Clinical variability within the INTERMACS 1 profile: Implications for treatment options

Current Opinion in Cardiology

Volumn 29, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 244-249

  Dutt, Debleena Pain ^a   Pinney, Sean P ^b  

^a MOUNT SINAI MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b MOUNT SINAI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

cardiogenic shock; extracorporeal membrane oxygenation; intra aortic balloon counterpulsation; left ventricular assist device; percutaneous assist device

Indexed keywords

ACUTE HEART FAILURE; ACUTE HEART INFARCTION; BIVENTRICULAR ASSIST DEVICE; BIVENTRICULAR FAILURE; CARDIOGENIC SHOCK; CARDIOVASCULAR EQUIPMENT; COUNTERPULSATION DEVICE; DEVICE THERAPY; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; EXTRACORPOREAL MEMBRANE OXYGENATION DEVICE; HEART FAILURE; HEART GRAFT; HUMAN; INTERAGENCY REGISTRY FOR MECHANICALLY ASSISTED CIRCULATORY SUPPORT 1; INTRAAORTIC BALLOON COUNTERPULSATION DEVICE; LEFT VENTRICULAR ASSIST DEVICE; MYOCARDITIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SURVIVAL RATE; TREATMENT PLANNING; VENTRICULAR ASSIST DEVICE; ASSISTED CIRCULATION; CLASSIFICATION; COMPLICATION; DEVICES; DISEASE MANAGEMENT; HEART ASSIST DEVICE; HEART INFARCTION; HEMODYNAMICS; MORTALITY; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PATIENT SELECTION; PROCEDURES; PROGNOSIS; REGISTER; RISK ASSESSMENT; SHOCK, CARDIOGENIC; SURVIVAL;

ASSISTED CIRCULATION; DISEASE MANAGEMENT; HEART FAILURE; HEART-ASSIST DEVICES; HEMODYNAMICS; HUMANS; MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION; MYOCARDITIS; PATIENT SELECTION; PROGNOSIS; REGISTRIES; RISK ASSESSMENT; SHOCK, CARDIOGENIC; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 84899475828     PISSN: 02684705     EISSN: 15317080     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/HCO.0000000000000066     Document Type: Review

References (35)

1. Stevenson LW, Pagani FD, Young JB, et al. INTERMACS profiles of advanced heart failure: the current picture. J Heart Lung Transplant 2009; 28:535-541.
2. Aggarwal S, Slaughter MS. Acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: role of mechanical circulatory support. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther 2008; 6:1223-1235.
3. Killip T. Cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 1989; 14:47-48.
4. Hands ME, Rutherford JD, Muller JE, et al. The in-hospital development of cardiogenic shock after myocardial infarction: incidence, predictors of occurrence, outcome, and prognostic factors. The MILIS Study Group. J Am Coll Cardiol 1989; 14:40-46.
5. Holmes DR Jr. Cardiogenic shock: a lethal complication of acute myocardial infarction. Rev Cardiovasc Med 2003; 4:131-135.
6. Goldberg RJ, Gore JM, Alpert JS, et al. Cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction: incidence and mortality from a community-wide perspective, 1975-1988. N Engl J Med 1991; 325:1117-1122.
7. Brugts JJ, Caliskan K. Short-term mechanical circulatory support by venoarterial extracorporeal membrance oxygenation in the management of cardiogenic shock and end-stage heart failure. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther 2014; 12:145-153.
8. Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Webb JG, et al. Early revascularization in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. SHOCK investigators. Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock. N Engl J Med 1999; 341:625-634.
9. Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, White HD, et al. One-year survival following early revascularization for cardiogenic shock. JAMA 2001; 285:190-192.
10. Werdan K, Gielen S, Ebelt H, et al. Mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock. Eur Heart J 2014; 35:156-167.
11. Thiele H, Zeymer U, Neumann FJ, et al. Intraaortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med 2012; 367: 1287-1296.
12. Takayama H, Truby L, Koekort M, et al. Clinical outcome of mechanical circulatory support for refractory cardiogenic shock in the current era. J Heart Lung Transplant 2013; 32:106-111.
13. Lauten A, Engström AE, Jung C, et al. Percutaneous left-ventricular support with the Impella-2.5-assist device in acute cardiogenic shock: results of the Impella-EUROSHOCK-registry. Circ Heart Fail 2013; 6:23-30.
14. Ziemba EA, John R. Mechanical circulatory support for bridge to decision: which device and when to decide. J Card Surg 2010; 25:425-433.
15. Russo MJ, Jeevanandam V, Stepney J, et al. Intra-aortic balloon pump inserted through the subclavian artery: A minimally invasive approach to mechanical support in the ambulatory end-stage heart failure patient. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2012; 144:951-955.
16. Burkhoff D, Naidu SS. The science behind percutaneous hemodynamic support: a review and comparison of support strategies. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2012; 80:816-829.
17. Froesch P, Martinelli M, Meier P, et al. Clinical use of temporary percutaneous left ventricular assist devices. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2011; 78:304-313.
18. John R, Long JW, Massey HT, et al. Outcomes of a multicenter trial of the Levitronix CentriMag ventricular assist system for short-term circulatory support. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2011; 141:932-939.
19. Haft JW, Pagani FD, Romano MA, et al. Short-and long-term survival of patients transferred to a tertiary care center on temporary extracorporeal circulatory support. Ann Thorac Surg 2009; 88:711-717.
20. Pawale A, Pinney S, Ashley K, et al. Implantable left ventricular assist devices as initial therapy for refractory postmyocardial infarction cardiogenic shock. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2013; 44:213-216.
21. Hernandez AF, Shea AM, Milano CA, et al. Long-term outcomes and costs of ventricular assist devices among Medicare beneficiaries. JAMA 2008; 300:2398-2406.
22. Kutty RS, Jones NJ, Moorjani N. Mechanical complications of acute myocardial infarction. Cardiol Clin 2013; 31:519-531.
23. Holman WL, Pae WE, Teutenberg JJ, et al. INTERMACS: interval analysis of registry data. J Am Coll Surg 2009; 208:755-761; discussion 761-762.
24. Pagani FD, Naftel DC, Aaronson KD, et al. Changing characteristics of patients receiving mechanically assist circulatory support in INTERMACS. J Heart Lung Transplant 2010; 29:S27.
25. Boyle AJ, Ascheim DD, Russo MJ, et al. Clinical outcomes for continuous-flow left ventricular assist device patients stratified by preoperative INTERMACS classification. J Heart Lung Transplant 2011; 30:402-407.
26. Kirklin JK, Naftel DC, Kormos RL, et al. Fifth INTERMACS Annual Report: Risk factor analysis from more than 6,000 mechanical circulatory support patients. J Heart Lung Transplant 2013; 32:141-156.
27. Miller L, Pagani F, Russell S, et al. Use of a continuous flow device in patients awaiting heart transplantation. N Engl J Med 2007; 357:885-896.
28. Boyle A, Moazami N, John R, et al. The VentrAssist U.S. Pivotal Bridge to Cardiac Transplantation Trial. Paper presented at the Late Breaking Clinical Trial, 58th annual scientific sessions of the American College of Cardiology, March 2009, Orlando, Florida.
29. Slaughter M, Rogers J, Milano C, et al. Advanced heart failure treated with continuous-flow left ventricular assist device. N Engl J Med 2009; 361:2241-2251.
30. Stewart GC, Stevenson LW. Keeping left ventricular assist device acceleration on track. Circulation 2011; 123:1559-1568.
31. Kirklin JK, Naftel DC, Stevenson LW, et al. INTERMACS database for durable devices for circulatory support: first annual report. J Heart Lung Transplant 2008; 27:1065-1072.
32. Cleveland JC Jr, Naftel DC, Reece B, et al. Survival after biventricular assist device implantation: an analysis of the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support Database. J Heart Lung Transplant 2011; 30:862-869.
33. Sayer GT, Baker JN, Park KA. Heart rescue: the role of mechanical circulatory support in the management of severe refractory cardiogenic shock. CurrOpin Crit Care 2012; 18:409-416.
34. McCarthy RE 3rd, Boehmer JP, Hruban RH, et al. Long-term outcome of fulminant myocarditis as compared with acute (nonfulminant) myocarditis. N Engl J Med 2000; 342:690-695.
35. Mody KP, Takayama H, Landes E, et al. Acute mechanical circulatory support for fulminant myocarditis complicated by cardiogenic shock. J Cardiovasc Transl Res 2014; 7:156-164.