Prophylactic Impella CP versus VA-ECMO in Patients Undergoing Complex High-Risk Indicated PCI

OBJECTIVES

To compare two different forms of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in patients with complex high-risk indicated PCI (CHIP): the Impella CP system and veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO).

BACKGROUND

To prevent hemodynamic instability in CHIP, various MCS systems are available. However, comparable data on different forms of MCS are not at hand.

METHODS

In this multicenter observational study, we retrospectively evaluated all CHIP procedures with the support of an Impella CP or VA-ECMO, who were declined surgery by the heart team. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE), mortality at discharge, and 30-day mortality were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 41 patients were included, of which 27 patients were supported with Impella CP and 14 patients with VA-ECMO. Baseline characteristics were well-balanced in both groups. No significant difference in periprocedural hemodynamic instability was observed between both groups (3.7% vs. 14.3%; p = 0.22). The composite outcome of MACE showed no significant difference (30.7% vs. 21.4%; p = 0.59). Bleeding complications were higher in the Impella CP group, but showed no significant difference (22.2% vs. 7.1%; p = 0.22) and occurred more at the non-Impella access site. In-hospital mortality was 7.4% in the Impella CP group versus 14.3% in the VA-ECMO group and showed no significant difference (p = 0.48). 30-Day mortality showed no significant difference (7.4% vs. 21.4%; p = 0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with CHIP, there were no significant differences in hemodynamic instability and overall MACE between VA-ECMO or Impella CP device as mechanical circulatory support. Based on this study, the choice of either VA-ECMO or Impella CP does not alter the outcome.

The future of adult cardiac assist devices: novel systems and mechanical circulatory support strategies

The recent, widespread success of mechanical circulatory support has prompted the development of numerous implantable devices to treat advanced heart failure. It is important to raise awareness of novel device systems, the mechanisms by which they function, and implications for patient management. This article discusses devices that are being developed or are in clinical trials. Devices are categorized as standard full support, less-invasive full support, partial support: rotary pumps, partial support: counterpulsation devices, right ventricular assist device, and total artificial heart. Implantation strategy, mechanism of action, durability, efficacy, hemocompatibility, and human factors are considered. The feasibility of novel strategies for unloading the failing heart is examined.