Advertisement

Safety and Feasibility of Elective High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Procedures With Left Ventricular Support of the Impella Recover LP 2.5

Published:February 14, 2006DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2005.10.037
      Currently, the most used left ventricular (LV) support device is intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation. The percutaneous implantable Impella Recover LP 2.5 system is a novel LV (unloading) assist device. We studied the feasibility and safety of LV support with the percutaneous implantable Impella Recover LP 2.5 system in 19 consecutive high-risk patients with percutaneous coronary intervention. Procedural success using the device and percutaneous coronary intervention was achieved in all 19 patients, who were very poor candidates for surgery. The patients were elderly (84% were >60 years of age), 74% had previous myocardial infarction, 63% had LV ejection fractions of ≤25%, and all had LV ejection fractions of ≤40%. There were no procedural deaths and 2 device-unrelated in-hospital late deaths. Mean decrease in hemoglobin level was 0.7 ± 0.4 mmol/L. The device did not induce or increase aortic valve regurgitation. There were no important device-related adverse events during LV support with the Impella Recover LP 2.5 system. However, these encouraging findings must be confirmed by larger studies, longer assist times, and in other patient categories.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to American Journal of Cardiology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • van ’t Hof A.W.
        • Liem A.L.
        • de Boer M.J.
        • Hoorntje J.C.
        • Suryapranata H.
        • Zijlstra F.
        A randomized comparison of intra-aortic balloon pumping after primary coronary angioplasty in high risk patients with acute myocardial infarction.
        Eur Heart J. 1999; 20: 659-665
        • Stone G.W.
        • Marsalese D.
        • Brodie B.R.
        • Griffin J.J.
        • Donohue B.
        • Costantini C.
        • Balestrini C.
        • Wharton T.
        • Esente P.
        • Spain M.
        • et al.
        A prospective, randomized evaluation of prophylactic intraaortic balloon counterpulsation in high risk patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with primary angioplasty.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997; 29: 1459-1467
        • Azevedo C.F.
        • Amado L.C.
        • Kraitchman D.L.
        • Gerber B.L.
        • Edvardsen T.
        • Osman N.F.
        • Rochitte C.E.
        • Wu K.C.
        • Lima J.A.
        The effect of intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation on left ventricular functional recovery early after acute myocardial infarction.
        Eur Heart J. 2005; 26: 1235-1241
        • Thiele H.
        • Sick P.
        • Boudriot E.
        • Diederich K.W.
        • Hambrecht R.
        • Niebauer J.
        • Schuler G.
        Randomized comparison of intra-aortic balloon support with a percutaneous left ventricular assist device in patients with revascularized acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock.
        Eur Heart J. 2005; 26: 1276-1283
        • Briguori C.
        • Sarais C.
        • Pagnotta P.
        • Airoldi F.
        • Liistro F.
        • Sgura F.
        • Spanos V.
        • Carlino M.
        • Montorfano M.
        • Di Mario C.
        • Colombo A.
        Elective versus provisional intra-aortic balloon pumping in high-risk percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty.
        Am Heart J. 2003; 145: 700-707
        • Aragon J.
        • Lee M.S.
        • Kar S.
        • Makkar R.R.
        Percutaneous left ventricular assist device.
        Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2005; 65: 346-352
        • Siegenthaler M.P.
        • Brehm K.
        • Strecker T.
        • Hanke T.
        • Notzold A.
        • Olschewski M.
        • Weyand M.
        • Sievers H.
        • Beyersdorf F.
        The Impella Recover microaxial left ventricular assist device reduces mortality for postcardiotomy failure.
        J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2004; 127: 812-822
        • Strecker T.
        • Fischlein T.
        • Pfeiffer S.
        Impella Recover 100.
        J Cardiovasc Surg. 2004; 45: 381-384
        • Garatti A.
        • Colombo T.
        • Russo C.
        • Lanfranconi M.
        • Milazzo F.
        • Catena E.
        • Bruschi G.
        • Frigerio M.
        • Vitali E.
        Different applications for left ventricular mechanical support with the Impella Recover 100 microaxial blood pump.
        J Heart Lung Transplant. 2005; 24: 481-485
        • Meyns B.
        • Dens J.
        • Sergeant P.
        • Herijgers P.
        • Daenen W.
        • Flameng W.
        Initial experiences with the Impella device in patients with cardiogenic shock—Impella support for cardiogenic shock.
        Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2003; 51: 312-317
        • Valgimigli M.
        • Steendijk P.
        • Sianos G.
        • Onderwater E.
        • Serruys P.W.
        Left ventricular unloading and concomitant total cardiac output increase by the use of percutaneous Impella Recover LP 2.5 assist device during high-risk coronary intervention.
        Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2005; 65: 263-267