RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Mechanical circulatory support effectively treats adult cardiogenic shock. Whereas cardiogenic shock confers high mortality, acute limb ischemia is a known complication of mechanical circulatory support that confers significant morbidity. We compared our novel approach to peripheral mechanical circulatory support with a conventional femoral approach, with a focus on the incidence of acute limb ischemia. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients treated with mechanical circulatory support between January 1, 2015 and December 5, 2021 at our institution. Patients receiving any femoral peripheral venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation were compared with those receiving minimally invasive, peripherally inserted, concomitant right and left ventricular assist devices. These included the Impella 5.0 (Abiomed, Danvers, MA) left ventricular assist device and the ProtekDuo (LivaNova, London, UK) right ventricular assist device used concomitantly (Propella) approach. The primary outcome was incidence of acute limb ischemia. The baseline patient characteristics, hemodynamic data, and post-mechanical circulatory support outcomes were collected. Fisher exact test and Wilcoxon rank sum test was used for the categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank test were used to estimate overall survival probabilities and survival experience, respectively. RESULTS: Fifty patients were treated with mechanical circulatory support at our institution for cardiogenic shock, with 13 patients supported with the novel Propella strategy and 37 with peripheral venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. The baseline characteristics, including patient organ function and medical comorbidities, were similar among the groups. Nine patients suffered mortality in ≤48 hours of mechanical circulatory support initiation and were excluded. Twenty patients (69%) suffered acute limb ischemia in the peripheral venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation group; 0 patients receiving Propella suffered acute limb ischemia (P < .001). The percentages of patients surviving to discharge in peripheral venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and Propella groups were 24% and 69%, respectively (P = .007). CONCLUSION: Patients treated with the Propella experienced a lower incidence of acute limb ischemia compared with patients treated with peripheral venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.