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
Comparative Study
. 2024 Nov 1;70(11):946-953.
doi: 10.1097/MAT.0000000000002219. Epub 2024 May 3.

ECMO Alone Versus ECPELLA in Patients Affected by Cardiogenic Shock: The Multicenter EVACS Study

Antonio Piperata  1 , Jef Van den Eynde  2   3 , Charles-Henri David  4 , Ahmet Ruchan Akar  5 , Masazumi Watanabe  6 , Ilias Doulamis  7 , Pierre-Guillaume Piriou  4 , Mehmet Cahit Saricaoğlu  5 , Hiroki Ikenaga  6 , Thomas Gouttenegre  1 , Mickael Vourc'h  4 , Shinya Takahashi  6 , Alexandre Ouattara  1   8 , Louis Labrousse  1 , Giacomo Frati  9   10 , Mathieu Pernot  1
Affiliations
Comparative Study

ECMO Alone Versus ECPELLA in Patients Affected by Cardiogenic Shock: The Multicenter EVACS Study

Antonio Piperata et al. ASAIO J. .

Abstract

The objective was to investigate the outcomes of concomitant venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and left ventricular unloading with Impella (ECPELLA) compared with ECMO alone to treat patients affected by cardiogenic shock. Data from patients needing mechanical circulatory support from 4 international centers were analyzed. Of 438 patients included, ECMO alone and ECPELLA were adopted in 319 (72.8%) and 119 (27.2%) patients, respectively. Propensity score matching analysis identified 95 pairs. In the matched cohort, 30-day mortality rates in the ECMO and ECPELLA were 49.5% and 43.2% ( P = 0.467). The incidences of complications did not differ significantly between groups ( P = 0.877, P = 0.629, P = 1.000, respectively). After a median follow-up of 0.18 years (interquartile range 0.02-2.55), the use of ECPELLA was associated with similar mortality compared with ECMO alone (hazard ratio 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.54-1.20, P = 0.285), with 1-year overall survival rates of 51.3% and 46.6%, for ECPELLA and ECMO alone, respectively. ECMO alone and ECPELLA are both effective strategies in patients needing mechanical circulatory support for cardiogenic shock, showing similar rates of early and mid-term survival.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosure: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

References

    1. Ponikowski P, Voors AA, Anker SD, et al.; ESC Scientific Document Group: 2016 ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure: the task force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC): developed with the special contribution of the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J. 37: 2129–2200, 2016.
    1. Wayangankar SA, Bangalore S, McCoy LA, et al.: Temporal trends and outcomes of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions for cardiogenic shock in the setting of acute myocardial infarction: A report from the CathPCI Registry. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 9: 341–351, 2016.
    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. 3: 3, 2014.
    1. Thiele H, Ohman EM, de Waha-Thiele S, Zeymer U, Desch S: Management of cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction: an update 2019. Eur Heart J. 40: 2671–2683, 2019.
    1. Brunner S, Guenther SPW, Lackermair K, et al.: Extracorporeal life support in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 73: 2355–2357, 2019.

LinkOut - more resources