Real‐world use of the Impella 2.5 circulatory support system in complex high‐risk percutaneous coronary intervention: The USpella Registry
- 25 April 2012
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions
- Vol. 80 (5), 717-725
- https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.23403
Abstract
Objectives: We report on the real‐world, multicenter experience of the Impella 2.5 circulatory support system during high‐risk PCI, a subset of the larger USpella Registry. Background: Standard of care for most patients with compromised ventricular function with multivessel or high‐risk coronary lesions has been coronary artery bypass grafting. In poor operative candidates, high‐risk PCI is increasingly considered, despite an increased risk for periprocedural hemodynamic compromise. Methods: 175 consecutive patients who underwent high‐risk PCI with prophylactic support of the Impella 2.5 were evaluated. The primary safety endpoint was the incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 30 days. Secondary endpoints included safety and efficacy related to the device and patient outcomes, including survival at 12 months. Results: Overall angiographic revascularization was successful in 99% of patients and in 90% of those with multivessel revascularization, resulting in a reduction of the mean SYNTAX score post‐PCI from 36 ± 15 to 18 ± 15 (P < 0.0001) and an improvement of the ejection fraction (from 31 ± 15% to 36 ± 14%, P < 0.0001). In 51% of patients, the functional status improved by one or more NYHA class (P < 0.001). At 30‐day follow‐up, the rate of MACE was 8%, and survival was 96%, 91%, and 88% at 30 days, 6 months, and 12 months, respectively. Conclusions: The use of Impella 2.5 in high‐risk PCI appeared feasible and safe in the real‐world setting. The utilization of the Impella 2.5 was successful, resulting in favorable short‐ and midterm angiographic, procedural and clinical outcomes.Keywords
This publication has 25 references indexed in Scilit:
- Complete Percutaneous Revascularization for Multivessel Disease in Patients With Impaired Left Ventricular Function: Pre- and Post-Procedural Evaluation by Cardiac Magnetic Resonance ImagingJACC: Cardiovascular Interventions, 2010
- Percutaneous Coronary Intervention versus Coronary-Artery Bypass Grafting for Severe Coronary Artery DiseaseNew England Journal of Medicine, 2009
- A Prospective Feasibility Trial Investigating the Use of the Impella 2.5 System in Patients Undergoing High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (The PROTECT I Trial): Initial U.S. ExperienceJACC: Cardiovascular Interventions, 2009
- Feasibility and long-term safety of elective Impella-assisted high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: a pilot two-centre studyJournal of Cardiovascular Medicine, 2008
- Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Stenting and Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Multivessel Coronary Artery DiseaseCirculation, 2008
- Revascularization in severe left ventricular dysfunction: Outcome comparison of drug‐eluting stent implantation versus coronary artery by‐pass graftingCatheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions, 2007
- Elective versus provisional intraaortic balloon pumping in unprotected left main stentingAmerican Heart Journal, 2006
- Role of Prophylactic Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump in High-Risk Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary InterventionThe American Journal of Cardiology, 2006
- Safety and Feasibility of Elective High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Procedures With Left Ventricular Support of the Impella Recover LP 2.5The American Journal of Cardiology, 2006
- The hibernating myocardium: implications for management of congestive heart failureThe American Journal of Cardiology, 1995