New-generation mechanical circulatory support during high-risk PCI: a cross-sectional analysis

EuroIntervention. 2019 Aug 29;15(5):427-433. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-18-01126.

Abstract

Aims: The aim of the study was to establish the value of new-generation mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices such as HeartMate PHP, Impella CP and PulseCath iVAC2.

Methods and results: We retrospectively analysed all consecutive elective high-risk PCI procedures performed in the Erasmus Medical Center (2011-2018) in order to compare MCS protected and unprotected patients. The primary endpoint was a composite of procedure-related adverse events including death (<24 hours), cardiac arrest, need for vasopressors, rescue MCS, endotracheal intubation and limb ischaemia with need for surgery. Secondary endpoints included 30-day survival. A total of 198 elective high-risk PCI patients were included (69 [35%] MCS protected, 129 [65%] MCS unprotected). When compared with unprotected patients, MCS protected patients had a significantly worse left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (25±10 vs 33±8%, p<0.01) and higher SYNTAX I score (33±11 vs 24±8, p<0.01). The primary endpoint occurred in 26 (20%) of the unprotected patients and in 6 (9%) of the MCS protected patients (OR 0.38, 95% CI: 0.15-0.97, p=0.04). Patients under 75 years of age, with a SYNTAX I score above 32 and with an LVEF below 30% showed most potential benefit from MCS. Survival during the first 24 hours after the procedure and at 30 days was significantly higher in MCS protected patients (100% vs 95%, p=0.04 at 24 hours, and 98% vs 87%, OR 10.32, 95% CI: 1.34-79.31, p=0.006 at 30 days).

Conclusions: In a consecutive real-world cohort of high-risk PCI patients, protection with new-generation MCS resulted in better procedural outcomes despite worse EF and more complex coronary artery disease at baseline. Larger prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.

MeSH terms

  • Aged
  • Coronary Artery Disease*
  • Cross-Sectional Studies
  • Humans
  • Percutaneous Coronary Intervention*
  • Prospective Studies
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Treatment Outcome