The intra-aortic balloon pump in high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: Is counterpulsation counterproductive?

Interventional Cardiology

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 211-234

  Myat, Aung ^a   McConkey, Hannah ^b   Chick, Louisa ^c   Baker, James ^a   Redwood, Simon ^b  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b ST THOMAS HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^c POOLE HOSPITAL NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

cardiogenic shock; diastolic augmentation; high risk; intra aortic balloon counterpulsation; intra aortic balloon pump; left ventricular systolic dysfunction; percutaneous coronary intervention

Indexed keywords

ACETYLSALICYLIC ACID; BETA ADRENERGIC RECEPTOR BLOCKING AGENT; DIPEPTIDYL CARBOXYPEPTIDASE INHIBITOR; LIDOCAINE;

ACUTE HEART INFARCTION; AORTA BALLOON; CARDIOGENIC SHOCK; CORONARY ARTERY BLOOD FLOW; EUROPE; HEART ASSIST DEVICE; HEART CATHETERIZATION; HEART HEMODYNAMICS; HEART LEFT VENTRICLE FUNCTION; HEART MUSCLE OXYGEN CONSUMPTION; HEART MUSCLE REVASCULARIZATION; HEART OUTPUT; HEART VENTRICLE ARRHYTHMIA; HIGH RISK PATIENT; HUMAN; PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; ST SEGMENT ELEVATION MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION; STENT THROMBOSIS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84859174336     PISSN: 17555302     EISSN: 17555310     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2217/ica.12.13     Document Type: Review

References (59)

1. Cutlip DE, Windecker S, Mehran R et al. Clinical end points in coronary stent trials: a case for standardized definitions. Circulation 115, 2344-2351 (2007).
2. Mehran R, Rao SV, Bhatt DL et al. Standardized bleeding definitions for cardiovascular clinical trials. A consensus report from the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium. Circulation 123, 2736-2747 (2011).
3. Hartzler GO, Rutherford BD, McConahay DR, Johnson WL, Giorgi LV. 'High-risk' percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Am. J. Cardiol. 61, 33G-37G (1988).
4. Califf RM, Phillips HR III, Hindman MC et al. Prognostic value of a coronary artery Jeopardy Score. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 5, 1055-1063 (1985).
5. APPROACH Investigators (Alberta Provincial Project for Outcome Assessment in Coronary Heart Disease; Graham MM, Faris PD, Ghali WA et al. Validation of three myocardial Jeopardy Scores in a population-based cardiac-catheterization cohort. Am. Heart J. 142(2), 254-261 (2001).
6. Keelan P, Johnston J, Koru-Sengul T et al. Comparison of in-hospital and one-year outcomes in patients with left ventricular ejection fractions or=50% having percutaneous coronary revascularization. Am. J. Cardiol. 91(10), 1168-1172 (2003).
7. Trost JC, HIllis DL. Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation. Am. J. Cardiol. 97, 1391-1398 (2006). Excellent, albeit slightly dated, overview of intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation.
8. Santa-Cruz RA, Cohen MG, Ohman EM. Aortic counterpulsation: a review of the hemodynamic effects and indications for use. Catheter Cardiovasc. Interv. 67, 68-77 (2006). Excellent, albeit again slightly dated, overview of the hemodynamic effects of counterpulsation.
9. Parissis H. Hemodynamic effects of the use of the intraaortic balloon pump. Hellenic J. Cardiol. 48, 346-351 (2007).
10. Kimura A, Toyota E, Lu S et al. Effects of intraaortic balloon pumping on septal arterial blood flow velocity waveform during severe left main coronary artery stenosis. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 27(4), 810-816 (1996).
11. Kern MJ, Aguirre F, Bach R et al. Augmentation of coronary blood flow by intra-aortic balloon pumping in patients after coronary angioplasty. Circulation 87, 500-511 (1993). Seminal paper on the post-stentotic diastolic augmentation of coronary blood flow by counterpulsation.
12. Kern MJ, Aguirre FV, Tatineni S et al. Enhanced coronary blood flow velocity during intraaortic balloon counterpulsation in critically ill patients. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 21(20), 359-368 (1993). Seminal work looking at coronary flow velocities during intra-aortic counterpulsation measured using a Doppler-tipped catheter.
13. Takeuchi M, Nohtomi Y, Yoshitani H et al. Enhanced coronary flow velocity during intra-aortic balloon pumping assessed by transthoracic Doppler echocardiography. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 43, 368-376 (2004).
14. Williams DO, Korr KS, Gewirtz H, Most AS. The effect of intraaortic balloon counterpulsation on regional myocardial blood flow and oxygen consumption in the presence of coronary artery stenosis in patients with unstable angina. Circulation 66, 593-597 (1982).
15. Shumacker HB Jr. Further development of heart-lung machines. In: The Evolution of Cardiac Surgery. Shumacker HB Jr (Ed.). Indiana University Press, IN, USA, 266-279 (1992).
16. Kantrowitz A, Kantrowitz A. Experimental augmentation of coronary flow by retardation of the arterial pressure pulse. Surgery 34(4), 678-687 (1953).
17. Clauss RH, Birtwell WC, Albertal G et al. Assisted circulation. I. The arterial counterpulsator. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 41, 447-458 (1961).
18. Moulopoulos SD, Topaz S, Kolff WJ. Diastolic balloon pumping (with carbon dioxide) in the aorta - a mechanical assistance for the failing circulation. Am. Heart J. 63, 669-675 (1962). Seminal paper describing a method of counterpulsation, tested in live anesthetized dogs, that avoided an extracorporeal circulation.
19. Kantrowitz A, Tjonneland S, Freed PS, Phillips SJ, Butner AN, Sherman JL. Initial clinical experience with intraaortic balloon pumping in cardiogenic shock. JAMA 203, 113-118 (1968). The first-in-man experience of intra-aortic counterpulsation.
20. Bregman D, Casarella WJ. Percutaneous intraaortic balloon pumping: initial clinical experience. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 29(2), 153-155 (1980).
21. Ferguson JJ III, Cohen M, Freedman JJ Jr et al. The current practice of intraaortic balloon counterpulsation: results from the Benchmark Registry. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 38, 1456-1462 (2001). First large-scale registry of intra-aortic counterpulsation examining the indications, outcomes and complications associated with this device.
22. The Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS); Wijns W, Kolh P, Danchin N et al. Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur. Heart J. 31, 2501-2555 (2010).
23. Writing Committee Members; Levine GN, Bates ER, Blankenship JC et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI guideline for percutaneous coronary intervention: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions. Circulation 124(23), 2574-2609 (2011). The writing panel committee has been bold and listed, for the first time in international guidelines, features that they feel are consistent with high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
24. Brodie BR, Stuckey TD, Hansen C, Muncy D. Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation before primary percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty reduces catheterization laboratory events in high-risk patients with acute myocardial infarction. Am. J. Cardiol. 84, 18-23 (1999).
25. SHOCK Investigators; Hochman JS, Buller CE, Sleeper LA et al. Cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction - etiologies, management and outcome: a report from the SHOCK Trial Registry. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 36, 1063-1070 (2000).
26. SHOCK Investigators; Sanborn TA, Sleeper LA, Bates ER et al. Impact of thrombolysis, intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation, and their combination in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: a report from the SHOCK Trial Registry. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 36, 1123-1129 (2000). Messages from the SHOCK Trial Registry with regard to counterpulsation and acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock.
27. Barron HV, Every NR, Parsons LS et al. The use of intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: data from the National Registry of Myocardial Infarrction-2. Am. Heart J. 141, 933-939 (2001).
28. Stone GW, Ohman EM, Miller MF et al. Contemporary utilization and outcomes of intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation in acute myocardial infarction. The benchmark registry. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 41, 1940-1945 (2003).
29. Curtis JP, Rathore SS, Wang Y et al. Use and effectiveness of intra-aortic balloon pumps among patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: Insights from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. Circ. Cardiovasc. Qual. Outcomes 5(1), 21-30 (2011). A recent registry ana lysis by a group from Yale University School of Medicine outlining significant variation in the uptake of intra-aortic counterpulsation for high-risk PCI.
30. SHOCK Investigators; Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Webb JG et al. Early revascularization in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. N. Engl. J. Med. 341, 625-634 (1999). Landmark trial of acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock and the value of early revascularization in this high-risk patient cohort.
31. SHOCK Investigators; Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, White HD et al. One-year survival following early revascularization for cardiogenic shock. JAMA 285, 190-192 (2001).
32. Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Webb JG et al. Early revascularization and long-term survival in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. JAMA 295, 2511-2515 (2006).
33. Perera D, Stables R, Thomas M et al. Elective intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation during high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention; a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 304(8), 867-874 (2010). Landmark study, and the largest randomized controlled trial to date, studying the impact of prophylactic intra-aortic counterpulsation in an elective high-risk PCI cohort.
34. Patel MR, Smalling RW, Thiele H et al. Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation and infarct size in patients with acute anterior myocardial infarction without shock. The CRISP AMI randomized trial. JAMA 306(12), 1329-1337 (2011). Landmark study looking at intra-aortic counterpulsation in the context of primary PCI for ST-elevation myocardial infarction not complicated by cardiogenic shock.
35. Beyond 12 hours Reperfusion AlternatiVe (BRAVE-2) Trial Investigators; Schomig A, Mehilli J, Antoniucci D et al. Mechanical reperfusion in patients with acute myocardial infarction presenting more than 12 hours form symptom onset. JAMA 293(23), 2865-2872 (2005).
36. Sjauw KD, Engstrom AE, Vis MM et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of intra-aortic balloon pump therapy in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: should we change the guidelines. Eur. Heart J. 30, 459-468 (2009). Landmark meta-ana lysis of intra-aortic counterpulsation in the context of ST-elevation myocardial infarction, which has formed the basis of the recommendations on intra-aortic counterpulsation emanating from the most current US and European PCI guidelines.
37. Bahekar A, Singh M, Singh S et al. Cardiovascular outcomes using intra-aortic balloon pump in high-risk acute myocardial infarction with or without cardiogenic shock: a meta-analysis. J. Cardiovasc. Pharmacol. Ther. 17(1), 44-56 (2011).
38. Chen EW, Canto JG, Parsons LS et al. Relation between hospital intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation volume and mortality in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. Circulation 108, 951-957 (2003).
39. Briguori C, Sarais C, Pagnotta P et al. Elective versus provisional intra-aortic balloon pumping in high-risk percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Am. Heart J. 145, 700-707 (2003).
40. Mishra S, Chu WW, Torguson R et al. Role of prophylactic intra-aortic balloon pump in high-risk patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Am. J. Cardiol. 98, 608-612 (2006).
41. Sianos G, Morel M-A, Kappetein AP et al. The SYNTAX Score: an angiographic tool grading the complexity of coronary artery disease. EuroIntervention 1, 219-227 (2005).
42. Dixon SR, Henriques JP, Mauri L et al. A prospective feasibility trial investigating the use of the Impella 2.5 system in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (The PROTECT I Trial): initial U.S. experience. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 2, 91-96 (2009).
43. Sjauw KD, Knorza T, Erbel R et al. Supported high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention with the Impella 2.5 device the Europella registry. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 54, 2430-2434 (2009).
44. Henriques JP, Remmelink M, Baan J et al. Safety and feasibility of elective high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention procedures with left ventricular support of the Impella Recover LP 2.5. Am. J. Cardiol. 97, 990-992 (2006).
45. Alasnag MA, Gardi DO, Elder M et al. Use of the Impella 2.5 for prophylactic circulatory support during elective high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention. Cardiovasc. Revasc. Med. 12(5), 299-303 (2011).
46. Seyfarth M, Sibbing D, Bauer I et al. A randomized clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a percutaneous left ventricular assist device versus intra-aortic balloon pumping for treatment of cardiogenic shock caused by myocardial infarction. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 52, 1584-1588 (2008).
47. Syed AI, Karkar A, Torguson R et al. Prophylactic use of intra-aortic balloon pump for high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: will the Impella LP 2.5 device show superiority in a clinical randomized study? Cardiovasc. Revasc. Med. 11, 91-97 (2010).
48. Thiele H, Sick P, Boudriot E et al. Randomized comparison of intra-aortic balloon support with a percutaneous left ventricular assist device in patients with revascularized acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. Eur. Heart J. 26, 1276-1283 (2005).
49. Cheng JM, den Uil CA, Hoeks SE et al. Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices vs. intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation for treatment of cardiogenic shock: a meta-analysis of controlled trials. Eur. Heart J. 30, 2102-2108 (2009).
50. Burkhoff D, Cohen H, Brunckhorst C, O'Neill WW. A randomized multicenter clinical study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the TandemHeart percutaneous ventricular assist device versus conventional therapy with intraaortic balloon pumping for treatment of cardiogenic shock. Am. Heart J. 152, e461-e468 (2006).
51. Ohman EM, George BS, White CJ et al. Use of aortic counterpulsation to improve sustained coronary artery patency during acute myocardial infarction. Results of a randomized trial. The Randomized IABP Study Group. Circulation 90, 792-799 (1994).
52. Abdel-Wahab M, Saad M, Kynast J et al. Comparison of hospital mortality with intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation before versus after primary percutaneous coronary intervention for cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. Am. J. Cardiol. 105, 967-971 (2010).
53. Stone GW, Marsalese D, Brodie BR et al. A prospective, randomized evaluation of prophylactic intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation in high-risk patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with primary angioplasty. Second Primary Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction (PAMI-II) Trial Investigators. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 29, 1459-1467 (1997).
54. van't Hof AWJ, Liem AL, de Boer MJ et al. A randomized comparison of intra-aortic balloon pump after primary coronary angioplasty in high-risk patients with acute myocardial infarction. Eur. Heart J. 20, 659-665 (1999).
55. Vaijayalakshmi K, Kunadian B, Whittaker VJ et al. Intra-aortic counterpulsation does not improve coronary flow early after PCI in a high-risk group of patients: observations from a randomized trial to explore its mode of action. J. Invasive Cardiol. 19(8), 339-346 (2007).
56. Intraaortic Balloon Pump in Cardiogenic Shock II (IABP-SHOCK II). http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00491036
57. Protect II, A Prospective, Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial (PROTECT II). http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00562016?term= NCT00562016&rank=1
58. British Cardiovacular Intervention Society. www.bcis.org.uk/pages/page- box-contents.asp?PageID=746
59. MAQUET. www.maquet.com