Abstract:Background Bleeding and thrombotic complications remain a major concern in cardiogenic shock (CS) patients undergoing percutaneous mechanical circulatory support (pMCS) with veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A ECMO) and/or microaxial flow pumps like the Impella. Antithrombotic practices strongly determine the coagulopathic risk, but standardized protocols are lacking in this context. Purpose This survey outlines European practices on antithrombotic management in adults on pMCS for CS, making an initial effort to standardize practices, inform future trials, and enhance outcomes. Methods This online cross-sectional survey was distributed through digital newsletters and social media platforms by the Association of Acute Cardiovascular Care (ACVC) of the ESC and the European branch of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (EuroELSO). The survey was accessible from April 17th to May 23rd, 2023. The target population were European clinicians involved in care for adults on pMCS. Results We included 105 responses from 26 European countries. In 72.4% of the European respondents' institutions, a standardized local anticoagulation protocol is present, with unfractionated heparin (UFH) being the predominantly used anticoagulant (Impella: 97.0%; V-A ECMO: 96.1%). Similarly, the purge solution during Impella support is most frequently UFH-based (84.1%). A bicarbonate-based purge solution (BBPS) as standard purge is reported by only 1.6%. UFH titration based on the activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) alone is the most common practice either for Impella (43.1%) and for V-A ECMO (32.9%). A minority of 16.9% and 13.2% indicate relying on activated clotting time (ACT) for UFH-titration during Impella and V-A ECMO support, respectively. UFH-titration protocols are anti-Xa based for 12.3% (Impella) and 10.5% (V-A ECMO) of the respondents. An UFH anticoagulant protocol based on APTT and anti-Xa in parallel is the preferred option for 10.8% (Impella) and 14.5% (V-A ECMO) of the respondents. Anticoagulant targets for APTT, ACT and anti-Xa varied across institutions. The majority (83.8%) does not alter their anticoagulation management in case of combined Impella plus V-A ECMO-approach (ECMELLA). Typical thresholds for transfusion or administration of blood products without acute bleeding as indication vary substantially and are frequently not predefined. Following acute coronary syndrome without percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), 54.0% and 42.7% administered dual antiplatelet therapy during Impella and V-A ECMO support, increasing to 93.7% and 84.0% after PCI. Conclusions Our survey validated the considerable variation in antithrombotic management in adults in CS on pMCS across European centres. There is a pressing demand for a standardized approach to antithrombotic management in this context to mitigate the impact of coagulopathic complications and, consequently, enhance outcomes.Figure 1.Figure 2.

What is known in pre-, peri-, and post-procedural anticoagulation in micro-axial flow pump protected percutaneous coronary intervention?

Post-Procedural Anticoagulation after Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Anterior Acute Myocardial Infarction with Severe Left Ventricular Dysfunction

Protected high risk percutaneous coronary intervention-Impella 5.0 as a single-access technique: a case report

Use of Left Ventricular Support Devices During Acute Coronary Syndrome and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Application of intraaortic balloon counterpulsation during primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating with acute myocardial infarction

Peripheral Vascular Disease Endovascular Management in Patients Scheduled for Cardiac Surgery: a Clinical-Angiographic Approach

Abstract 18976: In-Hospital Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Protected Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Percutaneous Left Ventricle Assist Device Protection

Dual guided heparin monitoring with anti-Xa and APTT during micro-axial flow pump support for cardiogenic shock

The Role of Hemodynamic Support in High-risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Anticoagulant management for transition from failed thrombolysis to extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation in patients with high-risk pulmonary embolism: A thoughtful approach

Antithrombotic therapy for durable left ventricular assist devices: protocol for a living systematic review with indirect comparison/network meta-analysis

Antithrombotic Strategies With Left Ventricular Assist Devices

Comparison of patients undergoing protected high risk percutaneous coronary intervention using either intravascular lithotripsy or rotational atherectomy

A novel protocol to reduce bleeding associated with alteplase treatment of HVAD pump thrombosis

Impact of preprocedural left ventricular systolic function on the safety and durability of percutaneous coronary intervention

Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients with Complex Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Cardiogenic Shock

Practices and complications of vascular closure devices and manual compression in patients undergoing elective transfemoral coronary procedures

Is percutaneous coronary intervention safe during uninterrupted direct oral anticoagulant therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation and acute coronary syndromes?

Antithrombotic Treatment Regimens in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization Requiring Oral Anticoagulation: What Real-World Evidence Shows Us

European practices on antithrombotic management during percutaneous mechanical circulatory support in adults: insights from an international survey

European practices on antithrombotic management during percutaneous mechanical circulatory support in adults: A survey of the Association for Acute CardioVascular Care (ACVC) of the ESC and the European branch of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (EuroELSO)