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
Review
. 2021 Nov;41(11):932-942.
doi: 10.1002/phar.2629. Epub 2021 Nov 9.

Optimizing anticoagulation for patients receiving Impella support

Craig J Beavers  1 , Robert J DiDomenico  2 , Steven P Dunn  3 , Jenna Cox  4 , Long To  5 , Phillip Weeks  6 , Toby C Trujillo  7 , Douglas L Jennings  8   9
Affiliations
Review

Optimizing anticoagulation for patients receiving Impella support

Craig J Beavers et al. Pharmacotherapy. 2021 Nov.

Abstract

Anticoagulation of patients treated with the Impella percutaneous mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices is complex and lacks consistency across centers, potentially increasing the risk of complications. In order to optimize safety and efficacy, an expert committee synthesized all available evidence evaluating anticoagulation for patients receiving Impella support in order to provide consensus recommendations for the management of anticoagulation with these devices. The evidence synthesis led to the creation of 42 recommendations to improve anticoagulation management related to the use of the Impella devices. Recommendations address purge solution management, intravenous anticoagulation, monitoring, evaluation and management of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), and management during combination MCS support. The use of a heparinized, dextrose-containing purge solution is critical for optimal device function, and a bicarbonate-based purge solution may be an alternative in certain situations. Likewise, intravenous (ie, systemic) anticoagulation with heparin is often necessary, although evidence supporting the optimal assay and target range for monitoring the level of anticoagulation is generally lacking. Patients treated with an Impella MCS device may develop HIT, which is more difficult to evaluate and treat in this setting. Lastly, the use of Impella with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or for biventricular support creates additional anticoagulation challenges.

Keywords: Impella; anticoagulation; heparin; percutaneous mechanical circulatory support; purge solution.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

REFERENCES

    1. Kolte D, Khera S, Aronow WS, et al. Trends in incidence, management, and outcomes of cardiogenic shock complicating ST-elevation myocardial infarction in the United States. J Am Heart Assoc. 2014;3(1):e000590.
    1. Nguyen HL, Yarzebski J, Lessard D, Gore JM, McManus DD. Ten-Year (2001-2011) Trends in the incidence rates and short-term outcomes of early versus late onset cardiogenic shock after hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction. J Am Heart Assoc. 2017;6(6):2001-2011.
    1. van Diepen S, Katz JN, Albert NM, et al. Contemporary management of cardiogenic shock: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2017;136(16):e232-e268.
    1. Yandrapalli S, Sanaani A, Harikrishnan P, et al. Cardiogenic shock during heart failure hospitalizations: age-, sex-, and race-stratified trends in incidence and outcomes. Am Heart J. 2019;213:18-29.
    1. Amin AP, Spertus JA, Curtis JP, et al. The evolving landscape of Impella use in the United States among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with mechanical circulatory support. Circulation. 2020;141(4):273-284.

LinkOut - more resources