Complication Rates Of Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support In Patients With Cardiogenic Shock
Eric Sheffield,Monte Scott,Christos P. Kyriakopoulos,Ethan Krauspe,Iosif Taleb,Derek K. Chang,Konstantinos Sideris,Omar Wever-Pinzon,Anwar Tandar,Matthew L. Goodwin,Eleni Tseliou,Rana Hamouche,Frederick G. Welt,Joseph E. Tonna,Thomas C. Hanff,Stavros G. Drakos
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cardfail.2023.10.079
IF: 6.592
2024-01-01
Journal of Cardiac Failure
Abstract:Introduction Temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) devices are increasingly used for the management of patients experiencing cardiogenic shock despite a paucity of randomized controlled data on their clinical efficacy. Complications associated with these devices are a common, but poorly quantified, occurrence that may negatively affect outcomes in cardiogenic shock patients receiving tMCS. Objective We sought to evaluate complication rates in patients with cardiogenic shock who receive tMCS and compare complication rates between different tMCS devices. Methods Consecutive patients with cardiogenic shock managed at a tertiary academic medical center from May 2015 to December 2021 were retrospectively reviewed (N=1,162). Our final study cohort comprised patients who developed cardiogenic shock and received tMCS after admission to our institution (N=187). Primary outcomes studied were complications using STS-INTERMACS definitions: neurologic complications (ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke, transient ischemic attack [TIA]), major bleeding events (type 3 and 4), and hemolysis, as well as acute kidney injury (AKI) requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT) and vascular compromise requiring vascular repair or amputation. Chi-squared tests were used to compare complication rates. Results Our study comprised 187 patients of whom 55 received VA-ECMO, 72 intra-aortic balloon pump, and 60 percutaneous ventricular assist device (pVAD - 90% Impella CP, 6.6% Impella 5.5, 3.3% Impella 2.5) as first tMCS. Patients receiving VA-ECMO had a higher proportion of SCAI stage E and higher lactate prior to the initiation of tMCS (Table- Panel A). Our analysis showed a vascular complication rate of 20% for VA-ECMO vs 6.9% for IABP vs 5% for pVAD, p=0.015; neurologic complication rate of 12.7% vs 8.3% vs 5%, p=0.34; hemolysis rate of 22.2% vs 2.8% vs 36.7%, p<0.001; AKI requiring RRT of 25.5% vs 9.7% vs 13.3%, p=0.045; and major bleeding event rate of 85.5% vs 34.7%% vs 53.3%, p<0.001 (Table- Panel B). Conclusions Overall complication rates increased from IABP to pVAD to VA-ECMO. VA-ECMO patients experienced more vascular complications, AKI requiring RRT, and major bleeding; pVAD patients had more hemolysis while the risk of stroke/TIA was comparable among the tMCS groups. Whether the observed differences are related to the specific device type and/or the different degrees of severity of shock warrants further investigation.
cardiac & cardiovascular systems