Prophylactic use of intra-aortic balloon pump for high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: will the Impella LP 2.5 device show superiority in a clinical randomized study?
- PMID: 20347798
- DOI: 10.1016/j.carrev.2009.07.006
Prophylactic use of intra-aortic balloon pump for high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: will the Impella LP 2.5 device show superiority in a clinical randomized study?
Erratum in
- Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2011 Jan-Feb;12(1):72. Karkar, Amit [corrected to Kakkar, Amit]
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to report the in-hospital and 30-day event rates in patients undergoing non-emergent, high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and to evaluate whether the Impella Recover LP 2.5 device (Abiomed, Danvers, MA) demonstrates superiority over intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) in the Protect II (A Prospective Feasibility Trial Investigating the Use of the Impella Recover LP 2.5 System in Patients Undergoing High Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) study.
Background: Patients undergoing non-emergent, high-risk PCI are often treated with prophylactic IABP for hemodynamic support.
Methods: A cohort of 85 patients who met the inclusion/exclusion criteria of the Protect II study was included in this retrospective analysis. High-risk PCI was defined as intervention to the last patent coronary conduit or to an unprotected left main or in a patient with three-vessel disease with an ejection fraction of <or=35%. Patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (MI), cardiac arrest within 24 h, or cardiogenic shock were excluded. The primary end point was the composite of death, MI, stroke, transient ischemic attack, repeat revascularization, renal failure, severe hypotension, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, ventricular arrhythmias requiring intervention, and angiographic failure at 30 days.
Results: The overall in-hospital and 30-day event rates were low (15.3% and 21.3%, respectively) with a low major vascular complication rate (5.9%). Therefore, for the Impella Recover LP 2.5 device to demonstrate superiority over IABP with a treatment effect of 33.3% and 80% power, the Protect II trial will require a total of 908 patients. With the current sample size of 654 patients, the Protect II trial is underpowered, with only 66% power.
Conclusion: These data question the clinical benefit of the Protect II study, which is evaluating the relatively high-profile Impella LP 2.5 device over IABP for this high-risk population.
Similar articles
-
A prospective feasibility trial investigating the use of the Impella 2.5 system in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (The PROTECT I Trial): initial U.S. experience.JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2009 Feb;2(2):91-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2008.11.005. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2009. PMID: 19463408
-
Impact of hemodynamic support with Impella 2.5 versus intra-aortic balloon pump on prognostically important clinical outcomes in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (from the PROTECT II randomized trial).Am J Cardiol. 2014 Jan 15;113(2):222-8. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2013.09.008. Am J Cardiol. 2014. PMID: 24527505 Clinical Trial.
-
Angiographic Characteristics and Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease Undergoing Impella-Supported High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From the cVAD PROTECT III Study.Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2024 Jul;17(7):e013503. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.123.013503. Epub 2024 May 6. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2024. PMID: 38708609 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Devices: A Health Technology Assessment.Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2017 Feb 7;17(2):1-97. eCollection 2017. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2017. PMID: 28232854 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices for High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.Curr Cardiol Rep. 2018 Jan 19;20(1):2. doi: 10.1007/s11886-018-0946-2. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2018. PMID: 29350305 Review.
Cited by
-
Case series of high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention with rotational atherectomy under short-term mechanical circulatory support with TandemHeart in the setting of acute myocardial infarction.Eur Heart J Case Rep. 2020 Sep 16;4(4):1-6. doi: 10.1093/ehjcr/ytaa219. eCollection 2020 Aug. Eur Heart J Case Rep. 2020. PMID: 33426433 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous