The Impella 2.5 and 5.0 devices for ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients presenting with severe and profound cardiogenic shock: The Academic Medical Center intensive care unit experience*
- 1 September 2011
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) in Critical Care Medicine
- Vol. 39 (9), 2072-2079
- https://doi.org/10.1097/ccm.0b013e31821e89b5
Abstract
Objective: Cardiogenic shock remains an important therapeutic challenge, with high in-hospital mortality rates. Mechanical circulatory support may be beneficial in these patients. Since the efficacy of the intra-aortic balloon pump seems limited, new percutaneously placed mechanical left ventricular support devices, such as the Impella system, have been developed for this purpose. Our current purpose was to describe our experience with the Impella system in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction presenting in profound cardiogenic shock, who were admitted to our intensive care unit for mechanical ventilation. Methods: From January 2004 through August 2010, a total of 34 ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients with profound cardiogenic shock were admitted to our intensive care unit and treated with either the Impella 2.5 or the Impella 5.0 device. Baseline and follow-up characteristics were collected retrospectively. Measurements and Main Results: Within the study cohort, 25 patients initially received treatment with the Impella 2.5, whereas nine patients received immediate Impella 5.0 support. Eight out of 25 patients in the Impella 2.5 group were upgraded to 5.0 support. After 48 hrs, 14 of 25 patients in the 2.5 group were alive, five of whom had been upgraded. In the 5.0 group, eight out of nine patients were alive. After 30 days, six of 25 patients in the 2.5 group were alive, three of whom had been upgraded. In the 5.0 group, three of nine patients were alive at 30 days. Conclusions: In ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients with severe and profound cardiogenic shock, our initial experience suggests improved survival in patients who received immediate Impella 5.0 treatment, as well as in patients who were upgraded from 2.5 to 5.0 support, when compared to patients who received only Impella 2.5 support.Keywords
This publication has 21 references indexed in Scilit:
- Supported High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With the Impella 2.5 Device: The Europella RegistryJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 2009
- A combined surgical and percutaneous approach through the axillary artery to introduce the Impella LP5.0 for short-term circulatory supportInternational Journal of Cardiology, 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
- Ten-Year Trends in the Incidence and Treatment of Cardiogenic ShockAnnals of Internal Medicine, 2008
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of intra-aortic balloon pump therapy in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: should we change the guidelines?European Heart Journal, 2008
- Left Ventricular Unloading in Acute ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients Is Safe and Feasible and Provides Acute and Sustained Left Ventricular RecoveryJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 2008
- New percutaneous mechanical left ventricular support for acute MI: the AMC MACH programNature Clinical Practice Cardiovascular Medicine, 2007
- 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
- ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management of Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee to Revise the 1999 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction)Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2004
- Early Revascularization in Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic ShockThe New England Journal of Medicine, 1999