Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 May;27(3):879-890.
doi: 10.1007/s10741-020-09971-7.

Outcomes of percutaneous temporary biventricular mechanical support: a systematic review

Matthew P Weber  1 , Thomas J O'Malley  1 , Jae H Choi  1 , Elizabeth J Maynes  1 , Kyle W Prochno  1 , Melissa A Austin  1 , Chelsey T Wood  1 , Sinal Patel  1 , Rohinton J Morris  1 , H Todd Massey  1 , Vakhtang Tchantchaleishvili  2
Affiliations

Outcomes of percutaneous temporary biventricular mechanical support: a systematic review

Matthew P Weber et al. Heart Fail Rev. 2022 May.

Abstract

Percutaneous biventricular assist devices (BiVAD) are a recently developed treatment option for severe cardiogenic shock. This systematic review sought to identify indications and outcomes of patients placed on percutaneous BiVAD support. An electronic search was performed to identify all appropriate studies utilizing a percutaneous BiVAD configuration. Fifteen studies comprising of 20 patients were identified. Individual patient survival and outcomes data were combined for statistical analysis. All 20 patients were supported with a microaxial LVAD, 12/20 (60%) of those patients were supported with a microaxial (RMA) right ventricular assist device (RVAD), and the remaining 8/20 (40%) patients were supported with a centrifugal extracorporeal RVAD (RCF). All patients presented with cardiogenic shock, and of these, 12/20 (60%) presented with a non-ischemic etiology vs 8/20 (40%) with ischemic disease. For the RMA group, RVAD support was significantly longer [RMA 5 (IQR 4-7) days vs RCF 1 (IQR 1-2) days, p = 0.03]. Intravascular hemolysis post-BiVAD occurred in three patients (27.3%) [RMA 3 (33.3%) vs RCF 0 (0%), p = 0.94]. Five patients received a durable left ventricular assist device, one patient received a total artificial heart, and one patient underwent a heart transplantation. Estimated 30-day mortality was 15.0%, and 78.6% were discharged alive. Both strategies for percutaneous BiVAD support appear to be viable options for severe cardiogenic shock.

Keywords: Biventricular assist device; Biventricular heart failure; Centrifugal devices; Microaxial devices.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Chiu C-Y, Hättasch R, Praeger D, Knebel F, Stangl K, Ramirez ID, Dreger H (2018) Percutaneous biventricular Impella support in therapy-refractory cardiogenic shock. Heart Lung 47:250–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrtlng.2018.03.009 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Goda A, Takayama H, Koeckert M, Pak SW, Sutton EM, Cohen S, Uriel N, Jorde U, Mancini D, Naka Y (2011) Use of ventricular assist devices in patients with mitral valve prostheses. J Card Surg 26:334–337. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-8191.2011.01248.x - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chaparro SV, Badheka A, Marzouka GR, Tanawuttiwat T, Ahmed F, Sacher V, Pham SM (2012) Combined use of Impella left ventricular assist device and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as a bridge to recovery in fulminant myocarditis. ASAIO J 58:285–287. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAT.0b013e31824b1f70 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jumean M, Pham DT, Kapur NK (2015) Percutaneous bi-atrial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for acute circulatory support in advanced heart failure. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 85:1097–1099. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.25791 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Aghili N, Bader Y, Vest AR et al (2016) Biventricular circulatory support using 2 axial flow catheters for cardiogenic shock without the need for surgical vascular access. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 9. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.116.003636

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources