Impella support for cardiogenic shock and high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: A single-center experience.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The use of mechanical circulatory support is increasing in cases of cardiogenic shock (CS) and high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (HR-PCI). The Impella® is a percutaneous ventricular assist device that unloads the left ventricle by ejecting blood to the ascending aorta. We report our center's experience with the use of the Impella® device in these two clinical settings. METHODS: We performed a single-center retrospective study including all consecutive patients implanted with the Impella® between 2007 and 2019 for CS treatment or prophylactic support of HR-PCI. Data on clinical and safety endpoints were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were included: 12 were treated for CS and 10 underwent an HR-PCI procedure. In the CS-treated population, the main cause of CS was acute myocardial infarction (five patients); hemolysis was the most frequent device-related complication (63.7%). In-hospital, cumulative 30-day and one-year mortality were 58.3%, 66.6% and 83.3%, respectively. In the HR-PCI group, all patients had multivessel disease (mean baseline SYNTAX I score: 44.1±13.7). In-hospital, 30-day and one-year mortality were 10.0%, 10.0% and 20.0%, respectively. There were no device- or procedure-related deaths in either group. CONCLUSION: The short- and long-term results of Impella®-supported HR-PCI were comparable to those in the literature. In the CS group, in-hospital and short-term outcomes were poor, with high mortality and non-negligible complication rates.

Long-term clinical outcomes after upgrade to resynchronization therapy: A propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Upgrade to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is common in Europe, despite little and conflicting evidence. OBJECTIVE: To compare long-term clinical outcomes in a cohort of patients receiving de novo or upgrade to CRT. METHODS: Single-center retrospective study of 295 consecutive patients submitted to CRT implantation between 2007 and 2018. Upgraded and de novo patients complying with a dedicated follow-up protocol were compared in terms of clinical (NYHA class improvement without major adverse cardiac events [MACE] in the first year of follow-up) and echocardiographic (left ventricle end-systolic volume reduction of >15% during the first year) response. RESULTS: No differences in the rate of clinical (59.3% vs 62.6%, P = .765) or echocardiographic response (72.2% vs 71.9%, P = .970) between groups were observed. Device-related complications were also comparable between groups (8.9% vs 8.4%, P = .892). Occurrence of MACE and all-cause mortality were analyzed over a median follow-up of 3 (interquartile range 1-6) years: MACE occurred less frequently in the de novo group (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.55, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.34-0.90, P = .018), but all-cause mortality was similar among groups (HR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.46-1.64, P = .684). Propensity score-matching analysis was performed to adjust for possible confounder variables. In the propensity-matched samples, all-cause mortality (HR: 1.26, 95% CI: 0.56-2.77, P = .557) and MACE (HR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.46-1.54, P = .574) were comparable between upgrade and de novo patients. CONCLUSION: Survival after upgrade to resynchronization therapy was comparable to de novo implants. Additionally, clinical and echocardiographic response to CRT in upgraded patients were similar to de novo patients.

Association between implantation depth assessed by computed tomography and new-onset conduction disturbances after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is often associated with intraventricular conduction disturbances. We aimed to determine the association between implantation depth assessed by multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) and new-onset conduction abnormalities after TAVR. METHODS: Retrospective single-center study including patients consecutively submitted to TAVR, between August/2007 and October/2016, who underwent routine MDCT 3 months after the procedure. The endpoint of conduction disturbances included permanent pacemaker implantation and/or new-onset left bundle-branch block. Implantation depth was determined as the distance between the ventricular end of the prothesis and the native ring, at the level of the non-coronary cusp. RESULTS: 138 patients were included (female gender 52.2%, mean age 78.7 ± 6.9 years). The EuroSCORE II was 4.0 ± 3.9% and 57.2% were treated with self-expanding prosthesis. The endpoint of conduction abnormalities was found in 45.7% (n = 63). The implantation depth was greater in the group with conduction disturbances (7.7 vs 6.4 mm, p = 0.006). Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, oversizing and implantation depth were independent predictors of conduction abnormalities. Implantation depth had an AUC of 0.64 (p = 0.004) for the prediction of conduction abnormalities and a cut-off value of 7.1 mm predicted the composed endpoint with a sensitivity and specificity of 65% and 70%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Implantation depth assessed by MDCT is associated with new-onset conduction disturbances after TAVR. In patients with conduction abnormalities, which do not qualify for the immediate implantation of pacemaker, the assessment of implantation depth by MDCT may be an additional marker of risk to aid decision-making.