Abstract:Background/Introduction In patients with cardiogenic shock (CS), a combination of Impella-a percutaneous ventricular assist device with a catheter-type micro-axial heart pump-and venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECPELLA) has been reported to have a better prognosis compared to venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) alone, although it was associated with more complications. In contemporary clinical practice, ECPELLA has often been used in place of VA-ECMO alone. However, in many cases of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) with CS, there is controversy regarding the prioritization of Impella or VA-ECMO installation. Purpose The current study aims to clarify the factors of Impella use before VA-ECMO, the impact of the timing of Impella insertion (before or after VA-ECMO) for 30-day mortality, and major adverse events (MAEs) in the two groups. Methods The Japanese registry for Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Device (J-PVAD) Registry is a nationwide registry enrolling 5,718 consecutive Japanese patients treated with Impella between February 2020 and December 2022. The current study population consisted of 1,082 patients with AMI complicated by CS excluding cardiopulmonary arrest on arrival or using only Impella, who were divided into 2 groups; Impella use before and after VA-ECMO. Results Among the current study population, 323 patients (30%) used Impella before VA-ECMO, and 759 patients (70%) used Impella after VA-ECMO. Patients who used Impella before VA-ECMO were older (72 vs. 68 years old, P<0.0001) and had higher left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (30 vs 20 %, P<0.0001), lower lactate level (5.6 vs 9.1 mmol/L, P<0.0001), and more often ST-elevation myocardial infarction (MI) (82% vs 76%, P<0.0001), whereas those patients had less often out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) (13% vs 45%, P<0.0001), in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) (27% vs 63%, P<0.0001), and prior heart failure (9.5% vs 16%, P=0.006). The factors of Impella use before VA-ECMO were 75 years or older, dyslipidemia, the absence of OHCA, the absence of IHCA, the absence of prior MI, and the absence of LVEF less than 30%. The cumulative 30-day incidence of all-cause death was 46.2% in patients with Impella use before VA-ECMO and 53.4% in those with Impella use after VA-ECMO (Log-rank P=0.02). After adjusting confounders, there was no excess risk of Impella use before VA-ECMO relative to Impella use after VA-ECMO (adjusted HR, 0.87; 95%CI, 0.55-1.37; P=0.55). Regarding major adverse events, hemolysis was significantly more frequent in patients with Impella use before VA-ECMO, while stroke was significantly more common in patients with Impella use after VA-ECMO. Conclusions The prognosis with AMI complicated by CS requiring ECPELLA remained poor. The 30-day mortality was lower in patients with Impella use before VA-ECMO compared to after VA-ECMO. However, after adjusting for confounders, there was no difference between the two groups.

The Use Of Ecpella In Cardiogenic Shock, An Umbrella Meta-Analysis

Meta-Analysis Comparing Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation With or Without Impella in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock

Impella as unloading strategy during VA-ECMO: systematic review and meta-analysis

Impella Versus Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock Treated With Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: An Observational Study

Influence of timing of impella insertion on the prognosis of acute myocardial infarction complicated with cardiogenic shock requiring ECPELLA

Benefit of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation combined with Impella (ECpella) therapy in acute coronary syndrome with cardiogenic shock

Left ventricular unloading via percutaneous assist device during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in acute myocardial infarction and cardiac arrest

In-Hospital Mortality in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock Requiring Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation With Concomitant Use of Impella vs. Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump - A Retrospective Cohort Study Using a Japanese Claims-Based Database

Abstract 12772: In Hospital Outcomes With Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Alone vs Combined With Percutaneous Left Ventricular Assist Device

Hemodynamic analysis of left ventricular unloading with Impella versus IABP during VA-ECMO

Comparison Of Outcomes In Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated With Cardiogenic Shock Treated With Ecpella Versus Va-ecmo With Iabp

Impact of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation with ECPELLA on improvement of short-term survival in patients with refractory cardiac arrest

Cardiac ECMO: changing role in times of Impella and ventricular assist devices?

ECPELLA: Beyond a Left Ventricular Venting Strategy When to Unload the Left Ventricle and How to Decide

The impact of ECPELLA on haemodynamics and global oxygen delivery: a comprehensive simulation of biventricular failure

EC-VAD: Combined Use of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation and Percutaneous Microaxial Pump Left Ventricular Assist Device

Utility of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock

Mechanical circulatory support with Impella versus intra-aortic balloon pump or medical treatment in cardiogenic shock—a critical appraisal of current data

Impella versus VA-ECMO for the treatment of patients with cardiogenic shock: the Impella Network Project - observational study protocol for cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses

Hemodynamic Support With the Impella 5.5 Acute Mechanical Circulatory Support Device

Efficacy of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation with and without intra-aortic balloon pump in adult cardiogenic shock