Impella 5.0 Support in INTERMACS II Cardiogenic Shock Patients Using Right and Left Axillary Artery Access.

The catheter-based Impella 5.0 left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is a powerful and less invasive alternative for patients in cardiogenic shock. The use of this device as a primary mechanical circulatory support strategy in INTERMACS II patients should be evaluated. From April 2014 to August 2014, eight Impella 5.0 devices were implanted in seven patients via the axillary artery access (six right and two left). We analyzed the outcome of the four patients in whom the Impella 5.0 device was implanted for the purpose of primary stabilization of cardiogenic shock (INTERMACS II). The remaining three patients had a contraindication for a permanent LVAD and received the device for prolonged weaning from extracorporeal life support (ECLS) system. The implantation of the Impella 5.0 was technically successful in all patients and resulted in the stabilization of the clinical situation. All four patients could be bridged to a long-term device (n = 3) or to cardiac recovery (n = 1). In one patient, 2 days of ECLS support was necessary because of pump thrombosis after 31 days of Impella 5.0 support. One patient with bronchopneumonia had the Impella 5.0 exchanged from the right to the left axillary artery after 22 days of support because of the progressive loss of purge flow and the need for longer bridging to a permanent LVAD. The last patient was supported for giant-cell myocarditis for 22 days and bridged to cardiac recovery. All patients were transferred to the intensive care unit with the Impella device in place. In INTERMACS II situations, the implantation of the Impella 5.0 via the right or left axillary access allowed additional time for decision making. Early patient mobilization, including walking with the Impella device in place, optimized the conditions for either weaning or the implantation of a permanent LVAD. This novel technique of left axillary approach leads to more flexibility in the case of anatomical- or device-related contraindications to right-side access, or when the device needs to be exchanged while continuous support is necessary.

Prognostic value of mild-to-moderate pulmonary hypertension in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis undergoing aortic valve replacement.

BACKGROUND: Optimal timing of elective aortic valve replacement (AVR) for severe aortic stenosis (AS) is challenging. Hence, a sensitive marker in AS patients indicating increasing risk after AVR would be of great clinical value. In the present study, we hypothesized that mild-to-moderate pulmonary hypertension (PH) assessed prior to AVR is a sensitive marker for adverse events in patients after successful AVR. METHODS: We enrolled 200 consecutive patients with severe AS undergoing AVR. Among them, 176 patients (88%) were symptomatic. Patients were divided according to systolic pulmonary artery pressure (PAP(sys)) into three groups: no PH (PAP(sys) <30 mmHg), mild-to-moderate PH (PAP(sys) ≥30 and PAP(sys) <60 mmHg) and severe PH (≥60 mmHg). Multivariable analyses were adjusted for age and gender and included PH, left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35%, renal insufficiency and logistic EuroSCORE ≥20%. Primary endpoint was death of any cause within 5 years after AVR. RESULTS: During follow-up, 23 patients died (cumulative 5-year mortality rate 14.6%). Patients without (n = 78), mild-to-moderate (n = 99) and severe PH (n = 23) had 5-year mortality rates of 2.6, 15.2 and 26.1% (p = 0.001). PAPsys ≥30 mmHg yielded an excellent level of sensitivity of 92.8%. On multivariable analysis, mild-to-moderate PH was the only independent risk factor (hazard ratio 4.9, 95% confidence interval 1.1-21.8). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe AS undergoing AVR, mild-to-moderate PH is a strong and independent predictor of late mortality. Conversely, patients with normal PAP(sys) have an extremely good prognosis.