Management and outcome of patients supported with Impella 5.0 for refractory cardiogenic shock
- PMID: 26453047
- PMCID: PMC4600310
- DOI: 10.1186/s13054-015-1073-8
Management and outcome of patients supported with Impella 5.0 for refractory cardiogenic shock
Abstract
Introduction: Cardiogenic shock refractory to standard therapy with inotropes and/or intra-aortic balloon pump is accompanied with an unacceptable high mortality. Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices may provide a survival benefit for these very sick patients. In this study, we describe our experience with the Impella 5.0 device used in the setting of refractory cardiogenic shock.
Methods: In this observational, retrospective, single-center study we included all the consecutive patients supported with Impella 5.0, between May 2008 and December 2013, for refractory cardiogenic shock. Patients' baseline and procedural characteristics, hemodynamics and outcome to the first 48 h of support, to ICU discharge and day-28 visit were collected.
Results: A total of 40 patients were included in the study. Median age was 57 years and 87.5 % were male. Cardiogenic shock resulted from acute myocardial infarction in 17 patients (43 %), dilated cardiomyopathy in 12 (30 %) and postcardiotomy cardiac failure in 7 (18 %). In 15 patients Impella 5.0 was added to an ECMO to unload the left ventricle. The median SOFA score for the entire cohort prior to circulatory support was 12 [10-14] and the duration of Impella support was 7 [5-10] days. We observed a significant decrease of the inotrope score (10 [1-17] vs. 1 [0-9]; p = 0.04) and the lactate values (3.8 [1.7-5.9] mmol/L vs. 2.5 [1.5-3.4] mmol/L; p = 0.01) after 6 h of support with Impella 5.0. Furthermore, at Impella removal the patients' left ventricular ejection fraction improved significantly (p < 0.001) when compared to baseline. Cardiac recovery, bridge to left ventricular assist device or heart transplantation was possible in 28 patients (70 %). Twenty-six patients (65 %) survived at day 28. A multivariate analysis showed a higher risk of mortality for patients with acute myocardial infarction (hazard ratio = 4.1 (1.2-14.2); p = 0.02).
Conclusions: Impella 5.0 allowed fast weaning of inotropes and might facilitate myocardial recovery. Despite high severity scores at admission, day-28 mortality rate was better than predicated.
Figures




Similar articles
-
Percutaneous left-ventricular support with the Impella-2.5-assist device in acute cardiogenic shock: results of the Impella-EUROSHOCK-registry.Circ Heart Fail. 2013 Jan;6(1):23-30. doi: 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.112.967224. Epub 2012 Dec 4. Circ Heart Fail. 2013. PMID: 23212552 Clinical Trial.
-
Outcome of the impella device for acute mechanical circulatory support.Innovations (Phila). 2013 Jan-Feb;8(1):12-6. doi: 10.1097/IMI.0b013e31828e0a8a. Innovations (Phila). 2013. PMID: 23571788
-
Mechanical circulatory support with the Impella 5.0 device for postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock: a three-center experience.Minerva Cardioangiol. 2013 Oct;61(5):539-46. Minerva Cardioangiol. 2013. PMID: 24096248
-
Outcomes of Impella 5.0 in Cardiogenic Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Innovations (Phila). 2018 Jul/Aug;13(4):254-260. doi: 10.1097/IMI.0000000000000535. Innovations (Phila). 2018. PMID: 30142110
-
Percutaneous Transvalvular Microaxial Flow Pump Support in Cardiology.Circulation. 2022 Apr 19;145(16):1254-1284. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.058229. Epub 2022 Apr 18. Circulation. 2022. PMID: 35436135 Review.
Cited by
-
Effect of Atrioventricular Dyssynchrony on Impella Hemodynamics: Mechanism and Its Clinical Implications.Cardiol Res. 2021 Aug;12(4):219-224. doi: 10.14740/cr1287. Epub 2021 Jul 9. Cardiol Res. 2021. PMID: 34349862 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Clinical outcomes and predictors of success with Impella weaning in cardiogenic shock: a single-center experience.Front Cardiovasc Med. 2023 Jun 21;10:1171956. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2023.1171956. eCollection 2023. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2023. PMID: 37416919 Free PMC article.
-
Catheter Ablation in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock and Refractory Ventricular Tachycardia.Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2020 May;13(5):e007669. doi: 10.1161/CIRCEP.119.007669. Epub 2020 Apr 12. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2020. PMID: 32281407 Free PMC article.
-
Hemodynamic support during catheter ablation of ventricular arrhythmias in patients with cardiogenic shock.Front Cardiovasc Med. 2023 Apr 27;10:1145123. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2023.1145123. eCollection 2023. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2023. PMID: 37180778 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Comparison of Mortality Risk Models in Patients with Postcardiac Arrest Cardiogenic Shock and Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support.J Interv Cardiol. 2021 Jan 18;2021:8843935. doi: 10.1155/2021/8843935. eCollection 2021. J Interv Cardiol. 2021. PMID: 33536855 Free PMC article.
References
-
- McMurray JJ, Adamopoulos S, Anker SD, Auricchio A, Böhm M, Dickstein K, et al. ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure 2012: The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute and Chronic Heart Failure 2012 of the European Society of Cardiology. Developed in collaboration with the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J. 2012;33:1787–1847. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehs104. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Thiele H, Zeymer U, Neumann FJ, Ferenc M, Olbrich HG, Hausleiter J, et al. Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (IABP-SHOCK II): final 12 month results of a randomized, open-label trial. Lancet. 2013;382:1638–1645. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61783-3. - DOI - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources