Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Impella versus extracorporal life support in cardiogenic shock: a propensity score adjusted analysis.
Wernly, Bernhard; Karami, Mina; Engström, Annemarie E; Windecker, Stephan; Hunziker, Lukas; Lüscher, Thomas F; Henriques, Jose P; Ferrari, Markus W; Binnebößel, Stephan; Masyuk, Maryna; Niederseer, David; Abel, Peter; Fuernau, Georg; Franz, Marcus; Kelm, Malte; Busch, Mathias C; Felix, Stephan B; Thiele, Holger; Lauten, Alexander; Jung, Christian.
Afiliação
  • Wernly B; Clinic of Internal Medicine II, Department of Cardiology, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria.
  • Karami M; Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
  • Engström AE; Department of Cardiology, Heart Center, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Windecker S; Department of Cardiology, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Hunziker L; Department of Cardiology, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
  • Lüscher TF; Department of Cardiology, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
  • Henriques JP; Imperial College, Research, Education & Development, Royal Brompton and Harefield Hospitals London, London, UK.
  • Ferrari MW; Department of Cardiology, Heart Center, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Binnebößel S; HSK, Clinic of Internal Medicine I, Helios-Kliniken, Wiesbaden, Germany.
  • Masyuk M; Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Pulmonary Diseases and Vascular Medicine, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
  • Niederseer D; Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Pulmonary Diseases and Vascular Medicine, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
  • Abel P; Department of Cardiology, University Heart Center Zurich, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
  • Fuernau G; Division of Cardiology, Pneumology and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine B, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
  • Franz M; Department of Cardiology, Angiology, Intensive Care Medicine, Medical Clinic II, University Heart Center Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
  • Kelm M; DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), Partner Site Hamburg/Kiel/Lübeck, Luebeck, Germany.
  • Busch MC; Department of Cardiology, Clinic of Internal Medicine I, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Jena, Germany.
  • Felix SB; Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Pulmonary Diseases and Vascular Medicine, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
  • Thiele H; Division of Cardiology, Pneumology and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine B, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
  • Lauten A; DZHK (German Center for Cardiovascular Research), Partner Site Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
  • Jung C; Division of Cardiology, Pneumology and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine B, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
ESC Heart Fail ; 8(2): 953-961, 2021 04.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33560591
ABSTRACT

AIMS:

The mortality in cardiogenic shock (CS) is high. The role of specific mechanical circulatory support (MCS) systems is unclear. We aimed to compare patients receiving Impella versus ECLS (extracorporal life support) with regard to baseline characteristics, feasibility, and outcomes in CS. METHODS AND

RESULTS:

This is a retrospective cohort study including CS patients over 18 years with a complete follow-up of the primary endpoint and available baseline lactate level, receiving haemodynamic support either by Impella 2.5 or ECLS from two European registries. The decision for device implementation was made at the discretion of the treating physician. The primary endpoint of this study was all-cause mortality at 30 days. A propensity score for the use of Impella was calculated, and multivariable logistic regression was used to obtain adjusted odds ratios (aOR). In total, 149 patients were included, receiving either Impella (n = 73) or ECLS (n = 76) for CS. The feasibility of device implantation was high (87%) and similar (aOR 3.14; 95% CI 0.18-56.50; P = 0.41) with both systems. The rates of vascular injuries (aOR 0.95; 95% CI 0.10-3.50; P = 0.56) and bleedings requiring transfusions (aOR 0.44; 95% CI 0.09-2.10; P = 0.29) were similar in ECLS patients and Impella patients. The use of Impella or ECLS was not associated with increased odds of mortality (aOR 4.19; 95% CI 0.53-33.25; P = 0.17), after correction for propensity score and baseline lactate level. Baseline lactate level was independently associated with increased odds of 30 day mortality (per mmol/L increase; OR 1.29; 95% CI 1.14-1.45; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS:

In CS patients, the adjusted mortality rates of both ECLS and Impella were high and similar. The baseline lactate level was a potent predictor of mortality and could play a role in patient selection for therapy in future studies. In patients with profound CS, the type of device is likely to be less important compared with other parameters including non-cardiac and neurological factors.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Choque Cardiogênico / Coração Auxiliar Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: ESC Heart Fail Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Áustria

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Choque Cardiogênico / Coração Auxiliar Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: ESC Heart Fail Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Áustria