Impella percutaneous left ventricular assist device as mechanical circulatory support for cardiogenic shock: A retrospective analysis from a tertiary academic medical center.

OBJECTIVES: To describe hemodynamic efficacy and clinical outcomes of Impella percutaneous left ventricular assist device (pLVAD) in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS). BACKGROUND: Percutaneous LVADs are increasingly used in CS management. However, device-related outcomes and optimal utilization remain active areas of investigation. METHODS: All CS patients receiving pLVAD as mechanical circulatory support (MCS) between 2011 and 2017 were identified. Clinical characteristics and outcomes were analyzed. A multivariable logistic regression model was created to predict MCS escalation despite pLVAD. Outcomes were compared between early and late implantation. RESULTS: A total of 115 CS patients (mean age 63.6 ± 13.8 years; 69.6% male) receiving pLVAD as MCS were identified, the majority with CS secondary to acute myocardial infarction (AMI; 67.0%). Patients experienced significant cardiac output improvement (median 3.39 L/min to 3.90 L/min, p = .002) and pharmacological support reduction (median vasoactive-inotropic score [VIS] 25.4 to 16.4, p = .049). Placement of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) occurred in 48 (41.7%) of patients. Higher pre-pLVAD VIS was associated with subsequent MCS escalation in the entire cohort and AMI subgroup (OR 1.27 [95% CI 1.02-1.58], p = .034 and OR 1.72 [95% CI 1.04-2.86], p = .035, respectively). Complications were predominantly access site related (bleeding [9.6%], vascular injury [5.2%], and limb ischemia [2.6%]). In-hospital mortality was 57.4%, numerically greater survival was noted with earlier device implantation. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with pLVAD for CS improved hemodynamic status but did not uniformly obviate MCS escalation. Mortality in CS remains high, though earlier device placement for appropriately selected patients may be beneficial.

Off-Label Use of Peripheral Paclitaxel Drug-Coated Balloons in Management of Recurrent Coronary In-Stent Restenosis.

Background: While not available for clinical use in the United States, dedicated drug-coated balloons (DCB) are currently under investigation for the management of coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR). Peripheral drug-coated balloons (P-DCB) have been used off-label for coronary ISR. Further data regarding this practice are needed. We aimed to describe outcomes in patients who underwent off-label P-DCB angioplasty for coronary ISR. Methods: We analyzed data on P-DCB angioplasty for coronary ISR at a single high-volume center between April 1, 2015, and December 30, 2017. Demographic and procedural details were collected, with systematic follow-up as clinically indicated. Results: Data from 31 patients treated with P-DCB angioplasty (mean age 68.0 ± 10.7 years) with coronary ISR (17 recurrent and 14 first time) were analyzed. Most patients presented with high-grade angina (81%) or myocardial infarction (13%). Treated ISR lesions were in native coronary arteries (68%), saphenous vein grafts (SVG, 23%), and the left internal mammary artery (10%). Diffuse intrastent ISR was common (69%) with a mean lesion length of 21.7 ± 12.4 mm. No postprocedural myocardial infarction occurred and 1 nonprocedural mortality occurred during index admission. At follow-up (median: 283, interquartile range [IQR]: 354 days), repeat angiography was performed in 19 patients (median: 212, IQR: 188 days), and 11 patients had target lesion recurrent ISR (Kaplan-Meier event-free survival estimate: 44.7%, 95% CI, 26.1%-76.5%). Conclusions: In the absence of availability of dedicated coronary DCB, treatment of coronary ISR using P-DCB angioplasty was feasible, although follow-up demonstrated continued risk for recurrent ISR in this high-risk population.

Pharmacological Agents Targeting Thromboinflammation in COVID-19: Review and Implications for Future Research.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), currently a worldwide pandemic, is a viral illness caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The suspected contribution of thrombotic events to morbidity and mortality in COVID-19 patients has prompted a search for novel potential options for preventing COVID-19-associated thrombotic disease. In this article by the Global COVID-19 Thrombosis Collaborative Group, we describe novel dosing approaches for commonly used antithrombotic agents (especially heparin-based regimens) and the potential use of less widely used antithrombotic drugs in the absence of confirmed thrombosis. Although these therapies may have direct antithrombotic effects, other mechanisms of action, including anti-inflammatory or antiviral effects, have been postulated. Based on survey results from this group of authors, we suggest research priorities for specific agents and subgroups of patients with COVID-19. Further, we review other agents, including immunomodulators, that may have antithrombotic properties. It is our hope that the present document will encourage and stimulate future prospective studies and randomized trials to study the safety, efficacy, and optimal use of these agents for prevention or management of thrombosis in COVID-19.