Temporary mechanical circulatory support with Impella in cardiac surgery: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Perioperative cardiogenic shock (CS) in cardiac surgery is still burdened by a high mortality risk. The introduction of Impella pumps in the therapeutic armory of temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) has potential implications to improve the management of complex cases, although it has never been systematically addressed. We performed a systematic review of the reported use of tMCS with Impella in cardiac surgery. METHODS: We searched PubMed for all original studies on the Impella use in adult patients in cardiac surgery. RESULTS: Nineteen studies (out of 151 identified by search string) were included. All studies were observational and all but one (95%) were retrospective. Seven studies focused on the implantation of Impella in the pre-operative setting (coronary or valvular surgery), either as a prophylactic device in high-risk cases (3 studies) or in patients with CS as stabilization tool prior to cardiac surgery procedure (4 studies). Three studies reported the use of Impella as periprocedural support for percutaneous valvular procedure, three as bridge to heart replacement, and six for postcardiotomy CS. Impella support had a low complication rate and was successful in supporting hemodynamics pre-, intra- and postoperatively. Most consistently reported data were left-ventricular ejection fraction at implant, short-term survival and weaning rate. CONCLUSIONS: tMCS with Impella in cardiac surgery patients is feasible and successful. It can be applied in selected cardiac surgery patients and presents advantages over other types of support. Systematic prospective studies are needed to standardize indications for implant and management of surgical issues, and to identify which patients may benefit.

Effects on health-related quality of life of interventions affecting survival in critically ill patients: a systematic review.

Survival has been considered the cornerstone for clinical outcome evaluation in critically ill patients admitted to intensive care unit (ICU). There is evidence that ICU survivors commonly show impairments in long-term outcomes such as quality of life (QoL) considering them as the most relevant ones. In the last years, the concept of patient-important outcomes has been introduced and increasingly reported in peer-reviewed publications. In the present systematic review, we evaluated how many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were conducted on critically ill patients and reporting a benefit on survival reported also data on QoL. All RCTs investigating nonsurgical interventions that significantly reduced mortality in critically ill patients were searched on MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus and Embase from inception until August 2021. In a second stage, for all the included studies, the outcome QoL was investigated. The primary outcome was to evaluate how many RCTs analyzing interventions reducing mortality reported also data on QoL. The secondary endpoint was to investigate if QoL resulted improved, worsened or not modified. Data on QoL were reported as evaluated outcome in 7 of the 239 studies (2.9%). The tools to evaluate QoL and QoL time points were heterogeneous. Four interventions showed a significant impact on QoL: Two interventions improved survival and QoL (pravastatin in subarachnoid hemorrhage, dexmedetomidine in elderly patients after noncardiac surgery), while two interventions reduced mortality but negatively influenced QoL (caloric restriction in patients with refeeding syndrome and systematic ICU admission in elderly patients). In conclusion, only a minority of RCTs in which an intervention demonstrated to affect mortality in critically ill patients reported also data on QoL. Future research in critical care should include patient-important outcomes like QoL besides mortality. Data on this topic should be collected in conformity with PROs statement and core outcome sets to guarantee quality and comparability of results.

Trigger and Target for Fibrinogen Supplementation Using Thromboelastometry (ROTEM) in Patients Undergoing Open Thoraco-Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the relationship between the value of fibrinogen assessed by the FIBTEM clot amplitude at 10 minutes (A10 FIBTEM) measured on admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) and the amount of drainage output at 24 hours, to investigate whether the A10 FIBTEM predicts severe bleeding (SB), and to define A10 FIBTEM thresholds to prevent (trigger) and treat (target) severe bleeding by fibrinogen supplementation. METHODS: In a single centre, retrospective observational study, 166 patients underwent elective open thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair between March 2016 and January 2019. Exclusion criteria were emergency, congenital, or acquired coagulopathy, or administration of P2Y12 inhibitor antiplatelet agents in the five days before surgery. All patients were managed intra-operatively and post-operatively according to a rotational thromboelastometry driven transfusion protocol. The principal endpoint was a composite outcome, which included bleeding, large volume transfusion, and re-operation. RESULTS: FIBTEM clot amplitude after 10 minutes measured on ICU admission and post-operative bleeding at 24 hours showed an inverse linear relationship (R2 = .03; p = .026). Performance of A10 FIBTEM in predicting SB evaluated by Receiving Operating Curve analysis showed an area under the curve of 0.63 (95% CI 0.56 - 0.70; p = .026) with a best cutoff of 9 mm. An A10 FIBTEM of 3 mm was the cutoff associated with a positive predictive value of 50%, while an A10 FIBTEM of 9 mm showed a negative predictive value of 92%. On multivariable analysis, an A10 FIBTEM ≤ 3 mm remained independently associated with SB. CONCLUSION: The present investigation shows for the first time in a population undergoing open TAAA repair that an A10 FIBTEM ≤ 3mm on ICU admission is associated with post-operative severe bleeding. Trigger and target values for fibrinogen supplementation, based on A10 FIBTEM, have been provided. The transferability and reliability of these cutoff values require further study.

A Systematic Review and International Web-Based Survey of Randomized Controlled Trials in the Perioperative and Critical Care Setting: Interventions Increasing Mortality.

OBJECTIVE: Reducing mortality is a key target in critical care and perioperative medicine. The authors aimed to identify all nonsurgical interventions (drugs, techniques, strategies) shown by randomized trials to increase mortality in these clinical settings. DESIGN: A systematic review of the literature followed by a consensus-based voting process. SETTING: A web-based international consensus conference. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred fifty-one physicians from 46 countries. INTERVENTIONS: The authors performed a systematic literature search and identified all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showing a significant increase in unadjusted landmark mortality among surgical or critically ill patients. The authors reviewed such studies during a meeting by a core group of experts. Studies selected after such review advanced to web-based voting by clinicians in relation to agreement, clinical practice, and willingness to include each intervention in international guidelines. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The authors selected 12 RCTs dealing with 12 interventions increasing mortality: diaspirin-crosslinked hemoglobin (92% of agreement among web voters), overfeeding, nitric oxide synthase inhibitor in septic shock, human growth hormone, thyroxin in acute kidney injury, intravenous salbutamol in acute respiratory distress syndrome, plasma-derived protein C concentrate, aprotinin in high-risk cardiac surgery, cysteine prodrug, hypothermia in meningitis, methylprednisolone in traumatic brain injury, and albumin in traumatic brain injury (72% of agreement). Overall, a high consistency (ranging from 80% to 90%) between agreement and clinical practice was observed. CONCLUSION: The authors identified 12 clinical interventions showing increased mortality supported by randomized controlled trials with nonconflicting evidence, and wide agreement upon clinicians on a global scale.