Literature DB >> 31028475

Real-world clinical experience with the percutaneous extracorporeal life support system: Results from the German Lifebridge® Registry.

Maryna Masyuk1, Peter Abel2, Martin Hug3, Bernhard Wernly4, Assad Haneya5, Stefan Sack6, Konstantinos Sideris7, Nicolas Langwieser8, Tobias Graf9, Georg Fuernau9, Marcus Franz10, Ralf Westenfeld1, Malte Kelm1,11, Stephan B Felix2,12, Christian Jung13.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The concept of percutaneous extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is based on immediate cardiovascular stabilization allowing for sufficient end-organ perfusion, thus improving the outcome in patients with circulatory arrest. Lifebridge® (Zoll Medical GmbH, Germany) is a portable ECLS device designed for rapid application due to its automated set-up.
METHODS: A total of 60 tertiary cardiovascular centers were interrogated with regard to application and short-term results after use of Lifebridge ECLS system. Detailed data were collected by standardized case report forms in all centers consented to participate in the study. Demographic and clinical baseline characteristics of the patient population, procedural and follow-up data were recorded and analyzed.
RESULTS: In total, 444 patients were analyzed regarding mortality. The detailed study cohort consisted of 112 patients. A total of 80% of the study subjects represented patients post cardiopulmonary resuscitation, 43% were in cardiogenic shock and 50% suffered from acute myocardial infarction. The survival rates were 36% immediately after device implementation and 16% after 30 days. Multivariable analysis revealed that only serum lactate concentration at admission could be proven as independent predictor of patients' outcome. Patients with lactate concentrations above 10 mmol/L exhibited > 95% mortality (p < 0.05 versus below 10 mmol/L).
CONCLUSION: The present study provides real-world clinical data of patients treated with a transportable automated ECLS system. In conclusion, Lifebridge is a safely applicable cardiorespiratory stabilization tool associated with acceptable complication rates. Nevertheless, mortality rates were high in these critically ill patients, especially in those showing high lactate concentrations at admission.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cardiac arrest; Cardiogenic shock; ECLS; Extracorporeal life support; Mechanical circulatory support

Year:  2019        PMID: 31028475     DOI: 10.1007/s00392-019-01482-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol        ISSN: 1861-0684            Impact factor:   5.460


  35 in total

1.  Percutaneous extracorporeal life support in patients with circulatory failure: results of the German Lifebridge Registry.

Authors:  Christian Jung; Marcus Franz; Hans-Rainer Figulla; Steffen Sonntag; Martin Hug; Harald Mudra; Robert Bauerschmitt; Franz-Xaver Kleber; Peter Feindt; Uwe Mehlhorn; Christian Vahl; Hans-Juergen Bruns; Markus Ferrari
Journal:  J Invasive Cardiol       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 2.022

Review 2.  Mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  Karl Werdan; Stephan Gielen; Henning Ebelt; Judith S Hochman
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2013-09-07       Impact factor: 29.983

3.  Unloading of the Left Ventricle During Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Therapy in Cardiogenic Shock.

Authors:  Benedikt Schrage; Daniel Burkhoff; Nicole Rübsamen; Peter Moritz Becher; Michael Schwarzl; Alexander Bernhardt; Hanno Grahn; Edith Lubos; Gerold Söffker; Peter Clemmensen; Hermann Reichenspurner; Stefan Blankenberg; Dirk Westermann
Journal:  JACC Heart Fail       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 12.035

4.  A prospective, randomized clinical trial of hemodynamic support with Impella 2.5 versus intra-aortic balloon pump in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: the PROTECT II study.

Authors:  William W O'Neill; Neal S Kleiman; Jeffrey Moses; Jose P S Henriques; Simon Dixon; Joseph Massaro; Igor Palacios; Brijeshwar Maini; Suresh Mulukutla; Vladimír Dzavík; Jeffrey Popma; Pamela S Douglas; Magnus Ohman
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2012-08-30       Impact factor: 29.690

5.  The changing landscape of advanced heart failure therapeutics.

Authors:  Joseph G Rogers; Christopher M O'Connor
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2014-10-07       Impact factor: 24.094

6.  Practical Use of Lactate Levels in the Intensive Care.

Authors:  Eva E Vink; Jan Bakker
Journal:  J Intensive Care Med       Date:  2017-05-10       Impact factor: 3.510

7.  Thirty-year trends (1975 to 2005) in the magnitude of, management of, and hospital death rates associated with cardiogenic shock in patients with acute myocardial infarction: a population-based perspective.

Authors:  Robert J Goldberg; Frederick A Spencer; Joel M Gore; Darleen Lessard; Jorge Yarzebski
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2009-02-23       Impact factor: 29.690

8.  Early revascularization is associated with improved survival in elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: a report from the SHOCK Trial Registry.

Authors:  V Dzavik; L A Sleeper; T P Cocke; M Moscucci; J Saucedo; S Hosat; X Jiang; J Slater; T LeJemtel; J S Hochman
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 29.983

9.  2017 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation: The Task Force for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC).

Authors:  Borja Ibanez; Stefan James; Stefan Agewall; Manuel J Antunes; Chiara Bucciarelli-Ducci; Héctor Bueno; Alida L P Caforio; Filippo Crea; John A Goudevenos; Sigrun Halvorsen; Gerhard Hindricks; Adnan Kastrati; Mattie J Lenzen; Eva Prescott; Marco Roffi; Marco Valgimigli; Christoph Varenhorst; Pascal Vranckx; Petr Widimský
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2018-01-07       Impact factor: 29.983

Review 10.  Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  Holger Thiele; Richard W Smalling; Gerhard C Schuler
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2007-06-22       Impact factor: 29.983

View more
  4 in total

1.  Outcomes of Transferred Adult Venovenous and Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Patients: A Single Center Experience.

Authors:  Yang-Chao Zhao; Xi Zhao; Guo-Wei Fu; Ming-Jun Huang; Hui Zhao; Zhen-Qing Wang; Xing-Xing Li; Jun Li
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-06-13

Review 2.  Utilization of Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices in Cardiogenic Shock Complicating Acute Myocardial Infarction and High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Interventions.

Authors:  Rabea Asleh; Jon R Resar
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2019-08-13       Impact factor: 4.241

3.  Association between serum lactate levels and mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock receiving mechanical circulatory support: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Fernando Luís Scolari; Daniel Schneider; Débora Vacaro Fogazzi; Miguel Gus; Marciane Maria Rover; Marcely Gimenes Bonatto; Gustavo Neves de Araújo; André Zimerman; Daniel Sganzerla; Lívia Adams Goldraich; Cassiano Teixeira; Gilberto Friedman; Carisi Anne Polanczyk; Luis Eduardo Rohde; Regis Goulart Rosa; Rodrigo Vugman Wainstein
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2020-11-24       Impact factor: 2.298

4.  Impella versus extracorporal life support in cardiogenic shock: a propensity score adjusted analysis.

Authors:  Bernhard Wernly; Mina Karami; Annemarie E Engström; Stephan Windecker; Lukas Hunziker; Thomas F Lüscher; Jose P Henriques; Markus W Ferrari; Stephan Binnebößel; Maryna Masyuk; David Niederseer; Peter Abel; Georg Fuernau; Marcus Franz; Malte Kelm; Mathias C Busch; Stephan B Felix; Holger Thiele; Alexander Lauten; Christian Jung
Journal:  ESC Heart Fail       Date:  2021-02-09
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.