The use of impella 2.5 in severe refractory cardiogenic shock complicating an acute myocardial infarction

Journal of Interventional Cardiology

Volumn 28, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 41-50

  Casassus, Frederic ^a   Corre, Jerome ^a   Leroux, Lionel ^a   Chevalereau, Pierre ^b   Fresselinat, Aurelie ^a   Seguy, Benjamin ^a   Calderon, Joachim ^c   Coste, Pierre ^a   Ouattara, Alexandre ^c   Roques, Xavier ^a   Barandon, Laurent ^d  

^a HAUT LÉVÊQUE HOSPITAL   (France)

^b Libourne Hospital   (France)

^c BORDEAUX UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (France)

^d Bordeaux Segalen University   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INOTROPIC AGENT; LACTIC ACID; CARDIOTONIC AGENT;

ACUTE HEART INFARCTION; ADULT; ARTICLE; CARDIOGENIC SHOCK; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HEART ARREST; HEART HEMODYNAMICS; HEART LEFT VENTRICLE FUNCTION; HOSPITAL ADMISSION; HUMAN; INTRAAORTIC BALLOON PUMP; LACTATE BLOOD LEVEL; LEFT VENTRICULAR ASSIST DEVICE; MALE; PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SURVIVAL RATE; TISSUE PERFUSION; TREATMENT OUTCOME; ADVERSE EFFECTS; BLOOD; CIRCULATION; COMPLICATION; EPIDEMIOLOGY; FRANCE; HEART ASSIST DEVICE; HEMODYNAMICS; MIDDLE AGED; MORTALITY; MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION; TREATMENT FAILURE;

BLOOD CIRCULATION; CARDIOTONIC AGENTS; FEMALE; FRANCE; HEART-ASSIST DEVICES; HEMODYNAMICS; HUMANS; INTRA-AORTIC BALLOON PUMPING; LACTIC ACID; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION; PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION; SHOCK, CARDIOGENIC; TREATMENT FAILURE;

EID: 84923039215     PISSN: 08964327     EISSN: 15408183     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/joic.12172     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Reynolds HR, Hochman JS. Cardiogenic shock: Current concepts and improving outcomes. Circulation 2008;117(5):686-697.
2. Kar B, Gregoric ID, Basra SS, et al. The percutaneous ventricular assist device in severe refractory cardiogenic shock. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011;57(6):688-696.
3. Thygesen K, Alpert JS, Jaffe AS, et al. Task Force for the Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction. Third universal definition of myocardial infarction. Nat Rev Cardiol 2012;9(11):620-633.
4. Flavio Lopes, Ferreira MD, Daliana Peres, et al. Serial evaluation of the SOFA score to predict outcome in critically ill patients. JAMA 2001;286(14):1754-1758.
5. Knaus WA, Zimmerman JE, Wagner DP, et al. APACHE-acute physiology and chronic health evaluation: A physiologically based classification system. Crit Care Med 1981;9(8):591-597.
6. Cubeddu RJ, Lago R, Horvath SA, et al. Use of the Impella 2.5 system alone, after and in combination with an intra-aortic balloon pump in patients with cardiogenic shock: Case description and review of the literature. EuroIntervention 2012;7(12):1453-1460.
7. Engström AE, Sjauw KD, Baan J, et al. Long-term safety and sustained left ventricular recovery:Long-term results of percutaneous left ventricular support with Impella LP2.5 in ST-elevation myocardial infarction. EuroIntervention 2011;6(7):860-865.
8. Fuller BM, Dellinger RP. Lactate as a hemodynamic marker in the critically ill. Curr Opin Crit Care Jun 2012;18(3):267-272.
9. Seyfarth M, Sibbing D, Bauer I, et al.Arandomized 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 2008;52(19):1584-1588.
10. O'Neill WW, Schreiber T, Wohns DH, et al. The current use of Impella 2.5 in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: Results from the USpella Registry. J Interv Cardiol 2014;27(1):1-11.
11. O'Neill WW, Kleiman NS, Moses J, et al. A prospective, randomized clinical trial of hemodynamic support with Impella 2.5 versus intra-aortic balloon pump in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: The PROTECT II study. Circulation 2012;126(14):1717-1727.
12. Thiele H, Zeymer U, Neumann FJ, et al. Intraaortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med 2012;367(14):1287-1296.
13. Thiele H, Zeymer U, Neumann FJ, et al. Intraaortic Balloon Pump in cardiogenic shock II (IABP-SHOCK II) trial investigators. Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (IABPSHOCK II): Final 12 month results of a randomised, open-label trial. Lancet 2013;382(9905):1638-1645.
14. Patel MR, Smalling RW, Thiele H, et al. Intra-aortic balloon counter pulsation,infarct size in patients with acute anterior myocardial infarction without shock: The CRISP AMI randomized trial. JAMA 2011;306(12):1329-1337.
15. Perera D, Stables R, Thomas M, et al. Elective intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation during high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2010;304(8):867-874.
16. 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(1):23-30.
17. Zeymer U, Vogt A, Zahn R, et al. Predictors of in-hospital mortality in 1333 patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), Results of the primary PCI registry of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Leitende Kardiologische Krankenhausärzte (ALKK). Eur Heart J 2004; Feb 25 (4): 322-8.
18. Sjauw KD, Remmelink M, Baan J Jr., et al. Left ventricular unloading in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients is safe and feasible and provides acute and sustained left ventricular recovery. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;51(10):1044-1046.
19. Dixon SR, Henriques JP, Mauri L, et al.Aprospective 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 2009;2(2):91-96.
20. Cheng R, Hachamovitch R, Kittleson M, et al. Complications of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for treatment of cardiogenic shock and cardiac arrest: A meta-analysis of 1,866 adult patients. Ann Thorac Surg 2014;97(2):610-616.
21. Zangrillo A, Landoni G, Biondi-Zoccai G, et al.Ameta-analysis of complications and mortality of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Crit Care Resusc 2013;15(3):172-178.
22. Kim H, Lim SH, Hong J, et al. Efficacy of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in acute myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock. Resuscitation 2012;83(8):971-975.
23. Roos JB, Doshi SN, Konorza T, et al. The cost-effectiveness of a new percutaneous ventricular assist device for high-risk PCI patients: Mid-stage evaluation from the European perspective. J Med Econ 2013;16(3):381-390.
24. Maini B, Gregory D, Scotti DJ, et al. Percutaneous cardiac assist devices compared with surgical hemodynamic support alternatives: Cost-Effectiveness in the Emergent Setting. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2014;83 (6):E183-E192.