Outcome of the impella device for acute mechanical circulatory support

Innovations: Technology and Techniques in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 12-16

  Lemaire, Anthony ^a   Anderson, Mark B ^b   Prendergast, Thomas ^b   Stockmaster, Neil ^b   Goodman, Andrew ^b   Lozane, Ann Marie ^b   Batsides, George ^b  

^a ROBERT WOOD JOHNSON UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b Abiomed   (United States)

Author keywords

Cardiogenic shock; Impella; Ventricular assist device

Indexed keywords

ACUTE HEART INFARCTION; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ASSISTED CIRCULATION; CARDIOGENIC SHOCK; CARDIOVASCULAR EQUIPMENT; CAUSE OF DEATH; CLINICAL ARTICLE; FEMALE; GASTROINTESTINAL HEMORRHAGE; HEART FUNCTION; HEMODYNAMICS; HOSPITAL DISCHARGE; HUMAN; IMPELLA DEVICE; ISCHEMIC CARDIOMYOPATHY; LEFT VENTRICULAR ASSIST DEVICE; MALE; MEDICAL DEVICE COMPLICATION; MEDICAL RECORD REVIEW; MULTIPLE ORGAN FAILURE; MYOCARDITIS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; POSTOPERATIVE CARE; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; STOMACH ULCER; SURGICAL MORTALITY; SURVIVAL RATE; TREATMENT INDICATION;

EID: 84876367462     PISSN: 15569845     EISSN: 15590879     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/IMI.0b013e31828e0a8a     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Lindholm MG, Boesgaard S, Thune JJ, Kelbaek H, Andersen HR, Kober L, for the DANAMI-2 Investigators. Percutaneous coronary intervention for acute MI does not prevent in-hospital development of cardiogenic shock compared to fibrinolysis. Eur J Heart Fail. 2008;10:668-674.
2. Ryan TJ. Early revascularization in cardiogenic shockVa positive view of a negative trial. N Engl J Med. 1999;341:687-688.
3. Forrester JS, Diamond G, Chatterjee K, Swan HJ. Medical therapy of acute myocardial infarction by application of hemodynamic subsets (second of two parts). N Engl J Med. 1976;295:1404-1413.
4. Prondzinsky R, Unverzagt S, Russ M, et al. Hemodynamic effects of intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: the prospective, randomized IABP shock trial. Shock. 2012;37:378-384.
5. Loforte A, Montalto A, Ranocchi F, et al. Peripheral extracorporeal membrane oxygenation system as salvage treatment of patients with refractory cardiogenic shock: preliminary outcome evaluation. Artif Organs. 2012;36:E53-E61.
6. Aiyagari RM, Rocchini AP, Remenapp RT, Graziano JN. Decompression of the left atrium during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation using a transseptal cannula incorporated into the circuit. Crit Care Med. 2006;34: 2603-2606.
7. Jeger RV, Radovanovic D, Hunziker PR, et al, for the AMIS Plus Registry Investigators. Ten-year trends in the incidence and treatment of cardiogenic shock. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:618-626.
8. Cohen M, Urban P, Christenson JT, et al, for the Benchmark Registry Collaborators. Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation in US and non-US centres: results of the Benchmark Registry. Eur Heart J. 2003;24: 1763-1770.
9. 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. 2009;30: 459-468.
10. Griffith BP, Anderson MB, Samuels LE, Pae WE Jr, Naka Y, Frazier OH. The RECOVER I: a multicenter prospective study of Impella 5.0/LD for postcardiotomy circulatory support. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013;145: 548-554.
11. Choi DC, Anderson MB, Batsides GP. Insertion of the Impella 5.0 left ventricular assist device via right anterior mini-thoracotomy: a novel practical approach. Innovations. 2011;6:265-266.
12. Koeckert MS, Jorde UP, Naka Y, Moses JW, Takayama H. Impella LP 2.5 for left ventricular unloading during venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support. J Card Surg. 2011;26:666-668.