M Derwall1, A Moza2, A Brücken3. 1. Klinik für Operative Intensivmedizin und Intermediate Care, Medizinische Fakultät RWTH Aachen, Uniklinik RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstraße 30, 52074, Aachen, Deutschland. mderwall@ukaachen.de. 2. Klinik für Thorax‑, Herz- und Gefäßchirurgie, Medizinische Fakultät RWTH Aachen, Uniklinik RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Deutschland. 3. Klinik für Operative Intensivmedizin und Intermediate Care, Medizinische Fakultät RWTH Aachen, Uniklinik RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstraße 30, 52074, Aachen, Deutschland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: After exhaustion of all conservative measures in the treatment of acute and chronic heart insufficiency, there is the possibility to temporarily or permanently support or replace the pump performance of the heart by mechanical circulatory support (MCS) systems. OBJECTIVE: Presentation of the most important cardiac support systems for intensive care medicine, their indications and important risk factors. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Critical review of device manufacturer's specifications, current research and expert opinions. RESULTS: The spectrum of available MCS procedures include mechanical chest compression devices, catheter-based micropumps and complete artificial hearts. Device selection depends on the severity of heart failure (monoventricular or biventricular pump failure), the expected duration of treatment and the degree of lung function impairment. The decision between minimally invasive and open surgical procedures depends on the options established at the specific healthcare institution and whether the heart function is to be temporarily or permanently replaced. Compliance with the anticoagulation regimens defined by the manufacturer is especially important as they differ vastly between devices and are critical to avoid bleeding or thromboembolic complications. CONCLUSION: Due to the increasing number of patients on long-term mechanical circulatory support, the chances are that physicians in the initial emergency admission are unfamiliar with these devices but need to operate them in emergency cases. Therefore, knowledge of these procedures and their complications becomes increasingly important.
BACKGROUND: After exhaustion of all conservative measures in the treatment of acute and chronic heart insufficiency, there is the possibility to temporarily or permanently support or replace the pump performance of the heart by mechanical circulatory support (MCS) systems. OBJECTIVE: Presentation of the most important cardiac support systems for intensive care medicine, their indications and important risk factors. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Critical review of device manufacturer's specifications, current research and expert opinions. RESULTS: The spectrum of available MCS procedures include mechanical chest compression devices, catheter-based micropumps and complete artificial hearts. Device selection depends on the severity of heart failure (monoventricular or biventricular pump failure), the expected duration of treatment and the degree of lung function impairment. The decision between minimally invasive and open surgical procedures depends on the options established at the specific healthcare institution and whether the heart function is to be temporarily or permanently replaced. Compliance with the anticoagulation regimens defined by the manufacturer is especially important as they differ vastly between devices and are critical to avoid bleeding or thromboembolic complications. CONCLUSION: Due to the increasing number of patients on long-term mechanical circulatory support, the chances are that physicians in the initial emergency admission are unfamiliar with these devices but need to operate them in emergency cases. Therefore, knowledge of these procedures and their complications becomes increasingly important.
Authors: Jennifer L Peura; Monica Colvin-Adams; Gary S Francis; Kathleen L Grady; Timothy M Hoffman; Mariell Jessup; Ranjit John; Michael S Kiernan; Judith E Mitchell; John B O'Connell; Francis D Pagani; Michael Petty; Pasala Ravichandran; Joseph G Rogers; Marc J Semigran; J Matthew Toole Journal: Circulation Date: 2012-10-29 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: David Feldman; Salpy V Pamboukian; Jeffrey J Teuteberg; Emma Birks; Katherine Lietz; Stephanie A Moore; Jeffrey A Morgan; Francisco Arabia; Mary E Bauman; Hoger W Buchholz; Mario Deng; Marc L Dickstein; Aly El-Banayosy; Tonya Elliot; Daniel J Goldstein; Kathleen L Grady; Kylie Jones; Katarzyna Hryniewicz; Ranjit John; Annemarie Kaan; Shimon Kusne; Matthias Loebe; M Patricia Massicotte; Nader Moazami; Paul Mohacsi; Martha Mooney; Thomas Nelson; Francis Pagani; William Perry; Evgenij V Potapov; J Eduardo Rame; Stuart D Russell; Erik N Sorensen; Benjamin Sun; Martin Strueber; Abeel A Mangi; Michael G Petty; Joseph Rogers Journal: J Heart Lung Transplant Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 10.247
Authors: N J Lees; Ajp Rosenberg; A I Hurtado-Doce; J Jones; N Marczin; M Zeriouh; A Weymann; A Sabashnikov; A R Simon; A F Popov Journal: J Artif Organs Date: 2016-07-19 Impact factor: 1.731
Authors: Piotr Ponikowski; Adriaan A Voors; Stefan D Anker; Héctor Bueno; John G F Cleland; Andrew J S Coats; Volkmar Falk; José Ramón González-Juanatey; Veli-Pekka Harjola; Ewa A Jankowska; Mariell Jessup; Cecilia Linde; Petros Nihoyannopoulos; John T Parissis; Burkert Pieske; Jillian P Riley; Giuseppe M C Rosano; Luis M Ruilope; Frank Ruschitzka; Frans H Rutten; Peter van der Meer Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2016-05-20 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: William W O'Neill; Theodore Schreiber; David H W Wohns; Charanjit Rihal; Srihari S Naidu; Andrew B Civitello; Simon R Dixon; Joseph M Massaro; Brijeshwar Maini; E Magnus Ohman Journal: J Interv Cardiol Date: 2013-12-13 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Kevin Pilarczyk; Udo Boeken; Andreas Beckmann; Andreas Markewitz; P Christian Schulze; Martin Pin; Ingo Gräff; Sebastian Schmidt; Birk Runge; Hans-Jörg Busch; Michael R Preusch; Nils Haake; Gereon Schälte; Jan Gummert; Guido Michels Journal: Anaesthesist Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 1.041