Clinical investigationsClinical features and outcomes in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: early vs recent experience with impella
Introduction
Despite significant advances in early revascularization and pharmacological strategies, cardiogenic shock remains the most common cause of death in patients with acute myocardial infarction.1,2 The overall incidence of cardiogenic shock in acute myocardial infarction (AMICS) is reported between 7%-10% and has remained steady over recent times.3,4 The in-hospital mortality continues to remain high, ranging between 27% and 51%.5,6 Coronary reperfusion achieved through percutaneous or surgical revascularization remains pivotal to survival of these patients;7,8 adjunct pharmacological strategies or the use of intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation (IABP) have not been shown to positively affect outcomes.7,9,10 Alternatively, percutaneous ventricular assist devices (pVAD) are increasingly used as part of contemporary management of selective AMICS patients, with a recent study finding that early placement of Impella CP (Abiomed, Danvers, MA), a commonly used pVAD, was associated with improved 30-day mortality compared to a control group of IABP-treated patients in an AMICS patient population.11
In the U.S Impella Registry (predecessor to the currently ongoing cVAD registry), Impella support initiated prior to PCI in AMICS patients was associated with improved survival to hospital discharge compared with patients who received Impella support post-PCI.12 In addition, a multicenter, prospective study assessing Impella use as treatment for patients developing cardiogenic shock after cardiac surgery reported favorable results.13 Since receiving FDA pre-market approval in 2016, observational and registry data has suggested improved survival with early initiation of Impella support coupled with implementation of regional treatment algorithms and better patient selection.13,14 However, it is unclear whether contemporary device use is associated with improved survival outcomes compared to earlier experience with the device, and how patient selection, greater operator and institutional experience, and best practice CS protocols developed for implanting and monitoring the device have impacted outcomes.
Accordingly, the purpose of this study was to compare clinical characteristics and in-hospital outcomes of AMICS patients treated with Impella during its early and recent experience.
Section snippets
The United States Impella (cVAD) registry and patient population
The catheter-based ventricular assist devices (cVAD) registry is a prospective, observational, multicenter registry designed to monitor the real-world safety and performance of Impella heart pumps as mechanical circulatory support during PCI. The predecessor to the cVAD registry, a retrospective registry known as USpella, was initiated in 2009.15 The registry design was changed from retrospective to prospective in 2017 to accommodate for the FDA requirement of post-market and post-approval
Baseline characteristics
A total of 649 patients with AMICS were evaluated for this analysis: 291 patients who received hemodynamic support with Impella before its pre-market approval (December 2007 to June 2014, early cohort) and 358 recent patients enrolled in the post market approval period (January 2017 to August 2019, recent cohort). Demographic and comorbidity characteristics of these patients are shown in Table 1. The mean age of patients was similar in the 2 cohorts (65 ± 13 y vs 64 ± 12 y in the early and
Discussion
In this retrospective analysis of clinical characteristics and acute outcomes in AMICS patients treated in early and recent experience with Impella pVADs, we observed that several baseline and procedural characteristics have evolved with greater experience with Impella patient selection and technique. Several of these factors along with improvement in system of care for cardiogenic shock patients have significantly impacted in-hospital mortality rates, with anoxic brain injury, baseline renal
Limitations
Some limitations should be considered when interpreting the current study. Given the observational, retrospective nature of this analysis, caution needs to be exercised when inferring causality. As in all observational analyses, influence of unmeasured confounders on study results cannot be ascertained. We cannot provide insights into the specific mechanisms of lower observed mortality in the recent period. Clearly, despite support for the use of Impella based on better hemodynamics with this
Funding
None
Conflict of interest
Dr Amir Kaki: Proctor and speaker for Abiomed. Dr William O'Neill: Consultant to Edwards and Abiomed. Dr Navin K. Kapur: Speaker honoraria/consulting from Abbott, Abiomed, Boston Scientific, LivaNova, Medtronic, Precardia and Research grants from Abiomed and Boston Scientific. Dr E. Magnus Ohman: Research grants: Abiomed, Chiesi: Consultant: 3D Communications, Abiomed, ACI Clinical, Cara Therapeutics, Cardinal Health, Faculty Connection, Imbria, Impulse Medical, Janssen Pharmaceuticals,
Translational perspective
The use of Impella in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock (AMICS) during recent years was associated with lower observed in-hospital mortality that was mostly related to patient characteristics on admission, such as anoxic brain injury and cardiac arrest, suggesting better patient selection in addition to changes in processes of care for these patients. In depth understanding of these factors associated with lower mortality has the potential to improve outcomes of
Acknowledgments
No extramural funding was used to support this work. The authors are solely responsible for the design and conduct of this study, all study analyses, the drafting and editing of the paper and its final contents. Dana Bentley, MWC, provided auxiliary medical editing services and writing assistance funded by the device manufacturer, in accordance with Good Publication Practice. Data management and statistical analyses were performed by ABIOMED.
References (30)
- et al.
Outcomes with invasive vs conservative management of cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction
Am J Med
(2015) - et al.
Multicenter registry of angioplasty therapy of cardiogenic shock: initial and long-term survival
J Am Coll Cardiol
(1991) - et al.
The RECOVER I: a multicenter prospective study of Impella 5.0/LD for postcardiotomy circulatory support
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg
(2013) - et al.
The cVAD registry for percutaneous temporary hemodynamic support: A prospective registry of Impella mechanical circulatory support use in high-risk PCI, cardiogenic shock, and decompensated heart failure
Am Heart J
(2018) - et al.
Cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction–etiologies, management and outcome: a report from the SHOCK Trial Registry. SHould we emergently revascularize Occluded Coronaries for cardiogenic shocK?
J Am Coll Cardiol
(2000) - et al.
Updated standardized endpoint definitions for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 consensus document
J Am Coll Cardiol
(2012) - et al.
Risk stratification for patients in cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction
J Am Coll Cardiol
(2017) - et al.
Impact of bleeding severity on clinical outcomes among patients with acute coronary syndromes
Am J Cardiol
(2005) - et al.
Effect of early initiation of mechanical circulatory support on survival in cardiogenic shock
Am J Cardiol
(2017) - et al.
Early initiation of impella in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock improves survival: a meta-analysis
JACC Cardiovasc Interv
(2017)
Temporal trends in utilization of right-sided heart catheterization among percutaneous ventricular assist device recipients in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock
Am J Cardiol
Analysis of outcomes for 15,259 US patients with acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock (AMICS) supported with the Impella device
Am Heart J
Current spectrum of cardiogenic shock and effect of early revascularization on mortality. Results of an International Registry. SHOCK Registry Investigators
Circulation.
Management of cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction
Heart
Cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction. Incidence and mortality from a community-wide perspective, 1975 to 1988
N Engl J Med
Cited by (5)
Utilization of the percutaneous left ventricular support as bridge to heart transplantation across the United States: In-depth UNOS database analysis
2023, Journal of Heart and Lung TransplantationComplications and Outcomes of Impella Treatment in Cardiogenic Shock Patients With and Without Acute Myocardial Infarction
2023, Journal of the American Heart AssociationImpella Versus VA-ECMO for Patients with Cardiogenic Shock: Comprehensive Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analyses
2023, Journal of Cardiovascular Development and DiseaseThe shock team: a multidisciplinary approach to early patient phenotyping and appropriate care escalation in cardiogenic shock
2022, Current Opinion in Cardiology