In order to bring you the best possible user experience, this site uses Javascript. If you are seeing this message, it is likely that the Javascript option in your browser is disabled. For optimal viewing of this site, please ensure that Javascript is enabled for your browser.


The free consultation period for this content is over.

It is now only available year-round to HFA Silver & Gold Members, Fellows of the ESC and Young combined Members

Clinical profiles, outcome and prognostic factors of patients treated with percutaneous left ventricular assist devices for protected PCI and cardiogenic shock

Session Poster Session 1

Speaker Assistant Professor Michel Noutsias

Congress : Heart Failure 2019

  • Topic : heart failure
  • Sub-topic : Ventricular Assist Devices
  • Session type : Poster Session
  • FP Number : P385

Authors : M Noutsias (Halle,DE), M Ali (Halle,DE), M Matiakis (Halle,DE), M Mammadov (Halle,DE), A Rigopoulos (Halle,DE)

Authors:
M Noutsias1 , M Ali1 , M Matiakis1 , M Mammadov1 , A Rigopoulos1 , 1University Clinic Halle (Saale), Mid-German Heart Center, Department of Internal Medicine III (KIM-III), Division of Cardiology - Halle - Germany ,

Citation:

Introduction: Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices (Impella) are used both for protected PCI (pPCI) and for patients with cardiogenic shock (CS).

Aims: We investigated the clinical profiles, outcome and prognostic factors of patients under Impella support for pPCI and CS in our monocentric registry.

Results: We evaluated n=25 consecutive patients (males: 72%; age: 67.4+11.2 years; range: 43-86 years), treated with Impella devices from 11/2016 to 01/2018 at our tertiary center. Impella 3.5 / CP was used in 48%, and Impella 2.5 in 52% of the patients. 88% of the patients had ischemic heart disease, and additional 3 cases had CS due to non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (dilated cardiomyopathy: n=2; non-compaction cardiomyopathy: n=1). The indications for the implantation of Impella were pPCI in 48%, and CS in 52% of the patients, respectively. All cases with pPCI were treated with an Impella 2.5, while all but one CS cases were treated with an Impella 3.5 / CP (p<0.0001). The mean duration on Impella-support was 53.8+157 hours. The rate of non-fatal complications was 9.8% (i.e. bleeding, hematoma), however, no fatal complications due to the use of the Impella occurred. Intra-hospital mortality occurred in 52% of the total patients, and was significantly higher in CS patients (84.6%) as compared with patients with pPCI (16.7%; p=0.0007). Furthermore, intra-hospital mortality was significantly associated with CPR (p=0.0017), with peak creatine kinase (CK; p=0.0020), with peak high-sensitive Troponin T (hsTnT; p=0.0011), and with peak lactate (p=0.0002).

Conclusions: Our data confirm the safety of Impella for pPCI and CS. Intra-hospital mortality in severe CS patients is still high despite Impella support. In contrast, mortality in patients with severe coronary artery disease subjected to pPCI is low. In addition to myocardial ischemia markers (CK, hsTnT), peak lactate might prove a relevant prognostic marker for adverse outcome in this setting.



Based on your interests

Three reasons why you should become a member

Become a member now
  • 1Access your congress resources all year-round on the New ESC 365
  • 2Get a discount on your next congress registration
  • 3Continue your professional development with free access to educational tools
Become a member now

Our sponsors

ESC 365 is supported by Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim and Lilly Alliance, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer Alliance, Novartis Pharma AG and Vifor Pharma in the form of educational grants. The sponsors were not involved in the development of this platform and had no influence on its content.

logo esc

Our mission: To reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease

Who we are