Current practices in the management of temporary mechanical circulatory support: A survey of CICU directors in North America
- PMID: 39182940
- PMCID: PMC12118638
- DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2024.05.018
Current practices in the management of temporary mechanical circulatory support: A survey of CICU directors in North America
Abstract
Introduction: Despite the growing use of temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS), little data exists to inform management and weaning of these devices.
Methods: We performed an online survey among cardiac intensive care unit directors in North America to examine current practices in the management of patients treated with intraaortic balloon pump and Impella.
Results: We received responses from 84% of surveyed centers (n=37). Our survey focused on three key aspects of daily management: 1. Hemodynamic monitoring; 2. Hemocompatibility; and 3. Weaning and removal. We found substantial variability surrounding all three areas of care.
Conclusion: Our findings highlight the need for consensus around practices associated with improved outcomes in patients treated with tMCS.
Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of Competing Interest Christopher Barnett receives research funding from Merck and is a consultant for Abiomed, Zoll, and Abbott. Michael Kontos is a consultant for Beckman Coulter. Barbara Pisani has self-funded personal investments in Abbott, Amgen, GlaxoSmithKline, Bristol Myers Squibb. Andrea Thompson is supported by NIH-NHLBI [K08HL163328]. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interests to declare.
References
-
- Thiele H, Zeymer U, Neumann F, et al. Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (IABP-SHOCK II): final 12 month results of a randomised, open-label trial. Lancet 2013;382:1638–45. - PubMed
-
- Karami M, Eriksen E, Ouweneel DM, et al. Long-term 5-year outcome of the randomized IMPRESS in severe shock trial: percutaneous mechanical circulatory support vs. intra-aortic balloon pump in cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care 2021;10:1009–15. - PMC - PubMed
-
- O’Neill WW, Kleiman NS, Moses J, et al. A prospective, randomized clinical trial of hemodynamic support with Impella 2.5 versus intra-aortic balloon pump in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: the PROTECT II study. Circulation 2012;126:1717–27. - PubMed
-
- Moller JE, Engstrom T, Jensen LO, et al. Microaxial flow pump or standard care in infarct-related cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med 2024;390:1382–93. - PubMed
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources