Impact of left-ventricular end-diastolic pressure as a predictor of periprocedural hemodynamic deterioration in patients undergoing Impella supported high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions.
CAD, coronary artery disease
Coronary artery disease
HD, hemodynamic deterioration
High-risk PCI
Impella
LVEDP, left ventricular end-diastolic pressure
MACCE, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events
MCS, mechanical circulatory support
Mechanical circulatory support
PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention
Percutaneous coronary intervention
SBP, systolic blood pressure
Journal
International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature
ISSN: 2352-9067
Titre abrégé: Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc
Pays: Ireland
ID NLM: 101649525
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2020
Feb 2020
Historique:
received:
29
09
2019
revised:
04
11
2019
accepted:
11
11
2019
entrez:
5
12
2019
pubmed:
5
12
2019
medline:
5
12
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
An increasing number of high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) are performed with mechanical circulatory support (MCS) to minimize the risk of periprocedural hemodynamic compromise. Prior studies have demonstrated that an elevated left-ventricular end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP) is associated with worse outcome after acute myocardial infarction or cardiac surgery. Although LVEDP is frequently measured, little is known about the usefulness for predicting periprocedural hemodynamic deterioration in high-risk PCI. The objective of this study is to assess the impact of preprocedural measured LVEDP in non-shock patients undergoing high-risk PCI with MCS on periprocedural hemodynamic deterioration. We reviewed the PCI protocol and the Automated Impella Controller in a consecutive series of 64 patients (mean age 73 years, 80% male), who underwent high-risk PCI with Impella MCS (period 01/2017-12/2018). LVEDP (17 ± 8 mm Hg) was measured in all cases before Impella insertion and start of PCI. Periprocedural hemodynamic deterioration was defined as: systolic blood pressure (SBP) drop (decrease ≥20 mm Hg or ≤90 mm Hg), or transient loss of arterial pressure pulsatility. Hemodynamic deterioration occurred in 33% (n = 21) of all patients but did not lead to a hemodynamic compromise due to the Impella support. Regression analysis of LVEDP for periprocedural hemodynamic deterioration or in-hospital major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) showed no significant results. LVEDP was not associated with periprocedural hemodynamic deterioration or a higher rate of in-hospital MACCE. Our data propose that LVEDP may not be used as a risk stratification variable for MCS usage in non-shock patients undergoing high-risk PCI.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
An increasing number of high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) are performed with mechanical circulatory support (MCS) to minimize the risk of periprocedural hemodynamic compromise. Prior studies have demonstrated that an elevated left-ventricular end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP) is associated with worse outcome after acute myocardial infarction or cardiac surgery. Although LVEDP is frequently measured, little is known about the usefulness for predicting periprocedural hemodynamic deterioration in high-risk PCI. The objective of this study is to assess the impact of preprocedural measured LVEDP in non-shock patients undergoing high-risk PCI with MCS on periprocedural hemodynamic deterioration.
METHODS AND RESULTS
RESULTS
We reviewed the PCI protocol and the Automated Impella Controller in a consecutive series of 64 patients (mean age 73 years, 80% male), who underwent high-risk PCI with Impella MCS (period 01/2017-12/2018). LVEDP (17 ± 8 mm Hg) was measured in all cases before Impella insertion and start of PCI. Periprocedural hemodynamic deterioration was defined as: systolic blood pressure (SBP) drop (decrease ≥20 mm Hg or ≤90 mm Hg), or transient loss of arterial pressure pulsatility. Hemodynamic deterioration occurred in 33% (n = 21) of all patients but did not lead to a hemodynamic compromise due to the Impella support. Regression analysis of LVEDP for periprocedural hemodynamic deterioration or in-hospital major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) showed no significant results.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
LVEDP was not associated with periprocedural hemodynamic deterioration or a higher rate of in-hospital MACCE. Our data propose that LVEDP may not be used as a risk stratification variable for MCS usage in non-shock patients undergoing high-risk PCI.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31799370
doi: 10.1016/j.ijcha.2019.100445
pii: S2352-9067(19)30222-2
pii: 100445
pmc: PMC6881640
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
100445Informations de copyright
© 2019 The Authors.
Références
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999 Mar 15;33(4):951-8
pubmed: 10091821
J Card Fail. 2015 Jun;21(6):499-518
pubmed: 26036425
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016 Aug 2;68(5):450-458
pubmed: 27470451
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015 May 19;65(19):e7-e26
pubmed: 25861963
Eur Heart J. 2019 Jan 7;40(2):87-165
pubmed: 30165437
Int J Cardiol. 2019 Jan 1;274:221-225
pubmed: 30057165
Am Heart J. 2015 Nov;170(5):872-9
pubmed: 26542494
Circulation. 2012 Oct 2;126(14):1717-27
pubmed: 22935569
Int J Cardiol. 2020 Jan 15;299:87-92
pubmed: 31378378
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015 Feb;8(2):229-244
pubmed: 25700745
Circulation. 2016 Aug 2;134(5):422-31
pubmed: 27482004
Br J Anaesth. 2006 Sep;97(3):292-7
pubmed: 16835254
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Mar 1;89(4):672-675
pubmed: 27658747
Clin Res Cardiol. 2018 Aug;107(Suppl 2):64-73
pubmed: 29978353
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Oct 1;90(4):576-581
pubmed: 28417594
Am Heart J. 2013 Nov;166(5):913-9
pubmed: 24176448
Am Heart J. 2006 Jan;151(1):76-83
pubmed: 16368295
Int J Cardiol. 2015 Dec 15;201:684-91
pubmed: 26363632
Am J Cardiol. 1992 Dec 15;70(20):1540-5
pubmed: 1466320
Arq Bras Cardiol. 2011 Aug;97(2):100-10
pubmed: 21691679
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013 Sep;146(3):656-61
pubmed: 22995728
Am J Cardiol. 2006 Apr 1;97(7):990-2
pubmed: 16563902
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015 Dec 15;66(23):2663-2674
pubmed: 26670067