RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The Impella 5.5® is commonly inserted via the axillary artery (AX) in patients with cardiogenic shock. The right AX has traditionally been preferred to avoid crossing the aortic arch, and a minimum diameter of 7 mm has been recommended to accommodate the device (21 Fr). There is limited data on choice of laterality of access and AX size required, both in terms of technicality of the procedure as well as outcomes. METHODS: We performed a single-center retrospective cohort analysis of patients who underwent Impella 5.5® implantation between December 2020 and February 2024 (N = 75). Data including demographics and outcomes were stratified both by diameter (small, <7 mm vs. normal, ≥7 mm) and laterality of access (right vs. left). Adverse events included stroke, limb ischemia, procedural bleeding or infection, and unplanned explant due to complications. Delivery time was defined as time from advancing the first wire to activation of the device. RESULTS: AX approach was attempted in all (N = 74) but one requiring innominate access, with a technical success rate of 95.9% (N = 71/74). The mean age was 58.8 ± 13.3 years, with 81.1% males. The median delivery time was 7.0 (25th, 75th percentiles: 4.0, 11.5) min with a median support duration of 13 (7.7, 24) days. Ten patients (13.5%) had a small AX, with a mean diameter of 6.3 ± 0.5 mm and were more likely to be younger compared to the normal AX group. Fifty-nine patients (79.7%) had insertion via the right AX. Median delivery time was comparable across all groups (small, 5.4 [3.5, 10.9] vs. normal, 7 [4.0, 12.1] min, p = 0.59) and (right, 10.4 [5.3, 15.2] vs. left, 6 [3.7, 10.4] min, p = 0.35). There was no difference between the rates of stroke, ischemia, bleeding, or infection when comparing by size or laterality. Survival to discharge was 59.5%, with 21.1% mortality on support, all in patients with a normal AX diameter, but with no difference between right versus left. CONCLUSION: In our study, laterality and a small diameter of AX access did not affect outcomes of Impella 5.5®, with a similar safety profile.
RESUMO
Optimal flow balance between Impella 5.5 and veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support in the setting of EC-PELLA (ECMO+Impella) is unknown. Outcomes of high Impella 5.5 flow in the setting of EC-PELLA support were reviewed (N = 7). EC-PELLA was successfully explanted in 6 patients (bridge-to-transplant, N = 1; bridge-to-recovery, N = 5). The median duration of EC-PELLA support in explanted patients was 6 days. Survival at discharge was 71.4% (5 patients). In terms of device-related events, either VA-ECMO or Impella-related complications were not experienced. The median performance level of Impella 5.5 was P5 at the time of starting EC-PELLA support and then increased with time up to the median of P8 with increment of the Impella flow, and index (L/min/m2 ). The percentage of Impella flow per total EC- PELLA flow reached 50% after 48 h of support. The vasoactive-inotropic score and serum lactate level improved after institution of EC-PELLA support as well as the pulmonary artery pressures and central venous pressure. In conclusion, a high pump flow from Impella 5.5 with partial VA-ECMO support in the setting of EC-PELLA provided great support with favorable survival and device-related complications rate.