Mechanical Circulatory Support in Cardiogenic Shock: Uses in the Emergency Setting

Cardiogenic shock is a lethal condition with significant morbidity, characterized by myocardial insults leading to low cardiac output and ensuing systemic hypoperfusion. While mortality rates remain high, we have improved upon our recognition and definition of cardiogenic shock, now with an emphasis on defining stages of shock to help guide effective treatment strategies with either pharmacologic or mechanical circulatory support. In this review, the authors summarize these stages as well as discuss indications, function, selection, and troubleshooting of the various temporary mechanical circulatory support devices.

Evaluating the Use of Unfractionated Heparin with Intra-Aortic Balloon Counterpulsation

BACKGROUND

Evidence supporting anticoagulation with unfractionated heparin (UFH) in patients with an intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) to prevent limb ischaemia remains limited, while bleeding risks remain high. Monitoring heparin in this setting with anti-factor Xa (anti-Xa) is not previously described.

OBJECTIVES

The study objective is to describe the incidence of thromboembolic and bleeding events with the use of UFH in patients with an IABP utilising monitoring with both anti-Xa and activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT).

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of adults who received an IABP and UFH for ≥24 hours. Electronic medical records were reviewed for pertinent data. The primary outcome was the incidence of limb ischaemia during IABP. Secondary outcomes included myocardial infarction, thrombus on IABP, or stroke. Exploratory outcomes included any venous thromboembolism and bleeding events.

RESULTS

Of 159 patients, 88% received an IABP for cardiogenic shock and median duration of IABP support was 118 hours (interquartile range, 67-196). Limb ischaemia occurred in four of 159 patients (2.5%). Strokes occurred in 3.8% of the cohort, and bleeding events occurred in 33%. Despite anticoagulation use in all patients, 11% experienced a venous thromboembolism, with most identified upon asymptomatic screening with concern for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. We found no differences in outcomes that occurred with a hybrid anti-Xa and aPTT versus aPTT monitoring alone.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed a high rate of thrombotic and bleeding complications with the use of UFH in patients with an IABP. Use of anti-Xa versus aPTT for monitoring was not associated with complications. These data suggest safer anticoagulation strategies are needed in this setting.

Intra-aortic balloon pump is associated with the lowest whereas Impella with the highest inpatient mortality and complications regardless of severity or hospital types

Impella and intra-aortic balloon pumps (IABP) are commonly utilized in patients with cardiogenic shock. However, the effect on mortality remains controversial. The goal of this study was to evaluate the effect of Impella and IABP on mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock the large Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database was utilized to study any association between the use of IABP or Impella on outcome. ICD-10 codes for Impella, IABP, and cardiogenic shock for available years 2016-2020 were utilized. A total of 844,020 patients had a diagnosis of cardiogenic shock. A total of 101,870 patients were treated with IABP and 39645 with an Impella. Total inpatient mortality without any device was 34.2% vs only 25.1% with IABP use (OR = 0.65, CI 0.62-0.67) but was highest at 40.7% with Impella utilization (OR = 1.32, CI 1.26-1.39). After adjusting for 47 variables, Impella utilization remained associated with the highest mortality (OR: 1.33, CI 1.25-1.41, p < 0.001), whereas IABP remained associated with the lowest mortality (OR: 0.69, CI 0.66-0.72, p < 0.001). Separating rural vs teaching hospitals revealed similar findings. In patients with cardiogenic shock, the use of Impella was associated with the highest whereas IABP was associated with the lowest in-hospital mortality regardless of comorbid condition.

The use of mechanical circulatory support in elective high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions: a literature-based review

Contemporary medical practices allow complete percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in a considerable number of patients who previously would have been considered too 'high-risk' for such procedures. The use of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices during these high-risk PCIs (HR-PCIs) is thought to reduce the potential risk for major adverse events during and after revascularization. The intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A ECMO), and the Impella are the most common MCS devices in use. This review aims to summarize the clinical evidence for each of these devices and the potential mechanisms for the improvement in patient outcomes in HR-PCI. The IABP use has rapidly declined in recent years due to no evidence of benefit in HR-PCI and cardiogenic shock. The V-A ECMO results in low rates of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) but higher rates of acute kidney injury and increased need for transfusions. In initial studies, Impella resulted in a reduced need for repeat interventions and reduced rates of hypotension, but no benefit in mortality. However, MACCE rates with Impella have gradually declined over the last 10 years, reflecting increased operator experience and technical improvements. Thus, a large, randomized trial is needed to assess the efficacy of Impella in HR-PCI with contemporary standards of care. There is currently no individual parameter that can identify patients who would benefit from MCS use in elective HR-PCI. To address this gap, we propose an algorithm that combines anatomical complexity, comorbidities, and clinical presentation to accurately identify candidates for MCS-assisted HR-PCI.

Blood perfusion status is important in the prognosis of ventricular aneurysm complicated by ventricular septal rupture

AIMS

Due to its low incidence, poor prognosis, and high mortality in the acute phase, the long-term prognosis of the left ventricular aneurysm (LVA) complicated by ventricular septal rupture (VSR) has received little attention. This study focus on the long-term prognosis of patients with LVA complicated by relatively stable VSR.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Over a decade of retrospection, 68 patients with both LVA and VSR were compared with 136 patients with LVA alone after propensity score matching. Patients with both LVA and VSR were further divided into two groups depending on whether pre-operative intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) was used (23 pre-operative IABP vs. 45 non-pre-operative IABP). The primary endpoint was defined as major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, a composite endpoint including mortality, myocardial infarction, revascularization, stroke, and heart failure. Patients with both LVA and VSR were generally in a worse condition upon admission compared with those with LVA alone [percentage of patients in New York Heart Association IV: 42.6% (29/68) vs. 11.0% (15/136), P < 0.001]. Both pre-operative and post-operative IABP use rates were significantly higher in patients with both LVA and VSR than in patients with LVA alone [pre-operative IABP use rates: 33.8% (23/68) vs. 0.74% (1/136), P < 0.001 and post-operative IABP use rates: 33.8% (23/68) vs. 10.3% (14/136), P < 0.001]. No significant difference was observed in the primary endpoint between patients with both LVA and VSR and those with LVA alone (log-rank test, P = 0.63, median follow-up time 63 months). We further investigated the effect of pre-operative IABP on the long-term prognosis of patients with both LVA and VSR. Patients who applied pre-operative IABP had a worse long-term prognosis than those who did not (log-rank test, P = 0.0011).

CONCLUSIONS

The long-term prognosis of LVA combined with VSR was not inferior than LVA alone after surgery, but poor blood perfusion status was associated with a worse prognosis.

Complications and Outcomes in 39,864 Patients Receiving Standard Care Plus Mechanical Circulatory Support or Standard Care Alone for Infarct-Associated Cardiogenic Shock

BACKGROUND

Temporary mechanical circulatory support devices (tMCS) are increasingly being used in patients with infarct-associated cardiogenic shock (AMICS). Evidence on patient selection, complications and long-term outcomes is lacking. We aim to investigate differences in clinical characteristics, complications and outcomes between patients receiving no tMCS or either intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A ECMO) or Impella® for AMICS, with a particular focus on long-term outcomes.

METHODS

Using health claim data from AOK-Die Gesundheitskasse (local health care funds), we retrospectively analysed complications and outcomes of all insured patients with AMICS between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2017.

RESULTS

A total of 39,864 patients were included (IABP 5451; Impella 776; V-A ECMO 833; no tMCS 32,804). In-hospital complications, including renal failure requiring dialysis (50.3% V-A ECMO vs. 30.5% Impella vs. 29.2 IABP vs. 12.1% no tMCS), major bleeding (38.1% vs. 20.9% vs. 18.0% vs. 9.3%) and sepsis (22.5% vs. 15.9% vs. 13.9% vs. 9.3%) were more common in V-A ECMO patients. In a multivariate analysis, the use of both V-A ECMO (HR 1.57, p < 0.001) and Impella (HR 1.25, p < 0.001) were independently associated with long-term mortality, whereas use of IABP was not (HR 0.89, p < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier estimates showed better survival for patients on IABP compared with Impella, V-A ECMO and no-tMCS. Short- and long-term mortality was high across all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data show noticeably more in-hospital complications in patients on tMCS and higher mortality with V-A ECMO and Impella. The use of both devices is an independent risk factor for mortality, whereas the use of IABP is associated with a survival benefit.

Impella Versus Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock Treated With Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: An Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is increasingly used for patients with cardiogenic shock. Although Impella or intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) is frequently used for left ventricular unloading (LVU) during VA-ECMO treatment, there are limited data on comparative outcomes. We compared outcomes of Impella and IABP for LVU during VA-ECMO.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Using the Nationwide Readmissions Database between 2016 and 2020, we analyzed outcomes in 3 groups of patients with cardiogenic shock requiring VA-ECMO based on LVU strategies: extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) only, ECMO with IABP, and ECMO with Impella. Of 15 980 patients on VA-ECMO, IABP and Impella were used in 19.4% and 16.4%, respectively. The proportion of patients receiving Impella significantly increased from 2016 to 2020 (6.5% versus 25.8%; P-trend<0.001). In-hospital mortality was higher with ECMO with Impella (54.8%) compared with ECMO only (50.4%) and ECMO with IABP (48.4%). After adjustment, ECMO with IABP versus ECMO only was associated with lower in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.83; P=0.02). ECMO with Impella versus ECMO only had similar in-hospital mortality (aOR, 1.09; P=0.695) but was associated with more bleeding (aOR, 1.21; P=0.007) and more acute kidney injury requiring hemodialysis (aOR, 1.42; P<0.001). ECMO with Impella versus ECMO with IABP was associated with greater risk of acute kidney injury requiring hemodialysis (aOR, 1.49; P=0.002), higher in-hospital mortality (aOR, 1.32; P=0.001), and higher 40-day mortality (hazard ratio, 1.25; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with cardiogenic shock on VA-ECMO, LVU with Impella, particularly with 2.5/CP, was not associated with improved survival at 40 days but was associated with increased adverse events compared with IABP. More data are needed to assess Impella platform-specific comparative outcomes of LVU.

Intra-aortic balloon pump in patients with extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation after cardiac arrest caused by acute coronary syndrome

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the association between intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) use in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) caused by acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who received extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) and 30-day outcomes.

METHODS

This study was a secondary analysis of data from the SAVE-J II study, a retrospective, multicenter registry study involving 36 participating institutions in Japan. Patients with cardiac arrest caused by ACS who received ECPR were divided into two groups depending on whether or not they received IABP. The primary outcome was 30-day survival. Subgroup analysis was performed to detect what type of patients were mostly associated with improved outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 2,157 patients registered in the SAVE-J II study, 877 patients were enrolled in this study, 702 patients in the IABP group and 175 patients in the non-IABP group. Multivariable logistic regression analysis did not reveal a significant difference in 30-day survival (OR 1.37, 95% CI 0.91-2.07, p = 0.13). In the subgroup analysis, 30-day survival among patients without percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and stenosis of multiple coronary vessels were associated with IABP use.

CONCLUSIONS

IABP use in patients with OHCA with ACS who received ECPR is not associated with 30-day survival. The use of IABP in patients who did not have PCI and have multiple coronary vessel stenoses warrants further study.

Mechanical Circulatory Support Strategies in Takotsubo Syndrome with Cardiogenic Shock: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Takotsubo syndrome is, by definition, a reversible form of acute heart failure. If cardiac output is severely reduced, Takotsubo syndrome can cause cardiogenic shock, and mechanical circulatory support can serve as a bridge to recovery. To date, there are no recommendations on when to use mechanical circulatory support and on which device is particularly effective in this context. Our aim was to determine the best treatment strategy.

METHODS

A systematic literature research and analysis of individual patient data was performed in MEDLINE/PubMed according to PRISMA guidelines. Our research considered original works published until 31 July 2023.

RESULTS

A total of 93 publications that met the inclusion criteria were identified, providing individual data from 124 patients. Of these, 62 (50%) were treated with veno-arterial extracorporeal life support (va-ECLS), and 44 (35.5%) received a microaxial left ventricular assist device (Impella). Eighteen patients received an Impella CP and twenty-one an Impella 2.5. An intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) without other devices was used in only 13 patients (10.5%), while other devices (BiVAD or Tandem Heart) were used in 5 patients (4%). The median initial left ventricular ejection fraction was 20%, with no difference between the four device groups except for the IABP group, which was less affected by cardiac output failure (p = 0.015). The overall survival was 86.3%. Compared to the other groups, the time to cardiac recovery was shorter with Impella (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Though the Impella treatment is new, our analysis may show a significant benefit of Impella compared to other MCS strategies for cardiogenic shock in Takotsubo syndrome.

Modelling and Simulation of the Combined Use of IABP and Impella as a Rescue Procedure in Cardiogenic Shock: An Alternative for Non-Transplant Centres?

The treatment of critically ill patients remains an evolving and controversial issue. Mechanical circulatory support through a percutaneous approach for the management of cardiogenic shock has taken place in recent years. The combined use of IABP and the Impella 2.5 device may have a role to play for this group of patients. A simulation approach may help with a quantitative assessment of the achievable degree of assistance. In this paper, we analyse the interaction between the Impella 2.5 pump applied as the LVAD and IABP using the numerical simulator of the cardiovascular system developed in our laboratory. Starting with pathological conditions reproduced using research data, the simulations were performed by setting different rotational speeds for the LVAD and driving the IABP in full mode (1:1) or partial mode (1:2, 1:3 and 1:4). The effects induced by drug administration during the assistance were also simulated. The haemodynamic parameters under investigation were aa follows: mean aortic pressure, systolic and diastolic aortic pressure, mean pulmonary arterial pressure, mean left and right atrial pressure, cardiac output, cardiac index, left and right ventricular end-systolic volume, left ventricular end-diastolic volume and mean coronary blood flow. The energetic variables considered in this study were as follows: left and right ventricular external work and left and right atrial pressure-volume area. The outcome of our simulations shows that the combined use of IABP and Impella 2.5 achieves adequate support in the acute phase of cardiogenic shock compared to each standalone device. This would allow further stabilisation and transfer to a transplant centre should the escalation of treatment be required.

Left Ventricular Unloading With Impella Versus IABP in Patients With VA-ECMO: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) use for circulatory support in cardiogenic shock results in increased left ventricular (LV) afterload. The use of concomitant Impella or intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) have been proposed as adjunct devices for LV unloading. The authors sought to compare head-to-head efficacy and safety outcomes between the 2 LV unloading strategies. We conducted a search of Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases to identify studies comparing the use of Impella to IABP in patients on VA-ECMO. The primary outcome of interest was in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes included transition to durable LV assist devices/cardiac transplantation, stroke, limb ischemia, need for continuous renal replacement therapy, major bleeding, and hemolysis. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence interval and heterogeneity statistic I2 were calculated using a random-effects model. A total of 7 observational studies with 698 patients were included. Patients on VA-ECMO unloaded with Impella vs IABP had similar risk of short-term all-cause mortality, defined as either 30-day or in-hospital mortality- 60.8% vs 64.9% (RR 0.93 [0.71 to 1.21], I2 = 71%). No significant difference was observed in transition to durable LV assist devices/cardiac transplantation, continuous renal replacement therapy initiation, stroke, or limb ischemia between the 2 strategies. However, the use of VA-ECMO with Impella was associated with increased risk of major bleeding (57.2% vs 39.7%) (RR 1.66 [1.12 to 2.44], I2 = 82%) and hemolysis (31% vs 7%) (RR 4.61 [1.24 to 17.17], I2 = 66%) compared with VA-ECMO, along with IABP. In conclusion, in patients requiring VA-ECMO for circulatory support, the concomitant use of Impella or IABP had comparable short-term mortality. However, Impella use was associated with increased risk of major bleeding and hemolysis.

Beneficial Effects of IABP in Anterior Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock

Background and Objectives. Recent guidelines have downgraded the routine use of the intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) due to ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Despite this, its use in clinical practice remains high. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic impact of the IABP in patients with STEMI complicated by CS undergoing primary PCI (pPCI), focusing on patients with anterior MI in whom a major benefit has been previously hypothesized. Materials and Methods. We enrolled 2958 consecutive patients undergoing pPCI for STEMI in our department from 2005 to 2018. Propensity score matching and mortality analysis were performed. Results. CS occurred in 246 patients (8.3%); among these patients, 145 (60%) had anterior AMI. In the propensity-matched analysis, the use of the IABP was associated with a lower 30-day mortality (39.3% vs. 60.9%, p = 0.032) in the subgroup of patients with anterior STEMI. Conversely, in the whole group of CS patients and in the subgroup of patients with non-anterior STEMI, IABP use did not have a significant impact on mortality. Conclusions. The use of the IABP in cases of STEMI complicated by CS was found to improve survival in patients with anterior infarction. Prospective studies are needed before abandoning or markedly limiting the use of the IABP in this clinical setting.

Percutaneous coronary intervention with Impella support with and without intra-aortic balloon in cardiogenic shock patients

OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical characteristics and in-hospital bleeding complications and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) associated with the use of Impella alone or the combination of an intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) with Impella in cardiogenic shock (CS) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

All CS patients who underwent PCI and were treated with an Impella mechanical circulatory support (MCS) device were identified. Patients were divided into two groups: having MCS support with Impella alone or with both, IABP and Impella simultaneously (dual MCS group). Bleeding complications were classified by a modified Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) classification. Major bleeding was defined as BARC≥3 bleeding. MACCE was the composite of in-hospital death, myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular events and major bleeding complications.

RESULTS

Between 2010 and 2018 a total of 101 patients were treated at six tertiary care New York hospitals with either Impella (n = 61) or dual MCS with Impella and IABP (n = 40). Clinical characteristics were similar for both groups. Dual MCS patients presented more often with a STEMI (77.5 % vs. 45.9 %, p = 0.002) and had left main coronary artery intervention (20.3 % vs. 8.6 %, p = 0.03). Major bleeding complications (69.4 % vs. 74.1 %, p = 0.62) and MACCE rates (80.6 % vs. 79.3 %, p = 0.88) were very high but similar in both groups, however access site bleeding complications were lower in patients treated with dual MCS. In-hospital mortality was 29.5 % for the Impella group and 25.0 % for the dual MCS group (p = 062). Access site bleeding complications were lower in in patients treated with dual MCS (5.0 % vs. 24.6 %, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

In CS patients undergoing PCI with either the Impella device alone or with Impella and IABP, major bleeding complications and MACCE rates were high but not significantly different between the two groups. In hospital mortality was relatively low in both MCS groups despite the high-risk characteristics of these patients. Future studies should assess the risks and benefits of the simultaneous use of these two MCS in CS patients undergoing PCI.

Growing Evidence for LV Unloading in VA ECMO

Impressively increasing availability of mechanical circulatory/cardiac support systems (MCSs) worldwide, together with the deepening of the knowledge of critical care medical practitioners, has inevitably led to the discussion about further improvements of intensive care associated to MCS. An appealing topic of the left ventricle (LV) overload related to VA ECMO support endangering myocardial recovery is being widely discussed within the scientific community. Unloading of LV leads to the reduction in LV end-diastolic pressure, reduction in pressure in the left atrium, and decrease in the LV thrombus formation risk. Consequently, better conditions for myocardial recovery, with comfortable filling pressures and a better oxygen delivery/demand ratio, are achieved. The combination of VA ECMO and Impella device, also called ECPELLA, seems to be a promising strategy that may bring the improvement of CS mortality rates. The series of presented trials and meta-analyses clearly showed the potential benefits of this strategy. However, the ongoing research has brought a series of new questions, such as whether Impella itself is the only appropriate unloading modality, or any other approach to unload LV would be beneficial in the same way. Benefits and potential risks of LV unloading and its timing are being discussed in this current review.

Case report: Combination of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and intra-aortic balloon pump in a young male patient with refractory cardiogenic shock due to aluminum phosphide poisoning

Background

Acute toxic myocardial damage may be accompanied by the development of cardiogenic shock (CS), the mortality from which is still unacceptably high. Since there is no specific antidote for many types of toxins, treatment of such patients includes various measures of hemodynamic and respiratory support. The paper presents a case of refractory CS due to possible aluminum phosphide (AP) poisoning.

Case summary

A 20-year-old man was admitted to the emergency department 4 days after home inhalation of AP due to complaints of nausea, vomiting, abdominal and chest pain. Over the next few hours, he rapidly developed CS, which was refractory to conservative treatment. Therefore, veno-arterial membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) was performed, during which hemodynamics stabilized, but later there were signs of left ventricular overload. To unload the left ventricle (LV), an intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) was implanted, which significantly improved the patient's condition. After 6 days the patient was decannulated, and a few more days later IABP was discontinued. Subsequently, the patient was treated for sepsis due to bilateral pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome and optimal medical therapy for heart failure was prescribed. The patient was discharged after 34th day of hospitalization.

Analysis of uroseptic shock after ureteroscopy for ureteral calculi during pregnancy: a case report

BACKGROUND

Uroseptic shock secondary to ureteral calculi during pregnancy is rare. It is characterized by rapid onset, rapid progression, aggressive disease, limited treatment, poor prognosis, and a mortality rate higher than 20% with improper or delayed management. A clear diagnosis is made based on typical clinical symptoms and abdominal ultrasound, often requiring combined multidisciplinary treatment and the simultaneous release of the obstruction. The high mortality rate is mainly related to inappropriate early treatment of stones and infections or failure to intervene in a timely manner.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 21-year-old first-time pregnant patient with uroseptic shock was admitted to our intensive care unit. The patient was successfully treated at our hospital with multidisciplinary cooperation, high-dose vasoactive drugs, IABP, CRRT, VA-ECMO, and termination of pregnancy.

CONCLUSIONS

Timely relief of obstructions, termination of pregnancy, and the provision of IABP, CRRT, and VA-ECMO when necessary in critically ill patients with uroseptic shock during pregnancy can improve the success rate of resuscitation.

Endothelial and Hemodynamic Function in a Large Animal Model in Relation to Different Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Cannulation Strategies and Intra-Aortic Balloon Pumping

BACKGROUND

The use of simultaneous veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) with or without an Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump (IABP) is a widely used tool for mechanical hemodynamic support. Endothelial function, especially in relation to different cannulation techniques, is rarely investigated in the setting of extracorporeal life support (ECLS). In this study, we analyzed endothelial function in relation to hemodynamic and laboratory parameters for central and peripheral ECMO, with or without concomitant IABP support in a large animal model to gain a better understanding of the underlying basic mechanisms.

METHODS

In this large animal model, healthy female pigs with preserved ejection fraction were divided into the following groups related to cannulation strategy for ECMO and simultaneous IBAP support: control (no ECMO, no IABP), peripheral ECMO (pECMO), central ECMO (cECMO), pECMO and IABP or cECMO and IABP. During the experimental setting, the blood flow in the ascending aorta, left coronary artery and arteria carotis was measured. Afterwards, endothelial function was investigated after harvesting the right coronary artery, arteria carotis and renal artery. In addition, laboratory markers, such as creatine kinase (CK), creatine kinase muscle-brain (CK-MB), troponin, creatinine and endothelin were analyzed.

RESULTS

The blood flow in the ascending aorta and the left coronary artery was significantly lower in all discussed experimental settings compared to the control group. Of note, the cECMO cannulation strategy generated favorable hemodynamic circumstances with higher blood flow in the coronary arteries than pECMO regardless of flow circumstances in the ascending aorta. The concomitant usage of IABP did not result in an improvement of the coronary blood flow, but partially showed a negative impact on the endothelial function of coronary arteries in comparison to the control. These findings correlate to higher CK/CK-MB levels in the setting of cECMO + IABP and pECMO + IABP.

CONCLUSIONS

The usage of mechanical circulatory support with concomitant ECMO and IABP in a large animal model might have an influence on the endothelial function of coronary arteries while not improving the coronary artery perfusion in healthy hearts with preserved ejection.

The impact of temporary mechanical circulatory support strategies on thrombocytopenia

One common but not well-understood phenomenon of temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS) use is thrombocytopenia. This clinical issue increases the risk of bleeding and the need for platelet transfusion. Additionally, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia must be considered as part of the differential diagnosis, which complicates patient management. In what follows, we analyze the degree and relative rate of platelet count drop with various temporary MCS strategies - Impella 5.5; Veno-venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (VV ECMO); Veno-arterial ECMO (VA ECMO); Intra-aortic Balloon Pump (IABP) and Centrimag Biventricular Assist Device (BIVAD). A total of 337 cohort was investigated. 77 was included for analysis after strict exclusion criteria were utilized (platelet transfusions, bleeding complications, etc.). Repeated measure mixed effect and linear regression models were used to assess the percent platelet drop on implantation of MCS and recovery after explantation of MCS. A statistically significant mean percent drop occurred in MCS types - VA ECMO(-69.6%, p < 0.001), VV ECMO(-40.9%, p < 0.001), Impella 5.5(-20.9%, p = 0.01) and IABP(-28.3%, p = 0.01), except Centrimag BIVAD(-6.5%, p = 0.61). Platelet recovery to or above baseline occurred in VA ECMO(+107.0%, p = 0.42), Impella 5.5(+117.2%, p = 0.28), IABP(+108.3%, p = 0.37), VV-ECMO(163.3%, p = 0.01*) and Centrimag BIVAD(+100.1%, p = 0.99). These results show that the degree of thrombocytopenia depends on MCS device type and is reversible.

Impact of intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation on all-cause mortality among patients with Takotsubo syndrome complicated by cardiogenic shock: results from the German-Italian-Spanish (GEIST) registry

Aims

Takotsubo syndrome (TTS) is an acute and reversible left ventricular dysfunction and can be complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS). However, few data are available on optimal care in TTS complicated by CS. Aim of this study was to evaluate short- and long-term impact of intra-aortic balloon pumping (IABP) on mortality in this setting.

Methods and results

In a multi-centre, international registry on TTS, 2248 consecutive patients were enrolled from 38 centres from Germany, Italy, and Spain. Of the 2248 patients, 212 (9.4%) experienced CS. Patients with CS had a higher prevalence of diabetes (27% vs. 19%), male sex (25% vs. 10%), and right ventricular involvement (10% vs. 5%) (P < 0.01 in all cases). Forty-three patients with CS (20% of 212) received IABP within 8 h (interquartile range 4-18) after admission. No differences in terms of age, gender, cardiovascular risk factors, and admission left ventricular ejection fraction were found among patients with and without IABP. There were no significant differences in terms of 30-day mortality (16% vs. 17%, P = 0.98), length of hospitalization (18.9 vs. 16.7 days, P = 0.51), and need of invasive ventilation (35% vs. 41%, P = 0.60) among two groups: 30-day survival was not significantly different even after propensity score adjustment (log-rank P = 0.73). At 42-month follow-up, overall mortality in patients with CS and TTS was 35%, not significantly different between patients receiving IABP and not (37% vs. 35%, P = 0.72).

Conclusions

In a large multi-centre observational registry, the use of IABP was not associated with lower mortality rates at short- and long-term follow-up in patients with TTS and CS.

Meta-analysis of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in combination with intra-aortic balloon pump vs. extracorporeal membrane oxygenation only in patients with cardiogenic shock due to acute myocardial infarction

Background

Incidence and mortality of cardiogenic shock (CS) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remain high despite substantial therapy improvements in acute percutaneous coronary intervention over the last decades. Unloading the left ventricle in patients with Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) can be performed by using an intra-aortic balloon pumps' (IABP) afterload reduction, which might be especially beneficial in AMI patients with CS.

Objective

The objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the effect of VA-ECMO + IABP vs. VA-ECMO treatment on the mortality of patients with CS due to AMI.

Methods

A systematic literature search was performed using EMBASE, COCHRANE, and MEDLINE databases. Studies comparing the effect of VA-ECMO + IABP vs. VA-ECMO on mortality of patients with AMI were included. Meta-analyses were performed to analyze the effect of the chosen treatment on 30-day/in-hospital mortality.

Results

Twelve studies were identified by the literature search, including a total of 5,063 patients, 81.5% were male and the mean age was 65.9 years. One thousand one hundred and thirty-six patients received treatment with VA-ECMO in combination with IABP and 2,964 patients received VA-ECMO treatment only. The performed meta-analysis showed decreased mortality at 30-days/in-hospital after VA-ECMO + IABP compared to VA-ECMO only for patients with cardiogenic shock after AMI (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.30-0.44, P≤0.001). Combination of VA-ECMO + IABP was associated with higher rates of weaning success (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.16-0.53, P < 0.001) without an increase of vascular access complications (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.35-2.08, P = 0.72).

Conclusion

In this meta-analysis, combination therapy of VA-ECMO + IABP was superior to VA-ECMO only therapy in patients with CS due to AMI. In the absence of randomized data, these results are hypothesis generating only.

Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation with concomitant Impella versus concomitant intra-aortic-balloon-pump for cardiogenic shock

INTRODUCTION

The intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) and Impella are left ventricular unloading devices with peripheral venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) in place and later serve as bridging therapy when VA-ECMO is terminated. We aimed to determine the potential differences in clinical outcomes and rate of complications between the two combinations of mechanical circulatory support.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, single institutional cohort study conducted in the intensive care unit (ICU) of Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Hong Kong. Inclusion criteria included all patients aged ⩾18 years, who had VA-ECMO support, and who had left ventricular unloading by either IABP or Impella between January 1, 2018 and October 31, 2020. Patients <18 years old, with central VA-ECMO, who did not require left ventricular unloading, or who underwent surgical venting procedures were excluded. The primary outcome was ECMO duration. Secondary outcomes included length of stay (LOS) in the ICU, hospital LOS, mortality, and complication rate.

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients with ECMO + IABP and 14 patients with ECMO + Impella were recruited. No statistically significant difference was observed in terms of ECMO duration (2.5 vs 4.6 days, p = 0.147), ICU LOS (7.7 vs 10.8 days, p = 0.367), and hospital LOS (14.8 vs 16.5 days, p = 0.556) between the two groups. No statistically significant difference was observed in the ECMO, ICU, and hospital mortalities between the two groups. Specific complications related to the ECMO and Impella combination were also noted.

CONCLUSIONS

Impella was not shown to offer a statistically significant clinical benefit compared with IABP in conjunction with ECMO. Clinicians should be aware of the specific complications of using Impella.

Safety of Bedside Portable Low-Field Brain MRI in ECMO Patients Supported on Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump

(1) Background: Fifty percent of patients supported on veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) are concurrently supported with an intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP). Acute brain injury (ABI) is a devastating complication related to ECMO and IABP use. The standard of care for ABI diagnosis requires transport to a head CT (HCT) scanner. Recent data suggest that point-of-care (POC) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is safe and may be effective in diagnosing ABI in ECMO patients; however, no data exist in patients supported on ECMO with an IABP. We report pre-clinical safety data and a case series to evaluate the safety and feasibility of POC brain MRI in ECMO patients supported with IABP. (2) Methods: Prior to patient use, ex vivo testing with an IABP catheter within the Swoop^® Portable MRI (0.064 T) System™ was conducted. After IRB approval, clinical testing was performed for the safety and feasibility of early ABI detection. (3) Results: No deflection force was measured with a 7.5 French Maquet Linear IABP within the 0.064 T field. Three adult ECMO patients (average age: 40 years; 67% female) supported with IABP completed four POC brain MRI exams (median exam time: 30 min). Multiple signal abnormalities were detected on the POC brain MRI, corresponding to HCT results. (4) Conclusions: Our preliminary results suggest that adult VA-ECMO patients with IABP support can be safely imaged with low-field POC brain MRI in the intensive care unit, allowing for the early and bedside imaging of patients.

Concomitant Intra-Aortic Balloon Pumping Significantly Reduces Left Ventricular Pressure during Central Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation-Results from a Large Animal Model

(1) Introduction: Simultaneous ECMO and IABP therapy is frequently used. Haemodynamic changes responsible for the success of the concomitant mechanical circulatory support system approach are rarely investigated. In a large-animal model, we analysed haemodynamic parameters before and during ECMO therapy, comparing central and peripheral ECMO circulation with and without simultaneous IABP support. (2) Methods: Thirty-three female pigs were divided into five groups: (1) SHAM, (2) (peripheral)ECMO(-)IABP, (3) (p)ECMO(+)IABP, (4) (central)ECMO(-)IABP, and (5) (c)ECMO(+)IABP. Pigs were cannulated in accordance with the group and supported with ECMO (±IABP) for 10 h. Systemic haemodynamics, cardiac index (CI), and coronary and carotid artery blood flow were determined before, directly after, and at five and ten hours on extracorporeal support. Systemic inflammation (IL-6; IL-10; TNFα; IFNγ), immune response (NETs; cf-DNA), and endothelial injury (ET-1) were also measured. (3) Results: IABP support during antegrade ECMO circulation led to a significant reduction of left ventricular pressure in comparison to retrograde flow in (p)ECMO(-)IABP and (p)ECMO(+)IABP. Blood flow in the left anterior coronary and carotid artery was not affected by extracorporeal circulation. (4) Conclusions: Concomitant central ECMO and IABP therapy leads to significant reduction of intracavitary cardiac pressure, reduces cardiac work, and might therefore contribute to improved recovery in ECMO patients.

Patient Selection for Protected Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Who Benefits the Most?

The evolution of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) enables a complete revascularization of complex coronary lesions. However, simultaneously, patients are presenting nowadays with higher rates of comorbidities, which may lead to a lower physiologic tolerance for complex PCI. To avoid hemodynamic instability during PCI and achieve safe complete revascularization, protected PCI using mechanical circulatory support devices has been developed. However, which patients would benefit from the protected PCI is still in debate. Hence, this review provides practical approaches for the selection of patients by outlining current clinical data assessing utility of protected PCI in high-risk patients.

Benefits of Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump Support in Patients with Postcardiotomy Shock Requiring Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation

Background: The benefit of the combined use of an intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) and venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) for postcardiotomy shock remains unclear. We aimed to analyse the potential benefits and safety of combining these two devices. Methods: We enrolled 200 patients treated with either VA-ECMO only or in combination with IABP (ECMO-I group) between January 2012 and January 2021. To adjust the patients’ backgrounds, we used propensity score matching for additional analyses, resulting in 57 pairs. The primary endpoint was 30-day survival. Secondary endpoints included successful weaning and complication rates. We also analysed hemodynamic parameters in both groups. Results: After propensity score matching, 30-day survival was better in the ECMO-I group (log-rank p = 0.004). The ECMO-I and ECMO-only groups differed regarding the secondary endpoints, including successful weaning (50.9% and 26.3%, respectively; p = 0.012) and the need for continuous renal replacement therapy (28.1% and 50.9%, p = 0.021). Complication rates were not statistically different between the two groups. Conclusion: Compared to VA-ECMO alone, the combined use of VA-ECMO and IABP is beneficial regarding 30-day survival in selected patients with postcardiotomy shock; successful ECMO weaning and freedom from renal replacement therapy is more common in patients supported with VA-ECMO plus IABP.

A Lifesaver Trinity for Unilateral Pulmonary Edema in a Cardiac Intensive Care Unit

A 72-year-old man with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease complained of worsening dyspnea. Physical examination and several diagnostic tests led to a diagnosis of unilateral pulmonary edema, which manifests as a classic radiographic image, but is usually misdiagnosed. Low-cardiac-output state, unilateral pulmonary infiltrates, and respiratory failure sets the diagnosis. The trinity of high positive end-expiratory pressure, intra-aortic balloon pump, and continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration may be life-saving.

Use of Impella device in cardiogenic shock and its clinical outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a life-threatening condition and mechanical circulatory support (MCS) might exert a relevant impact on its clinical course. Among MCS devices, Impella is very promising. Yet, its usefulness is still debated. We performed a meta-analysis of all studies evaluating the clinical impact of Impella in CS.

Methods

All studies including patients with CS and treated with Impella were included. The primary endpoint was short-term mortality. Secondary endpoints were vascular access complications and major bleeding. Data synthesis was obtained using random-effects metanalysis.

Results

Thirty-three studies and 5204 patients were included. Short-term mortality was 47%. Meta-regression analysis showed that patients age (p = 0.01), higher support level (p = 0.004) and pre-PCI insertion (p < 0.001) were significant moderators for the primary endpoint. Vascular access complications were registered in 6.4% of cases, whereas age (p = 0.05) and diabetes (p = 0.007) were significant predictors. Major bleeding occurred in 16.4% of patients. Meta-analysis of the subgroup of studies comparing Impella to IABP showed no significant difference in short-term mortality (RR = 1.08, p = 0.45), while rates of vascular access complications (p < 0.001) or major bleeding (p < 0.001) were significantly higher with Impella. Subgroup and metaregression analyses showed that these results were influenced by lower adoption rates of higher degree of MCS support (p = 0.003), and by higher vascular complications rates (p = 0.014).

Conclusions

Our results suggest that the choice of adequate device size, careful patients selection and optimal timing of MCS initiation are key to clinical success with Impella in CS. Large prospective studies are mandatory to confirm these results deriving from retrospective studies.

Impact of shock index before IABP implantation on recent prognosis of patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the impact of shock index before Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump (IABP) implantation on recent prognosis of patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMI) underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

A total of 103 patients with CS complicating AMI admitted in our hospital from June 2014 to May 2019 who underwent primary PCI with IABP support were enrolled in the study. We collected the data according to the medical records and collected their clinical manifestation and laboratory examination, as well as 28-day mortality, and also calculated the shock index (ratio of heart rate to systolic blood pressure) before IABP implantation.

RESULTS

Patients with higher SI at IABP insertion were associated with higher proportion of anterior infarction (81.5% vs. 61.2%, p = 0.022), previous history of PCI (24.1% vs. 8.16%, p = 0.030), culprit leision at left main (31.5% vs. 12.2%, p = 0.019), and final TIMI flow ≤ 2(55.5% vs. 26.5%, p = 0.003), invasive ventilation(40.7% vs. 20.4%, p = 0.026) as well as 28-day-mortality (81.5% vs. 61.2%, p = 0.022). SI at insertion may help predict recent outcome, with a cutoff value of 1.625, a sensitivity of 0.655 and a specificity of 0.708, and areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUCROC) was 0.713. On multiple analysis, SI, together with final TIMI flow, arterial pH and creatinine were independent predictive factors of recent prognosis among this population.

CONCLUSION

Among CS patients complicating AMI undergoing PCI with the support of IABP, higher SI before IABP implantation was associated with poorer prognosis, SI was an independent risk factor of 28-day mortality and may predict the 28-day outcome.

Bedside intra-aortic balloon pump insertion in cardiac intensive care unit: A single-center experience

Background

In contemporary Cardiac Intensive Care Unit (CICU), bedside intra‐aortic balloon pump (IABP) insertion under echocardiographic guidance may be an attractive option for selected patients with cardiogenic shock (CS). Currently available data on this approach are limited.

Aim

This study aimed to assess the feasibility and safety of bedside IABP insertion, as compared to fluoroscopic‐guided insertion in the Catheterization Laboratory (CathLab), and to describe the clinical features of patients receiving bedside IABP insertion using a standardized technique in real‐world CICU practice.

Methods

We prospectively evaluated all patients admitted the CICU who received transfemoral IABP between June 2020 and October 2021. The overall study cohort was divided according to implant strategy in bedside and CathLab groups. The primary outcome was correct radiographic IABP positioning at the first bedside chest X‐ray obtained after insertion. Secondary outcomes included IABP‐related complications.

Results

Among 115 patients, bedside IABP insertion was performed in 35 (30.4%) cases, mainly presenting with CS‐related to acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) (68.6 vs 33.8%; p < 0.001), with lower LVEF, higher proportion of right ventricular involvement and higher need of inotropes/vasopressors, compared to those receiving CathLab insertion. Bedside IABP insertion resulted feasible and safe, with similar rates of correct IABP positioning (82.9 vs. 82.5%; p = 0.963) and IABP‐related major vascular complications (5.7 vs. 5.0%; p = 0.874), as compared to CathLab positioning.

Conclusion

This study suggests the feasibility and safety of bedside IABP insertion, which could be of relevant interest in patients with ADHF‐related CS who may not need coronary angiography or other urgent CathLab procedures.

Outcomes of Impella compared with intra-aortic balloon pump in ST-elevation myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock

Background

Despite limited randomized trial data demonstrating clinical efficacy, the utilization of Impella in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients complicated with cardiogenic shock (CS) has increased over time.

Methods

We identified 75,769 hospitalizations with STEMI complicated by CS between October 2015 and December 2018 using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) codes. From this cohort, hospitalizations were stratified according to IABP or Impella placement. The primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were divided into efficacy, safety, and device-related complications. Propensity-score matching was used to account for differences in the baseline characteristics between the groups. Logistic regression was performed to get the odds ratio and confidence intervals.

Results

Among 75,769 admissions with STEMI and CS, hospitalizations with <18 years old, both IABP and Impella placement, and who underwent ECMO and/or LVAD implantation were excluded. After the exclusion, out of 72,791 admissions, 25,260 (34.70%) hospitalizations received IABP, and 7825 (10.75%) received Impella support. After propensity score-matched analysis, 7345 hospitalizations were included in each group. All-cause in-hospital mortality was higher in the hospitalizations requiring Impella support as compared to IABP (42.10% vs. 31.54%, adjusted OR 1.71; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.60-1.84, P < 0.0001). Impella was associated with a higher risk of in-hospital complications and hospitalization cost compared with IABP.

Conclusion

Impella compared with IABP in STEMI patients with CS was associated with higher in-hospital mortality and other adverse clinical and procedural outcomes.

To Balloon or Not to Balloon? The Effects of an Intra-Aortic Balloon-Pump on Coronary Artery Flow during Extracorporeal Circulation Simulating Normal and Low Cardiac Output Syndromes

ECMO is the most frequently used mechanical support for patients suffering from low cardiac output syndrome. Combining IABP with ECMO is believed to increase coronary artery blood flow, decrease high afterload, and restore systemic pulsatile flow conditions. This study evaluates that combined effect on coronary artery flow during various load conditions using an in vitro circuit. In doing so, different clinical scenarios were simulated, such as normal cardiac output and moderate-to-severe heart failure. In the heart failure scenarios, we used peripheral ECMO support to compensate for the lowered cardiac output value and reach a default normal value. The increase in coronary blood flow using the combined IABP-ECMO setup was more noticeable in low heart rate conditions. At baseline, intermediate and severe LV failure levels, adding IABP increased coronary mean flow by 16%, 7.5%, and 3.4% (HR 60 bpm) and by 6%, 4.5%, and 2.5% (HR 100 bpm) respectively. Based on our in vitro study results, combining ECMO and IABP in a heart failure setup further improves coronary blood flow. This effect was more pronounced at a lower heart rate and decreased with heart failure, which might positively impact recovery from cardiac failure.

The role of mechanical support devices during percutaneous coronary intervention

The practice of interventional cardiology has changed dramatically over the last four decades since Andreas Gruentzig carried out the first balloon angioplasty. The obvious technological improvements in stent design and interventional techniques have facilitated the routine treatment of a higher risk cohort of patients, including those with complex coronary artery disease and poor left ventricular function, and more often in the setting of cardiogenic shock (CS) complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The use of mechanical cardiac support (MCS) in these settings has been the subject of intense interest, particularly over the past decade . A number of commercially available devices now add to the interventional cardiologist’s armamentarium when faced with the critically unwell or high-risk patient in the cardiac catheter laboratory. The theoretical advantage of such devices in these settings is clear- an increase in cardiac output and hence mean arterial pressure, with variable effects on coronary blood flow. In doing so, they have the potential to prevent the downward cascade of ischaemia and hypoperfusion, but there is a paucity of evidence to support their routine use in any patient subset, even those presenting with cardiogenic shock. This review will discuss the use and haemodynamic effect of MCS devices during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and also examine the clinical evidence for their use in patients with cardiogenic shock, and those undergoing ‘high risk’ PCI

How Would the Authors Treat Their Own Temporary Left Ventricular Failure With Mechanical Circulatory Support?

In the last 20 years, mechanical circulatory supports (MCS) have overturned completely the outcomes and the clinical recovery of patients with isolated acute left ventricle failure (iALVF). This usually occurs more frequently than right-sided heart failure or biventricular dysfunction, and it mainly is caused by acute myocardial infarction. The primary role of MCS is to restore the tissue metabolism to preserve the vital organs' function but, on the other hand, they also have to relieve the workload stress on the heart. In this way, they allow not only the heart to recover from the acute event, but MCS also can stabilize the patient toward cardiac transplantation. The short-term MCS devices currently used in clinical practice are the intraaortic balloon pump, the Impella (Abiomed, Danvers, MA), and venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO), but the choice of the right and tailored device for each patient, as well as the timing to use it, is actually one of the most debated topics of MCS management.

Mechanical Cardiac Circulatory Support: an Overview of the Challenges for the Anesthetist

Purpose of Review

Owing to increased utilization of Mechanical Circulatory Support (MCS) devices, patients with these devices frequently present for surgeries requiring anesthetic support. The current article provides basics of perioperative management of these devices.

Recent Findings

Use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are on the rise with recently updated management guidelines. Veno-venous ECMO utilization has been widely utilized as a salvage therapy during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Summary

Intra-Aortic Balloon Pumps continue to be one of the most frequently used devices after acute myocardial infarction. ECMO is utilized for pulmonary or cardiopulmonary support as salvage therapy. LVADs are used in patients with end-stage heart failure as a destination therapy or bridge to transplant. Each of these devices present with their own set of management challenges. Anesthetic management of patients with MCS devices requires a thorough understanding of underlying operating and hemodynamic principles.

The clinical effects of IABP pumps combined with tirofiban in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction and on patients' serum levels

OBJECTIVE

To explore the clinical effects of the intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) combined with tirofiban in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and to analyze the combination's influence on patient serum levels.

METHOD

106 patients with AMI admitted to our hospital from February 2017 to February 2018 were recruited as the research cohort. The patients were randomly placed into a control group and an experimental group according to their order of admission, with 53 patients in each group. The patients in the control group were treated with IABP, while the experimental group was treated with IABP combined with tirofiban. The two groups' clinical efficacy and serum levels were compared.

RESULTS

The clinical efficacy in the experimental group was significantly higher than the clinical efficacy in the control group. After the treatment, both groups' serum indexes were significantly better, and the experimental group's indexes were comparatively better than the control group's indexes. The experimental group's thrombolysis and thrombin myocardial infarction (TIMI) glow grades were much better than the glow grades in the control group. The experimental group's left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) index was higher than the control group', while the left ventricular end-diastolic dimension (LVEDD) index and the left ventricular end-systolic dimension (LVESD) index in the experimental group exhibited lower levels when compared to the control group. The hemorheological parameters in the experimental group were much lower than the hemorheological parameters in the control group, and the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The clinical effects of an IABP pump combined with tirofiban in treating AMI are significant. The patients' clinical symptoms were alleviated drastically, and their serum levels and cardiac and cardiovascular functions improved significantly. Therefore IABP combined with tirofiban in the treatment of AMI is worthy of clinical application and promotion.

Combined use of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and intra-aortic balloon pump after cardiac arrest

OBJECTIVES

We investigated whether intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) combined with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) was associated with favourable neurological outcomes for patients after the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). Moreover, we evaluated the aetiology of cardiac arrest on the effectiveness of this therapy in a sub-study.

BACKGROUND

There is insufficient research on the optimal combination of machines for patients after ROSC is not established.

METHODS

This is a large-scale, multicentre, 30-day cohort study. Among 80,716 patients who delivered to the emergency room, 935 patients treated with VA-ECMO after ROSC were included using the data from the Tokyo Cardiovascular Care Unit Network Registry between 2010 and 2017. The study patients were stratified according to the use of IABP [the ECMO + IABP group (n = 762) vs. the ECMO-alone group (n = 173)]. We also evaluated the cause of cardiac arrest [acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and non-ACS] in the sub-study. To adjust the patients' backgrounds, we used the propensity score matching for additional analyses. The endpoint was 30-day favourable neurological outcome.

RESULTS

The ECMO + IABP group showed significantly better neurological outcomes than the ECMO-alone group (crude; 35% vs. 25%; log-lank P < 0.001). In the ACS subgroup, the ECMO + IABP group showed significantly better neurological outcome (crude; 34% vs. 18%; log-lank P < 0.001), but not in the non-ACS subgroup (crude; 38% vs. 32%; log-lank P = 0.11). These results are similar after adjustments to their backgrounds using propensity matching.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to VA-ECMO alone, the combined use of VA-ECMO and IABP is associated with better neurological outcomes after ROSC, especially in complicated ACS.

Determination of Brain Death in Patients Undergoing Short-Term Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices

OBJECTIVE

To describe apnoea test (AT) and ancillary study performance for brain death (BD) determination among patients undergoing short-term mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices, including extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP).

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed data regarding use of AT and ancillary study in consecutive adult patients who were diagnosed with BD while on MCS devices (including ECMO and IABP) over a 10-year period.

RESULTS

Out of 140 patients, eight were on MCS devices at the time of BD (four ECMO, two ECMO and IABP, two IABP). The most common aetiology of BD was hypoxic ischaemic brain injury (6/8, 75%). In four patients (50%), the AT was not attempted because of haemodynamic instability and ECMO; in the remaining four (50%), both AT and ancillary studies were used. In three patients on ECMO, AT was performed by reducing the ECMO sweep flow rate to a range 0.5-2.7 L/min in order to achieve hypercarbia. One patient underwent AT while on IABP which was complicated by hypotension. All patients underwent ancillary tests, most commonly transcranial Doppler ultrasonography (TCD) (7/8, 88%); among those, cerebral circulatory arrest was confirmed in six of seven patients (86%), all of whom had left ventricular ejection fracture (LVEF) ≥20% and/or were supported with IABP.

CONCLUSIONS

There are multiple uncertainties regarding BD diagnosis while on MCS, prompting the need for ancillary studies in most patients. Our study shows that TCD can be used to support BD diagnosis in patients on ECMO who have sufficient cardiac contractility and/or IABP to produce pulsatile flow. TCD use in ECMO patients low LVEF needs further study.

VA-ECMO With IABP is Associated With Better Outcome Than VA-ECMO Alone in the Treatment of Cardiogenic Shock in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether combining venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) with intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) improves outcomes in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) over VA-ECMO alone.

BACKGROUND

VA-ECMO is an upcoming technique in the treatment of cardiogenic shock (CS); however, it increases afterload. IABP + VA-ECMO has been suggested to reduce afterload and increase survival.

METHODS

A multicenter in-hospital registry was maintained on all patients undergoing VA-ECMO or VA-ECMO + IABP treatment for CS in STEMI.

RESULTS

Between 2015 and 2018, a total of 18 patients with STEMI underwent VA-ECMO ± IABP treatment for CS. The majority (n = 14; 78%) were male and median age was 59 years (interquartile range, 47-75 years). VA-ECMO + IABP was performed in 7 patients (39%) and VA-ECMO alone was performed in 11 patients (61%). The VA-ECMO + IABP group had more complex coronary anatomy and a higher number of patients with left main (LM) disease, LM + 3-vessel disease, or 3-vessel disease (VA-ECMO + IABP 86% vs VA-ECMO alone 18%; P=.03). The Survival After Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (SAVE) score did not differ between the groups (VA-ECMO alone -5.9 ± 2.4 vs VA-ECMO + IABP -6.1 ± 2.6; P=.88). The SYNTAX score was higher in the VA-ECMO + IABP group (32 ± 13 vs 22 ± 14 in the VA-ECMO alone group). In the total group, a SAVE score of -6 had a predicted survival of 25%-35%. Survival in the VA-ECMO + IABP group was 100% (7/7) and survival in the VA-ECMO group was 55% (6/11); P=.04. Good neurological outcome was achieved in more patients in the VA-ECMO + IABP group (VA-ECMO alone 45% vs VA-ECMO + IABP 100%; P=.04).

CONCLUSION

In STEMI complicated by CS, VA-ECMO + IABP leads to a lower observed mortality and higher observed good neurological outcome.

Concomitant ECMO And IABP Support in Postcardiotomy Cardiogenic Shock Patients

OBJECTIVES

Simultaneous mechanical circulatory support (MCS) with intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is common in postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock (PCS). This study aimed to analyse the effect of concomitant ECMO and IABP therapy on the short-term outcomes of patients with PCS.

METHODS

Between March 2006 and March 2017, 172 consecutive patients with central (c) or peripheral (p) veno-arterial ECMO therapy due to PCS were identified at the current institution and included in this retrospective analysis. Patients were divided into ECMO+IABP and ECMO alone groups. Further, the impact of ECMO flow direction was analysed for the groups.

RESULTS

A total of 129 patients received ECMO+IABP support and 43 patients were treated with ECMO alone. Median ECMO duration did not differ between the groups (68 [34; 95] hours ECMO+IABP vs 44 [20; 103] hours ECMO; p=0.151). However, a trend toward a higher weaning rate was evident in ECMO+IABP patients (75 [58%] ECMO+IABP vs 18 [42%] ECMO; p=0.078). Concomitant IABP support with either cECMO (73% [n=24] cECMO+IABP vs 50% [n=11] ECMO; p=0.098) or pECMO (57% [n=55] ECMO+IABP vs 33% [n=7] ECMO; p=0.056) was also associated with a trend toward a higher weaning rate off ECMO. In-hospital mortality did not differ between the groups.

CONCLUSION

This analysis found that, independent of ECMO type, additional IABP support might increase ECMO weaning; however, it did not influence survival in PCS patients. Larger studies are necessary to further analyse the impact of this concomitant MSC therapy on clinical outcomes.

Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support as a Bridge to Heart Transplant or Durable Left Ventricular Assist Device

Advanced heart failure refractory to medical therapy can result in patients presenting with progressively worsening hypoperfusion and cardiogenic shock. Temporary mechanical circulatory support is often necessary as a bridge to heart transplant or durable ventricular assist devices. These devices increase cardiac output. Several options are available for left ventricular support. With the exception of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, all other devices decrease left ventricular end-diastolic pressure. The choice of device should be driven by patient needs and the treating teams comfort. Timely identification of cardiogenic shock and use of shock teams are potential strategies that can help improve survival.

Gender-related propensity score match analysis of ECMO therapy in postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock in patients after myocardial revascularization

BACKGROUND

Gender is known to influence the pathophysiology and pathogenesis of the coronary vascular disease. Data on gender-related differences in patients with veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation due to postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock is lacking in current literature. We aimed to analyze the impact of gender on intraoperative and short-term outcomes of vaECMO patients after coronary surgery and postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock.

METHODS

Between 2006 and 2017, a total of 92 patients with PCS after CABG underwent vaECMO-implantation at our institution. After a 1:1 propensity score match (PSM) for relevant preoperative data, we identified a cohort of 32 patients, 16 males, and 16 females. Periprocedural and short-term outcome data were analyzed with respect to sex differences.

RESULTS

The mean age was 64 ± 11 years, and 79% (n = 73) were male patients. Clinical outcomes showed a 30-day all-cause mortality of 64% (n = 59). After PSM, male patients showed a significantly smaller number of arterial grafts (0.4 ± 0.53 male vs 1.1 ± 0.7 female; p = 0.037). Thirty-day all-cause mortality did not differ between the groups (56% male vs 75% female; p = 0.262). In general, short-term outcome data were comparable without significant differences for the matched groups.

CONCLUSION

Gender has no impact on patients with vaECMO therapy due to PCS in isolated coronary surgery.

In reply to: "Intra-aortic balloon pump protects against hydrostatic pulmonary oedema during peripheral venoarterial-extracorporeal membrane oxygenation"

Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is an increasingly utilized life-saving measure. However, left-ventricular distention from inadequate left-ventricular off-loading can lead to unwanted pulmonary and cardiac complications. We are writing to indicate our agreement with a recent article by Brechot et al. published in the June 2017 issue where the authors demonstrated that intra-aortic balloon pump provides mechanical support to off-load the left ventricle during VA-ECMO, which prevents pulmonary edema.

Impella support versus intra-aortic balloon pump in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (AMICS) is associated with high mortality rates. Data has shown that intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) support does not provide a survival benefit over optimal medical therapy in AMICS. Despite lack of supportive evidence, IABP is still commonly used in these clinical situations. The Impella percutaneous ventricular assist device (PVAD) (Abiomed, Denver, MA) rapidly deploys superior mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in patients with AMICS. However, the safety and efficacy of Impella in AMICS is a matter of ongoing investigation, and its role in AMICS management is not yet fully established.

METHODS

The databases of Pubmed, EMBASE and Cochrane Central databases were searched from inception to March 2020. Relevant randomized trials and observational studies comparing Impella versus IABP in AMICS were identified and a meta-analysis was performed using the random effect model. The efficacy endpoint of interest was short-term mortality (defined as in-hospital or 30-day mortality). The safety endpoints of interest were major bleeding, limb complications, stroke and hemolysis.

RESULTS

A total of 2 randomized trials and 5 observational studies with 3921 patients were included. No difference in short-term mortality between the two groups [RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.87-1.33, P = 0.49] was found. For safety endpoints, Impella was associated with significantly higher incidence of major bleeding [RR: 2.03, 95% CI 1.56-2.64, P < 0.0001], limb complications [RR: 3.67, 95% CI 1.56-8.65, P = 0.003] as well as hemolysis [RR: 9.46, 95% CI 1.75-51.22, P = 0.009] compared with IABP. No significant difference was observed for the incidence of stroke [RR: 1.07 95% CI 0.34-3.31 P = 0.91].

CONCLUSION

Impella support in AMICS patients was associated with a significantly increased risk of bleeding, limb complications and hemolysis without an improved short-term survival advantage compared with IABP.

Frequency of intra-aortic balloon pump insertion and associated factors in coronary artery bypass Grafting in a tertiary care hospital

Objective

To find the incidence of intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) induction and factors associated with its insertion in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).

Methods

This retrospective observational non interventional study was conducted at Cardiac Surgery Department, North West General Hospital and Research Center, Peshawar from December 2018 to March 2020. The total sample size was 360 patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The research was piloted in the cardiac operation theatre then cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) of Northwest General Hospital and Research center Hayatabad Peshawar. Data was collected from 360 patients scheduled for CABG. Total numbers of patients in whom IABP was inserted and factors associated with IABP insertions were noted. All the information was collected on a specifically prepared Form. Data was entered and evaluated in statistical package for social sciences form 25.

Results

In this study, a total of 360 patients were observed who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). We determined the frequency of IABP induction and the factors related to it. Gender distribution among patients who were assisted with IABP was 43% female and 57% male. IABP induction was done for most of moderately to severely reduced ejection fraction patients. Other factors related to patients who required IABP support were previous myocardial infarction 100%, hypertension 86%, diabetes mellitus 64%, coronary end-arterectomy 21% and smoking 7%. The results were analyzed. We have used the (SPSS) version 25 and Chi-square test for analysis in which the P-value less than 0.00001 is statistically significant.

Conclusion

Incidence of insertion of IABP among CABG population was 3.9% in our hospital. It is an essential support to post CABG patient with left ventricular dysfunction after cardiopulmonary bypass with moderate to severely reduced ejection fraction, Myocardial infarction, hypertension, diabetes mellitus. Smoking and endarterectomy were not significantly related to IABP induction in our study. Multicenter study is still required to find out the other factors governing the IABP insertion.

Aortix™: a novel intra-aortic entrainment pump

Use of short-term mechanical circulatory support pumps for cardiogenic shock, decompensated heart failure and high-risk coronary intervention is growing. The Aortix™ device (Procyrion, TX, USA) is the first axial-flow pump positioned in the aorta and is designed to provide short-term hemodynamic support. This review discusses the field of continuous flow aortic pumps and focuses specifically on emerging preclinical and clinical data supporting the development of these technologies.

Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation timing: A new numerical model for programming and training in the clinical environment

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) is the most widely available device for short-term mechanical circulatory support, often used to wean off cardiopulmonary bypass or combined with extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation support or as a bridge to a left ventricular assist device. Although based on a relatively simple principle, its complex interaction with the cardiovascular system remains challenging and open to debate. The aim of this work was focused on the development of a new numerical model of IABP.

METHODS

The new model was implemented in CARDIOSIM©, which is a modular software simulator of the cardiovascular system used in research and e-learning environment. The IABP is inserted into the systemic bed divided in aortic, thoracic and two abdominal tracts modelled with resistances, inertances and compliances. The effect induced by the balloon is reproduced in each tract of the aorta by the presence of compliances connected to PIABP generator and resistances. PIABP generator reproduces the balloon pressure with the option to change IABP timing. We have used literature data to validate the potential of this new numerical model.

RESULTS

The results have shown that our simulations reproduced the typical effects induced during IABP assistance. We have also simulated the effects induced by the device on the hemodynamic variables when the IABP ratio was set to 1:1, 1:2, 1:4 and 1:8. The outcome of these simulations is in accordance with literature data measured in the clinical environment.

CONCLUSIONS

The new IABP module is easy to manage and can be used as a training tool in a clinical setting. Although based on literature data, the outcome of the simulations is encouraging. Additional work is ongoing with a view to further validate its features. The configuration of CARDIOSIM© presented in this work allows the simulation of the effects induced by mechanical ventilatory assistance. This facility may have significant importance in the management of patients affected by COVID-19 when they require mechanical circulatory support devices.

[Individualized use of levosimendan in cardiac surgery]

BACKGROUND

Levosimendan is a cardiac inotrope that augments myocardial contractility without increasing myocyte oxygen consumption. Additionally, levosimendan has been shown to exhibit anti-inflammatory, antioxidative, and other cardioprotective properties and is approved for treatment of heart failure. Recent studies indicated that these beneficial effects can be achieved with doses lower than the standard dose of 12.5 mg. Patients with preoperatively diagnosed left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤40% received 1.25 mg levosimendan after induction of anesthesia. After surgery, administration of low-dose levosimendan was repeated until cardiovascular stability was achieved.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate if pharmacological preconditioning with 1.25 mg levosimendan in patients with LVEF ≤40% altered the postoperative need for inotropic agents, the incidence of newly occurring atrial fibrillation, renal replacement therapy, mechanical circulatory support and 30-day mortality. The cumulative dosage of levosimendan was recorded to assess the required dosage in the context of individualized treatment.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This retrospective study included patients with preoperatively diagnosed LVEF ≤40% who underwent cardiac surgery at this institution between January 2015 and December 2018 and who received 1.25 mg levosimendan after induction of anesthesia to prevent postoperative low cardiac output syndrome. Based on echocardiography results, invasive hemodynamic monitoring, and central venous or mixed venous oxygen saturation and lactate clearance, repetitive doses of levosimendan in 1.25 mg increments could be postoperatively administered until cardiovascular stability was achieved. The results were compared to the current literature.

RESULTS

We identified 183 patients with LVEF <40% who received pharmacological preconditioning with 1.25 mg levosimendan. Maximum doses of epinephrine, incidence of atrial fibrillation, need for renal replacement therapy and 30-day mortality were found to be below the published rates of comparable patient collectives. In 73.2% of patients, a cumulative dosage of 5 mg levosimendan or less was considered sufficient.

CONCLUSION

The presented concept of pharmacological preconditioning with 1.25 mg levosimendan followed by individualized additional dosing in cardiac surgery patients with preoperative LVEF ≤40% suggests that this concept is safe, with possible advantages regarding the need of inotropic agents, renal replacement therapy, and 30-day mortality, compared to the current literature. Individualized treatment with levosimendan to support hemodynamics and a timely reduction of inotropic agents needs further confirmation in randomized trials.

Patient Selection for Protected Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Who Benefits the Most?

The evolution of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) enables a complete revascularization of complex coronary lesions. However, simultaneously, patients are presenting nowadays with higher rates of comorbidities, which may lead to a lower physiologic tolerance for complex PCI. To avoid hemodynamic instability during PCI and achieve safe complete revascularization, protected PCI using mechanical circulatory support devices has been developed. However, which patients would benefit from the protected PCI is still in debate. Hence, this review provides practical approaches for the selection of patients by outlining current clinical data assessing utility of protected PCI in high-risk patients.