Francesco Cardaioli; Giulio Rodinò; Giuseppe Tarantini
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-05-31       Impact factor: 4.964

Review 6.  Mechanical Circulatory Support for Acute Heart Failure Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock.

Authors:  Min Suk Choi; Hunbo Shim; Yang Hyun Cho
Journal:  Int J Heart Fail       Date:  2020-01-22

7.  Trends, etiologies, and predictors of 90-day readmission after percutaneous ventricular assist device implantation: A national population-based cohort study.

Authors:  Hafeez Ul Hassan Virk; Byomesh Tripathi; Shuchita Gupta; Akanksha Agrawal; Sandeep Dayanand; Faisal Inayat; Chayakrit Krittanawong; Ali Raza Ghani; Mohammad Nour Zabad; Parasuram Melarcode Krishnamoorthy; Aman Amanullah; Gregg Pressman; Christian Witzke; Sean Janzer; Jon George; Sanjog Kalra; Vincent Figueredo
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2018-05-10       Impact factor: 2.882

Review 8.  Acute mechanical circulatory support for cardiogenic shock: the "door to support" time.

Authors:  Michele L Esposito; Navin K Kapur
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2017-05-22

9.  Influence of Timing and Predicted Risk on Mortality in Impella-Treated Infarct-Related Cardiogenic Shock Patients.

Authors:  Andreas Schäfer; Nikos Werner; Daniel Burkhoff; Jan-Thorben Sieweke; Andreas Zietzer; Maryna Masyuk; Nanna Louise Junker Udesen; Ralf Westenfeld; Jacob Eifer Møller
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2020-05-14

10.  Complete Revascularisation in Impella-Supported Infarct-Related Cardiogenic Shock Patients Is Associated With Improved Mortality.

Authors:  Andreas Schäfer; Ralf Westenfeld; Jan-Thorben Sieweke; Andreas Zietzer; Julian Wiora; Giulia Masiero; Carolina Sanchez Martinez; Giuseppe Tarantini; Nikos Werner
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2021-07-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.