Evolution of concomitant use of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support with Impella in cardiogenic shock: From percutaneous femoral Impella to axillary Impella 5.5

8Citations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: Little is known about safety and efficacy of the use of Impella 5.5 compared to previous iterations in the setting of Impella with Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support as ECPELLA. Methods: Consecutive patients who were treated by ECPELLA with surgically implanted axillary Impella 5.5 (N = 13) were compared with patients supported by ECPELLA with percutaneous femoral Impella CP or 2.5 (Control, N = 13). Results: The total ECPELLA flow was higher in ECPELLA 5.5 group (6.9 vs. 5.4 L/min, p = 0.019). Actual hospital survival was higher than predicted and comparable in both groups (ECPELLA 5.5, 61.5% vs. Control, 53.8%, p = 0.691). Both total device complications (ECPELLA 5.5, 7.7% vs. Control, 46.1%, p = 0.021) and Impella-specific complications (ECPELLA 5.5, 0% vs. Control, 30.8%, p = 0.012) were significantly lower in the ECPELLA 5.5 group. Conclusions: Utilization of Impella 5.5 in the setting of ECPELLA provides greater hemodynamic support with a lower risk of complications compared to Impella CP or 2.5.

Author supplied keywords

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Isath, A., Ohira, S., Levine, A., Lanier, G. M., Pan, S., Aggarwal-Gupta, C., … Kai, M. (2023). Evolution of concomitant use of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support with Impella in cardiogenic shock: From percutaneous femoral Impella to axillary Impella 5.5. Artificial Organs, 47(8), 1404–1412. https://doi.org/10.1111/aor.14594

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free