Comparison of Impella and intra-aortic balloon pump in high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: Vascular complications and incidence of bleeding

Acute Cardiac Care

Volumn 14, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 120-124

  Boudoulas, Konstantinos Dean ^a   Pederzolli, Andrew ^a   Saini, Uksha ^a   Gumina, Richard J ^a   Mazzaferri, Ernest L ^a   Davis, Michael ^a   Bush, Charles A ^a   Capers IV, Quinn ^a   Magorien, Raymond ^a   Pompili, Vincent J ^a  

^a THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY WEXNER MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Impella; Intra aortic balloon pump; Percutaneous coronary intervention

Indexed keywords

ANTICOAGULANT AGENT;

ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROME; ADULT; AORTA RUPTURE; ARTICLE; BLEEDING; BLOOD TRANSFUSION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; GASTROINTESTINAL HEMORRHAGE; HEMATOCRIT; HIGH RISK PATIENT; HUMAN; INCIDENCE; INTRAAORTIC BALLOON PUMP; LEFT VENTRICULAR ASSIST DEVICE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MESENTERIC ISCHEMIA; MORTALITY; PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SAFETY; VASCULAR ACCESS; VASCULAR DISEASE;

EID: 84870947036     PISSN: 17482941     EISSN: 1748295X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/17482941.2012.741244     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Keelan PC, Johnston JM, Koru-Sengul T, Detre KM, Williams DO, Slater J, et al. Comparison of in-hospital and one-year outcomes in patients with lef ventricular ejection fractions < or = 40%, 41% to 49%, and > or = 50% having percutaneous coronary revascularization. Am J Cardiol. 2003; 91 : 1168-72.
2. Wallace TW, Berger JS, Wang A, Velazquez EJ, Brown DL Impact of lef ventricular dysfunction on hospital mortality among patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention. AmJ Cardiol. 2009;103:355-60.
3. Iliodromitis KE, Kahlert P, Plicht B, Hofmann AC, Eggebrecht H, Erbel R, et al. High-risk PCI in acute coronary syndromes with Impella LP 2.5 device support. Int J Cardiol. 2011; 153 : 59-63.
4. Sjauw KD, Konorza T, Erbel R, Danna PL, Viecca M, Minden HH, et al. Supported high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention with the Impella 2.5 device the Europella registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:2430-4.
5. Dixon SR, Henriques JP, Mauri L, Sjauw K, Civitello A, Kar B, et al. A prospective feasibility trial investigating the use of the Impella 2.5 system in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (T e PROTECT I Trial): initial U.S. experience. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2:91-6.
6. Brodie BR, Stuckey TD, Hansen C, Muncy D. Intraaortic balloon counterpulsation before primary percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty reduces catheterization laboratory events in high-risk patients with acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 1999;84:18-23.
7. Mishra S, Chu WW, Torguson R. Wolfram R, Deible R, Suddath WO, et al. Role of prophylactic intra-aortic balloon pump in high-risk patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol. 2006;98:608-12.
8. Henriques JP, Remmelink M, Baan J Jr, van der Schaaf RJ, Vis MM, Koch KT, et al. Safety and feasibility of elective high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention procedures with lef ventricular support of the Impella Recover LP 2.5. Am J Cardiol. 2006;97:990-2.
9. Mejia VM. Naidu SS. Her mann H. Textbo ok of Inter vent ional Cardiology 5th Edition, Topol EJ, editor. Philadelphia, PA, USA: Saunders Elsevier; 2008. pp. 643-4.
10. Raess DH. Weber DM. Impella 2.5. J C ardiovasc Trans Res. 2009; 2:168-72.
11. Williams DO, Korr KS, Gewirtz H, Most AS. The effect of intraaor-tic balloon counterpulsation on regional myocardial blood fl ow and oxygen consumption in the presence of coronary artery stenosis in patients with unstable angina. Circulation. 1982; 66 : 593-97.
12. Kern MJ, Aguirre F, Bach R, Donohue T, Siegel R, Segal J. Augmentation of coronary blood fl ow by intraaortic balloon pumping in patients af er coronary angioplasty. Circulation. 1993;87:500-11.
13. Valgimigli M, Steendijk P, Sianos G, Onderwater E, Serruys PW. Lef ventricular unloading and concomitant total cardiac output increase by the use of percutaneous Impella Recover LP 2.5 assist device during high-risk coronary intervention. Catheter Cardio-vasc Interv. 2005;65:263-7.
14. Seyfarth M. Sibbing D. Bauer I, Fröhlich G, Bott-Flügel L. Byrne R. et al. A randomized clinical trial to evaluate the safety and effi cacy of a percutaneous lef ventricular assist device versus intra-aortic balloon pumping for treatment of cardiogenic shock caused by myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008; 52:1584-8.
15. Thiele H, Sick P, Boudriot E, Diederich KW, Hambrecht R, Niebauer J, et al. Randomized comparison of intra-aortic balloon support with a percutaneous lef ventricular assist device in patients with revascularized acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. Eur Heart J. 2005;26:1276-83.
16. Cheng JM, den Uil CA, Hoeks SE, van der Ent M, Jewbali LS, van Domburg RT, et al. Percutaneous lef ventricular assist devices vs. intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation for treatment of cardiogenic shock: A meta-analysis of controlled trials. Eur Heart J. 2009;30:2102-8.
17. Perera D, Stables R, Tomas M, Booth J, Pitt M, Blackman D, de Belder A, et al. BCIS-1 Investigators. Elective intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation during high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2010; 304:867-74.