Comparison of Intraoperative Blood Product Use During Heart Transplantation in Patients Bridged with Impella 5.5 versus Durable Left Ventricular Assist Devices.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if the intraoperative transfusion requirements differ based on the mechanical circulatory device used as a bridge to heart transplantation. DESIGN: A single-center retrospective analysis of intraoperative transfusion requirements in all patients undergoing heart or heart/kidney transplantation between November 2018 and July 2021 who were bridged with a temporary (Impella 5.5) or durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD). SETTING: A tertiary care hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-three adult patients bridged to heart or heart/kidney transplantation with a temporary or durable LVAD between 2018 and 2021 INTERVENTIONS: Recording of baseline characteristics and intraoperative transfusion requirements, including packed red blood cells, fresh frozen plasma, cryoprecipitate, autologous blood salvage, and platelets. The difference in cardiopulmonary bypass times, intensive care unit length of stay, and the vasoactive inotrope score following transplantation were also recorded. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was the volume of blood products transfused intraoperatively. Patients who underwent bridge to transplantation using the Impella 5.5 had statistically significant lower median transfusions of cryoprecipitate (155 mL versus 200 mL, p = 0.015), autologous blood salvage (675 mL versus 1,125 mL, p ≤ 0.01), and platelets (412 mL versus 675 mL, p ≤ 0.01). Additionally, there was a trend toward lower transfusion of intraoperative packed red blood cells (4.5 units versus 6.5 units, p = 0.29) and fresh frozen plasma (675 mL versus 800 mL, p = 0.11), but these were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest a reduction in certain intraoperative transfusion requirements in patients undergoing heart transplantation bridged with the Impella 5.5 versus durable left ventricular assist device.

Impella 5.5 as a bridge to heart transplantation: Waitlist outcomes in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: The 2018 United Network for Organ Sharing allocation policy change has led to a significant increase in the use of mechanical circulatory support devices in patients listed for orthotopic heart transplantation. However, there has been a paucity of data regarding the newest generation Impella 5.5, which received FDA approval in 2019. METHODS: The United Network for Organ Sharing registry was queried for all adults awaiting orthotopic heart transplantation who received Impella 5.5 support during their listing period. Waitlist, device, and early post-transplant outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 464 patients received Impella 5.5 support during their listing period with a median waitlist time of 19 days. Among them, 402 (87%) patients were ultimately transplanted, with 378 (81%) being directly bridged to transplant with the device. Waitlist death (7%) and clinical deterioration (5%) were the most common reasons for waitlist removal. Device complications and failure were uncommon (<5%). The most common post-transplant complication was acute kidney injury requiring dialysis (16%). Survival at 1-year post-transplant survival was 89.5%. CONCLUSION: Since its approval, the Impella 5.5 has been increasingly used as a bridge to transplant. This analysis demonstrates robust waitlist and post-transplant outcomes with minimal device-related and postoperative complications.

Early experience with the Impella pump: Single-center registry.

BACKGROUND: With the rapid development of mechanical circulatory support technologies, patients presenting with cardiogenic shock have gained access to various treatment opportunities which were not until recently available. The Impella® pump (Abiomed, Danvers, USA) is a minimally invasive device which provides excellent left ventricular unloading and full circulatory support. The aim of the study was to review our center's experience with Impella® and to analyze the major adverse events associated with the device. METHODS: From January 2020 to January 2022, a total of 32 patients underwent Impella® implantation at our center for various indications. RESULTS: The mean age at surgery was 60.3 ± 12.4 years and 9.4% were female. All patients presented with acute cardiogenic shock in INTERMACS Class I (53.1%) and INTERMACS Class II (46.9%). Twenty-six patients (81.25%) out of the whole cohort have been mobilized on Impella® support. Seventeen patients (53.1%) have been weaned from the Impella® support and 10 patients (31.3%) have been bridged to durable LVAD. The median time on Impella® was 7 days (IQR 5.0-11.0). 30-day mortality was 37.5%, with 56.25% survival until hospital discharge. Only one patient developed vascular complications consisting of arm hypoperfusion. There were no cases of stroke on Impella® support. CONCLUSION: The Impella® axial-flow pump seems an appropriate therapeutic option for patients with acute cardiogenic shock requiring partial or full hemodynamic support. It also provides sufficient left ventricular unloading to allow full mobilization and neurological assessment of the patients. Furthermore, Impella® offers a high rate of myocardial recovery.

Successful use of Impella 5.5 to manage cardiogenic shock complicated by COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Acute decompensated heart failure in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is becoming increasingly common. AIMS: In this case report, we describe the successful use of an Impella 5.5 (Abiomed) to treat cardiogenic shock refractory to inotropic therapy. MATERIALS & METHODS: Transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography confirmed severely diminished left ventricular ejection fraction and a reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction test revealed that the patient was COVID-19 positive during his hospital admission. RESULTS: Following initiation of inotropic therapy, we placed an Impella 5.5 for further cardiac support. The patient's LVEF and cardiac index improved after 21 days on the Impella 5.5 and was maintained following explant. DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION: The findings reported here demonstrate successful use of an Impella 5.5 to improve native heart function in refractory cardiogenic shock and further indicate its use as an option for those in acute decompensated heart failure who have tested positive for COVID-19 infection.

ECPELLA 2.0-Minimally invasive biventricular groin-free full mechanical circulatory support with Impella 5.0/5.5 pump and ProtekDuo cannula as a bridge-to-bridge concept: A first-in-man method description.

BACKGROUND: Cardiogenic shock (CS) from biventricular heart failure that requires acute mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is associated with high mortality. Different MCS methods and techniques have emerged as a standard of care in CS. Nevertheless, the routine MCS approach carries multiple limitations such as limb ischemia, missing of left ventricular unloading and immobilization. We describe a method to establish a groin-free full support MCS in patients with CS without the need for thoracotomy. This is the first report of the ECPELLA 2.0 concept, a peripheral groin-free biventricular MCS in patients with acute CS. METHODS AND RESULTS: We discuss two patients in acute CS (INTERMACS I) treated with two peripheral MCS devices (Impella 5.0 or 5.5 surgically via an axillary artery and ProtekDuo cannula percutaneously via a right internal jugular vein) as a bridge before the implantation of a durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD). Biventricular assist device (BIVAD)-support duration was 9 and 15 days and both of the patients were successfully bridged to a durable LVAD. As our BIVAD-concept is groin-free, the patients started full mobilization as early as they were weaned from the respirator 2 days after the BIVAD-implantation. ECPELLA 2.0 provides a high cardiac output, right and left ventricular unloading with end-organ recovery and a possibility of administration of a membrane oxygenator. There were no device-related complications. CONCLUSION: The ECPELLA 2.0 biventricular support concept for patients suffering from an acute CS. Allows for rapid extubation, mobilization, and physical exercise while on full support. Additional application of a membrane oxygenator is easily feasible if required.

Suprasternal approach for insertion of Impella 5.5 into the proximal right subclavian artery.

The Impella 5.5 (Abiomed) is a percutaneous, temporary left ventricular assist device (LVAD) that serves as an important method of treatment of acute cardiogenic shock refractory to medical management. The Impella 5.5 and 5.0 are commonly inserted through the right axillary artery; however, this may be limited by inadequate vessel diameter to accommodate the Impella and inadequate vessel quality. A central approach to Impella 5.5 incision has been described in the pediatric population, particularly via the innominate artery through a suprasternal and/or neck incision, with success. As an alternative to axillary Impella placement, we propose the usage of a limited suprasternal incision for Impella 5.5 insertion in the adult population, either through the proximal right subclavian artery or the distal innominate artery. This may offer multiple advantages, such as increased vessel diameter and quality of more proximal vessels, avoidance of partial sternotomy, avoidance of a second infraclavicular wound site if the patient progresses to require LVAD or transplant, avoidance of lymphatic and nerve injury through the axillary exposure, ease of manipulation for repositioning, and patient rehabilitation. Potential limitations include difficulty due to body habitus, potential risk of stroke with the innominate approach, and wound complications. A central approach is a reasonable alternative to axillary Impella placement in patients with inadequate axillary artery caliber, defined as less than 6-7 mm diameter, poor artery quality to accommodate anastomosis, and small body habitus, allowing for ease of exposure.

Preemptive Impella 5.5 insertion to reduce operative risk in high-risk cardiac surgery: A case report.

INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE: Society of thoracic surgery (STS) risk score has been used as a tool to gauge operative risk of cardiac surgery patients. High-risk patients, with STS risk score > 8 %, are considered as having prohibitive risk and are not offered surgery. There is no established strategy to minimize postoperative hemodynamic instability using mechanical circulatory support (MCS), despite growing interest in utilizing MCS prior to hemodynamic instability. The Impella 5.5 can provide enough perfusion and unload the left ventricle. CASE PRESENTATION: We managed a 75-year-old male with multiple comorbidities and a presumed Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score higher than 9.8 %, who had redo coronary artery bypass grafting and aortic and mitral valve replacement with concomitant implantation of the Impella 5.5. Patient had a good recovery despite developing post-operative atrial fibrillation. DISCUSSION: Impella is used as a mechanical circulatory support device in patients with cardiogenic shock. It provides forward flow and effectively unloads the left ventricle. The concomitant placement of the Impella 5.5 in high-risk cardiac candidates may be associated with reduced operative risk. CONCLUSION: Placement of the device as part of surgical plan can potentially mitigate the perioperative risk by providing adequate endogean perfusion, decrease pressor support, unloading LV.

Optimizing Perioperative Care for Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation in High-Risk Patients Supported by Impella 5.5.

Impella 5.5 (Abiomed Inc., Danvers, MA, USA) is a surgically implanted mechanical circulatory support device that helps support hemodynamically compromised patients. The device's risks and benefits must be entirely known, especially in the electrophysiology lab. Due to unexpected hemodynamic changes during pace mapping and ablation, such as ventricular tachycardia (VT) and asystole, it is sometimes necessary to implement chemical support with inotropic agents such as epinephrine or mechanical support with devices such as an Impella. We present the case of a 72-year-old male with a biventricular implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA) placed for refractory VT presenting for VT ablation. He had ischemic cardiomyopathy with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 33% and medical history of cardiac sarcoidosis, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, pulmonary embolism, left bundle branch block, and coronary artery disease. Due to the nature of the procedure and his history of arrhythmia, the patient was deemed a candidate for Impella 5.5. After evaluating patient risk factors, the cardiothoracic anesthesia team developed a strategic approach with imaging (including radiographic and echocardiographic imaging), Impella monitoring, and pharmacologic management with inotropes and vasopressors, allowing for uncomplicated perioperative management during the ablation. Given the procedure's intricacies and the patient's arrhythmia history, the medical team identified the patient as suitable for Impella 5.5 due to better performance and greater cardiac output than Impella 2.5 (Abiomed Inc., Danvers, MA, USA). Following a thorough assessment of the patient's risk factors, the cardiothoracic anesthesia team devised a comprehensive strategy to facilitate smooth perioperative management during the ablation, minimizing complications. The VT ablation procedure was performed successfully and effectively terminated the arrhythmia. However, the patient developed multifaceted postoperative complications, including cardiogenic shock, hemorrhagic shock, dyspnea, anemia, gastrointestinal abnormalities, and sepsis.  This case represents a highly complex patient scenario under the care of the cardiovascular anesthesiologist due to the nature of the procedure and numerous cardiovascular comorbidities, low ejection fraction, ICD placement, and malignant ventricular arrhythmia. We discuss the various perioperative management strategies and how they are tailored to such patients, including pharmacologic intervention, anesthesia administration, imaging modalities, and postoperative care. The purpose of this case report is to delineate the role of Impella 5.5 in perioperative care for high-risk VT ablation patients. We discuss the progression, pathophysiology, and management of this patient's multisystem complications following the procedure. We also highlight the use of Impella 5.5 in the electrophysiology lab and the anesthesia considerations, safeguards, and management strategies to optimize perioperative outcomes and avoid complications.

A Rare Case of Leukemoid Reaction During Mechanical Circulatory Support in a Patient With Severe Heart Failure: An Autopsy Study.

The leukemoid reaction (LR) is reported to be caused by severe stress conditions such as infection, malignancies, intoxication, severe hemorrhage, or acute hemolysis; this condition is attributed to a very severe prognosis. Some reports have suggested that the LR was associated with a systemic stress response. A 36-year-old man who required mechanical circulatory support (MCS), including veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and Impella 5.5 due to severe heart failure, was transferred to our hospital. He showed a markedly elevated WBC count and died of multiple organ failure. The autopsy revealed the possibility that leukocytosis might have been due to an LR; however, the cause of the cardiac failure was unknown. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to report a rare case of LR in a patient with severe heart failure requiring MCS.

Intracardiac Shunt Reversal and Early Right Ventricular Failure after Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation.

Right ventricular failure (RVF) is a common complication that occurs after a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is implanted. We report an interesting case of severe and refractory hypoxia during the early postoperative period after HeartMate3 (HM3) (Abbott Laboratories, Lake Forest, IL) implantation resulting in the unmasking of a right-to-left intracardiac shunt through a patent foramen ovale (PFO), triggered by early RVF. Importantly, the patient had a small left-to-right shunt after receiving a left-sided Impella 5.5 micro-axial pump (Abiomed, Danvers, MA, USA) pre-LVAD implantation. We observed improved hypoxia but worsening RVF after percutaneous PFO closure, necessitating right-sided mechanical circulatory support. We outline potential reasons for the significant PFO-related shunting seen after HM3 implantation, but not after Impella 5.5 placement. Uncertainty exists regarding the approach to a PFO in patients undergoing LVAD implantation. We propose an approach based on existing literature.

Use of microaxial flow pumps in adolescents.

Objectives: The Impella 5.5 has been successfully used in the adult population; however, safety and efficacy data in patients aged less than 18 years are limited. Methods: Six pediatric patients, aged 13 to 16 years and weighing 45 to 113 kg, underwent axillary artery graft placement and attempted placement of the Impella 5.5 device at our institution between August 2020 and March 2023. Results: Indications for implantation were heart failure secondary to myocarditis (2), rejection of prior orthotopic heart transplant, idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy (2), and heart failure after transposition of the great arteries repair. Placement was unsuccessful in a 13.8-year-old female patient due to prohibitively acute angulation of the right subclavian artery, and venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation cannulation was performed via the axillary graft. In 5 patients with successful Impella 5.5 placement, median duration of support was 13.5 days (range, 7-42 days). One experienced cardiac arrest secondary to coagulation-associated device failure, requiring temporary HeartMate3 implantation. Four patients were bridged to transplant; 3 patients received a transplant directly from Impella 5.5, and 1 patient received a transplant after HeartMate3. The final patient received the HeartMate3 on Impella day 42 and is awaiting transplant. Conclusions: Although exact size cutoffs and anatomy are still being determined, our experience provides a framework for use of the Impella 5.5 in adolescents.

Staged revascularization and multi-modal mechanical circulatory supports in a patient with severe cardiogenic shock due to acute-on-chronic coronary syndrome.

Acute coronary syndrome with cardiogenic shock is a life-threatening condition, but with planned staged treatment combined with coronary revascularization and mechanical circulatory supports its management is increasingly possible. Here, we present our successful life-saving case. A 76-year-old male patient was diagnosed with ST-elevation myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock due to severe stenosis of the left main coronary artery based on the severe triple vessel disease. We initially introduced Impella CP and performed a percutaneous coronary intervention without stenting on the patient. We maintained hemodynamics with Impella CP and performed coronary artery bypass grafting after a week. Intraoperatively, Impella CP was left to function as a left ventricular vent. The patient required upgrading to Impella 5.5 plus veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation postoperatively, but his condition gradually improved, all mechanical circulatory supports could be weaned off, and he eventually survived.

The impact of temporary mechanical circulatory support strategies on thrombocytopenia.

One common but not well-understood phenomenon of temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS) use is thrombocytopenia. This clinical issue increases the risk of bleeding and the need for platelet transfusion. Additionally, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia must be considered as part of the differential diagnosis, which complicates patient management. In what follows, we analyze the degree and relative rate of platelet count drop with various temporary MCS strategies - Impella 5.5; Veno-venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (VV ECMO); Veno-arterial ECMO (VA ECMO); Intra-aortic Balloon Pump (IABP) and Centrimag Biventricular Assist Device (BIVAD). A total of 337 cohort was investigated. 77 was included for analysis after strict exclusion criteria were utilized (platelet transfusions, bleeding complications, etc.). Repeated measure mixed effect and linear regression models were used to assess the percent platelet drop on implantation of MCS and recovery after explantation of MCS. A statistically significant mean percent drop occurred in MCS types - VA ECMO(-69.6%, p < 0.001), VV ECMO(-40.9%, p < 0.001), Impella 5.5(-20.9%, p = 0.01) and IABP(-28.3%, p = 0.01), except Centrimag BIVAD(-6.5%, p = 0.61). Platelet recovery to or above baseline occurred in VA ECMO(+107.0%, p = 0.42), Impella 5.5(+117.2%, p = 0.28), IABP(+108.3%, p = 0.37), VV-ECMO(163.3%, p = 0.01*) and Centrimag BIVAD(+100.1%, p = 0.99). These results show that the degree of thrombocytopenia depends on MCS device type and is reversible.

Test Bench for Right Ventricular Failure Reversibility: The Hybrid BiVAD Concept.

BACKGROUND: When heart transplantation and myocardial recovery are unlikely, patients presenting with biventricular cardiogenic shock initially treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) may benefit from a mechanical support upgrade. In this scenario, a micro-invasive approach is proposed: the combination of the double-lumen ProtekDuo cannula (Livanova, London, UK) and the Impella 5.5 (Abiomed, Danvers, MA) trans-aortic pump that translates into a hybrid BiVAD. METHODS: All consecutive ECMO patients presenting with biventricular cardiogenic shock and ineligibility to heart transplantation from August 2022 were prospectively enrolled. The clinical course, procedural details, and in-hospital events were collected via electronic medical records. RESULTS: A total of three patients, who were temporarily not eligible for heart transplantation or durable LVAD due to severe acute pneumonia and right ventricular (RV) dysfunction, were implanted with a hybrid BiVAD. This strategy provided high-flow biventricular support while pulmonary function ameliorated. Moreover, by differentially sustaining the systemic and pulmonary circulation, it allowed for a more adequate reassessment of RV function. All the patients were considered eligible for isolated durable LVAD and underwent less invasive LVAD implantation paired with a planned postoperative RVAD. In all cases, RV function gradually recovered and the RVAD was successfully removed. CONCLUSIONS: The Hybrid BiVAD represents an up-to-date micro-invasive mechanical treatment of acute biventricular failure beyond ECMO. Its rationale relies on more physiological circulation across the lungs, the complete biventricular unloading, and the possibility of including an oxygenator in the circuit. Finally, the independent and differential control of pulmonary and systemic flows allows for more accurate RV function evaluation for isolated durable LVAD eligibility reassessment.

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation-Impella (ECPELLA) in a Patient With Recalcitrant Ventricular Tachycardia Undergoing Ablation.

In advanced heart failure, refractory hemodynamically unstable ventricular tachycardia (VT) can be life-threatening. The utilization of short-term temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS) has been described. Still, it is limited to the intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) or Impella 2.5/CP (Abiomed Inc., Danvers, MA, USA) which may only provide up to 1-2.5 L/min of added support. Escalation of MCS therapies should be considered. Referrals to advanced tertiary heart transplant centers should be done early to afford patients the best chance at an optimal outcome, with the option for heart transplant evaluation if needed. We present a case of recalcitrant hemodynamically unstable VT complicated by cardiac arrest, eventually undergoing successful VT ablation while supported on veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA ECMO) and Impella 5.5 as a vent strategy in the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation-Impella (ECPELLA) configuration.

Placement of Temporary Left Ventricular Assist Device Using Monitored Anesthesia Care and Regional Anesthesia.

Patients with advanced cardiogenic shock requiring mechanical circulatory support are uniquely susceptible to clinical deterioration. Limiting physiologic perturbations via avoidance of general anesthesia and endotracheal intubation by awake Impella 5.5 placement is safe and may represent a novel strategy in mechanical circulatory support initiation among patients in cardiogenic shock. (Level of Difficulty: Intermediate.).

Temporary circulatory support with surgically implanted microaxial pumps in postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock following coronary artery bypass surgery.

Objectives: Patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery may develop postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock. In these cases, implantation of an Impella 5.0 or 5.5 microaxial pump offers full hemodynamic support while simultaneously unloading of the left ventricle. Methods: Preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative data of all patients receiving postoperative support with an Impella 5.0 or 5.5 after CABG surgery between September 2017 and October 2022 were retrospectively collected. Cohort built-up was performed according to the timing of Impella implantation, either simultaneous during CABG surgery or delayed. Results: A total of n = 42 patients received postoperative Impella support, of whom 27 patients underwent simultaneous Impella implantation during CABG surgery and 15 patients underwent delayed Impella therapy. Preoperative left ventricular ejection fraction was similarly low in both groups (26.7 ± 0.7% vs 24.8 ± 11.3%; P = .32). In the delayed cohort, Impella implantation was performed after a median of 1 (1; 2) days after CABG surgery. Survival after 30 days (75.6% vs 47.6%, P = .04) and 1 year (69.4% vs 29.8%, P = .03) was better in the cohort receiving simultaneous Impella implantation. Conclusions: The combined advantages of hemodynamic support and LV unloading with microaxial pumps may lead to a favorable survival in patients with left ventricular failure following CABG surgery. Early implantation during the initial surgery shows a trend toward a more favorable survival as compared with patients receiving delayed support.

A case series analysis on the clinical experience of Impella 5.5® at a large tertiary care centre.

AIMS: We aimed to detail the early clinical experience with pVAD 5.5 at a large academic medical centre. Impella® 5.5 (Abiomed) is a temporary peripherally inserted left ventricular assist device (pVAD) used for the treatment of cardiogenic shock (CS). This system has several modifications aimed at improving deliverability and durability over the pVAD 5.0 system, but real-world experience with this device remains limited. METHODS AND RESULTS: We collected clinical and outcome data on all patients supported with pVAD 5.5 at our centre between February and December 2020, including procedural and device-related complications. Fourteen patients with pVAD 5.5 were included. Aetiology of CS was acute myocardial infarction (n = 6), decompensated heart failure (n = 6), suspected myocarditis (n = 1), and post-cardiotomy CS (n = 1). Four patients received pVAD 5.5 after being on inotropes alone, two were escalated from intra-aortic balloon pump, two were escalated from pVAD CP, and six patients were transitioned to pVAD 5.5 from extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Median duration of pVAD 5.5 support was 12 (interquartile range 7, 25) days. Complications included axillary insertion site haematoma (n = 3), acute kidney injury (n = 3), severe thrombocytopenia (n = 1), and stroke (n = 1). No valve injury or limb complications occurred. Survival to device explant for recovery or transition to another therapy was 11/14 (79%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this early experience of the pVAD 5.5, procedural and device-related complications were observed but were manageable, and overall survival was high in this critically ill cohort, particularly when the device was used as a bridge to other therapies.

Advantages of intraoperative implantation of Impella 5.5 SmartAssist in the Management of Acute Post-Infarction Ventricular Septal Defect with cardiogenic shock.

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in surgical techniques and aggressive therapy of post-infarction ventricular septal defect (VSD) with cardiogenic shock, the overall morbidity and mortality is frustratingly high. The Impella 5.5 SmartAssist (Abiomed, Danvers, MA) is a surgically implanted temporary device, recently approved by the FDA ( https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20190925005454/en/ ) for treatment of patients in cardiogenic shock, and may fill a technological gap for patients who require acute circulatory support after VSD closure. CASE PRESENTATION: We report our initial experience for two patients with post myocardial infarction VSD in the setting of cardiogenic shock supported with trans-aortic implantation Impella 5.5 SmartAssist. First patient had a posterior VSD with a left to right shunt (Qp/Qs ratio of 3.3), blood pressure 80/35 mmHg, right ventricle dysfunction, severe pulmonary arterial hypertension (an estimated systolic pulmonary artery pressure of 45 mmHg), and severe mitral valve regurgitation. Second patient was admitted for massive MI with large anterior VSD (Qp/Qs ratio of 2.8). Under cardiopulmonary bypass with cardioplegic arrest both patients underwent urgent VSD closure with trans-aortic implantation of the Impella. Minimal postoperative support was required. Patients were discharged on postoperative day 10 and 14 and remained well 3 months later. Follow-up echocardiogram showed no residual shunt. CONCLUSIONS: Early surgical implantation of Impella 5.5 SmartAssist can prevent multiorgan dysfunction and stabilize the patients in cardiogenic shock with post-myocardial infarction VSD.