Impact of left ventricular unloading using a peripheral Impella®-pump in eCPR patients.
ECMO
Impella
LV-unloading
assist device
cardiogenic shock
eCPR
mechanical circulatory devices
Journal
Artificial organs
ISSN: 1525-1594
Titre abrégé: Artif Organs
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7802778
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2022
Mar 2022
Historique:
revised:
23
07
2021
received:
09
01
2021
accepted:
11
09
2021
pubmed:
14
9
2021
medline:
9
3
2022
entrez:
13
9
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (eCPR) is a rapidly growing treatment strategy due to increasing survival rates in selected patients. Additional left ventricular mechanical unloading, using a transfemoral micro-axial blood pump (Impella® Denver, Massachusetts, USA), might improve patients' outcomes. In this regard, we sought to investigate patients who suffered OHCA (out-of hospital cardiac arrest) or IHCA (in-hospital cardiac arrest) with subsequent eCPR via VA-ECMO (veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation) and concomitant Impella® implantation based on survival and feasibility of ECMO weaning. From January 2016 until December 2020, 108 patients underwent eCPR at our institution. Data prior to eCPR and early outcome parameters were analyzed comparing patients who were supported with an additional Impella® (2.5 or CP) (ECMO+Impella®, n = 18) and patients without additional (ECMO, n = 90) support during V-A ECMO therapy. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality; secondary endpoints were, among others: ECMO explantation, need for hemodialysis, stroke, and need for blood transfusions. Low-flow time was significantly lower in the ECMO+Impella group (60 min vs. 55 min, p = .01). All-cause mortality was significantly lower in the ECMO+Impella® group (82% vs. 56%, p = .01). The time of circulatory support was shorter in the ECMO cohort (2.0 ± 1.73 vs. 4.76 ± 2.88 p = .05). ECMO decannulation was significantly more feasible in patients with ECMO+Impella® (72% vs. 32%, p = .01). Patients treated with additional Impella® showed significantly more acute kidney injury with the need for dialysis (72% vs. 18%, p ≤ .01). Concomitant Impella® support might positively influence survival and ECMO weaning in eCPR patients. Treatment-associated complications such as the need for dialysis were more common in this highly selected patient group. Further studies with larger numbers are necessary to evaluate the clinical relevance of concomitant LV-unloading in eCPR patients using an Impella® device.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (eCPR) is a rapidly growing treatment strategy due to increasing survival rates in selected patients. Additional left ventricular mechanical unloading, using a transfemoral micro-axial blood pump (Impella® Denver, Massachusetts, USA), might improve patients' outcomes. In this regard, we sought to investigate patients who suffered OHCA (out-of hospital cardiac arrest) or IHCA (in-hospital cardiac arrest) with subsequent eCPR via VA-ECMO (veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation) and concomitant Impella® implantation based on survival and feasibility of ECMO weaning.
METHODS
METHODS
From January 2016 until December 2020, 108 patients underwent eCPR at our institution. Data prior to eCPR and early outcome parameters were analyzed comparing patients who were supported with an additional Impella® (2.5 or CP) (ECMO+Impella®, n = 18) and patients without additional (ECMO, n = 90) support during V-A ECMO therapy. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality; secondary endpoints were, among others: ECMO explantation, need for hemodialysis, stroke, and need for blood transfusions.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Low-flow time was significantly lower in the ECMO+Impella group (60 min vs. 55 min, p = .01). All-cause mortality was significantly lower in the ECMO+Impella® group (82% vs. 56%, p = .01). The time of circulatory support was shorter in the ECMO cohort (2.0 ± 1.73 vs. 4.76 ± 2.88 p = .05). ECMO decannulation was significantly more feasible in patients with ECMO+Impella® (72% vs. 32%, p = .01). Patients treated with additional Impella® showed significantly more acute kidney injury with the need for dialysis (72% vs. 18%, p ≤ .01).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Concomitant Impella® support might positively influence survival and ECMO weaning in eCPR patients. Treatment-associated complications such as the need for dialysis were more common in this highly selected patient group. Further studies with larger numbers are necessary to evaluate the clinical relevance of concomitant LV-unloading in eCPR patients using an Impella® device.
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
451-459Informations de copyright
© 2021 International Center for Artificial Organs and Transplantation and Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Hryniewicz K, Hart M, Raile D, Wang Y, Mooney M, Mudy K, et al. Multidisciplinary shock team is associated with improved outcomes in patients undergoing ECPR. Int J Artif Organs. 44 (5):310-17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0391398820962807
Kim H, Cho YH. Role of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation in adults. Acute Crit Care. 2020;35(1):1-9.
Wang G-N, Chen X-F, Qiao LI, Mei Y, Lv J-R, Huang X-H, et al. Comparison of extracorporeal and conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a meta-analysis of 2260 patients with cardiac arrest. World J Emerg Med. 2017;8(1):5-11.
Lin J-W, Wang M-J, Yu H-Y, Wang C-H, Chang W-T, Jerng J-S, et al. Comparing the survival between extracorporeal rescue and conventional resuscitation in adult in-hospital cardiac arrests: propensity analysis of three-year data. Resuscitation. 2010;81(7):796-803.
Schrage B, Burkhoff D, Rübsamen N, Becher PM, Schwarzl M, Bernhardt A, et al. Unloading of the left ventricle during venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy in cardiogenic shock. JACC Heart Fail. 2018;6(12):1035-43.
Schiller P, Vikholm P, Hellgren L. Experimental venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation induces left ventricular dysfunction. ASAIO J. 2016;62(5):518-24.
Russo JJ, Aleksova N, Pitcher I, Couture E, Parlow S, Faraz M, et al. Left ventricular unloading during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in patients with cardiogenic shock. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;73(6):654-62.
Organization E-ELS. Guidelines for Adult Cardiac Failure. 2013.
Truby LK, Takeda K, Mauro C, Yuzefpolskaya M, Garan AR, Kirtane AJ, et al. Incidence and implications of left ventricular distention during venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support. ASAIO J. 2017;63(3):257-65.
Camboni D, Schmid C. To vent or not on veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, does it improve myocardial recovery and outcome? J Thorac Dis. 2017;9(12):4915-8.
Schrage B, Becher PM, Bernhardt A, Bezerra H, Blankenberg S, Brunner S, et al. Left ventricular unloading is associated with lower mortality in cardiogenic shock patients treated with veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: results from an international, multicenter cohort study. Circulation. 2020;142 (22):2095-106.
Djordjevic I, Sabashnikov A, Deppe AC, Kuhn E, Eghbalzadeh K, Merkle J, et al. Risk factors associated with 30-day mortality for out-of-center ECMO support: experience from the newly launched ECMO retrieval service. J Artif Organs. 2019;22(2):110-7.
Sabashnikov A, Djordjevic I, Deppe A-C, Kuhn EW, Merkle J, Weber C, et al. Managing traps and pitfalls during initial steps of an ECMO retrieval program using a miniaturized portable system: what have we learned from the first two years? Artif Organs. 2018;45(5):488-94.
Gaisendrees C, Djordjevic I, Sabashnikov A, Adler C, Eghbalzadeh K, Ivanov B, et al. Gender-related differences in treatment and outcome of eCPR-patients. Artif Organs. 2020;23:405-6.
Gaisendrees C, Suhr L, Ivanov B, Wörmann J, Djordjevic I, Eghbalzadeh K, et al. Using hydrophilic introducer sheath for peripheral vaECMO cannulation in highly calcified vessels: the bailout solution. J Artif Organs. 2020;23(4):405-6.
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. 2019;40(32):2671-83.
Uriel N, Sayer G, Annamalai S, Kapur NK, Burkhoff D. Mechanical unloading in heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;72(5):569-80.
Pappalardo F, Schulte C, Pieri M, Schrage B, Contri R, Soeffker G, et al. Concomitant implantation of Impella(®) on top of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation may improve survival of patients with cardiogenic shock. Eur J Heart Fail. 2017;19(3):404-12.
Tongers J, Sieweke J-T, Kühn C, Napp LC, Flierl U, Röntgen P, et al. Early escalation of mechanical circulatory support stabilizes and potentially rescues patients in refractory cardiogenic shock. Circ Heart Fail. 2020;13(3):e005853.
Belohlavek J, Hunziker P, Donker DW. Left ventricular unloading and the role of ECpella. Eur Heart J Supplements. 2021;23(Supplement_A):A27-34.
Wengenmayer T, Rombach S, Ramshorn F, Biever P, Bode C, Duerschmied D, et al. Influence of low-flow time on survival after extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (eCPR). Crit Care. 2017;21(1):157.
Thiele H, Zeymer U, Neumann F-J, Ferenc M, Olbrich H-G, Hausleiter J, et al. Intraaortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(14):1287-96.
Aufderheide TP, Kalra R, Kosmopoulos M, Bartos JA, Yannopoulos D. Enhancing cardiac arrest survival with extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation: insights into the process of death. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2021.
Badiye AP, Hernandez GA, Novoa I, Chaparro SV. Incidence of hemolysis in patients with cardiogenic shock treated with impella percutaneous left ventricular assist device. ASAIO J. 2016;62(1):11-4.
Askenazi DJ, Selewski DT, Paden ML, Cooper DS, Bridges BC, Zappitelli M, et al. Renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2012;7(8):1328-36.
Lin C-Y, Chen Y-C, Tsai F-C, Tian Y-C, Jenq C-C, Fang J-T, et al. RIFLE classification is predictive of short-term prognosis in critically ill patients with acute renal failure supported by extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2006;21(10):2867-73.
Yan X, Jia S, Meng X, Dong P, Jia M, Wan J, et al. Acute kidney injury in adult postcardiotomy patients with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: evaluation of the RIFLE classification and the Acute Kidney Injury Network criteria. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2010;37(2):334-8.
Ooi YS, Gray WA. Taking the kidney to heart. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2020;95(6):1122-3.
Fahad F, Saad Shaukat MH, Yager N. Incidence and outcomes of acute kidney injury requiring renal replacement therapy in patients on percutaneous mechanical circulatory support with Impella-CP for cardiogenic shock. Cureus. 2020;12(1):e6591.
Markus B, Patsalis N, Chatzis G, Luesebrink U, Ahrens H, Schieffer B, et al. Impact of microaxillar mechanical left ventricular support on renal resistive index in patients with cardiogenic shock after myocardial infarction: a pilot trial to predict renal organ dysfunction in cardiogenic shock. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. 2020;9(2):158-63.
Gaisendrees C, Djordjevic I, Sabashnikov A, Adler C, Eghbalzadeh K, Ivanov B, et al. Gender-related differences in treatment and outcome of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation-patients. Artif Organs. 2021;45:488-94.