Frailty according to the 2019 HFA-ESC definition in patients at risk for advanced heart failure: Insights from the HELP-HF registry.

AIMS: Frailty is highly prevalent in patients with heart failure (HF), but a concordant definition of this condition is lacking. The Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology (HFA-ESC) proposed in 2019 a new multi-domain definition of frailty, but it has never been validated. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients from the HELP-HF registry were stratified according to the number of HFA-ESC frailty domains fulfilled and to the cumulative deficits frailty index (FI) quintiles. Prevalence of frailty and of each domain was reported, as well as the rate of the composite of all-cause death and HF hospitalization, its single components, and cardiovascular death in each group and quintile. Among 854 included patients, 37 (4.3%), 206 (24.1%), 365 (42.8%), 217 (25.4%), and 29 (3.4%) patients fulfilled zero, one, two, three, or four domains, respectively, while 179 patients had a FI < 0.21 and were considered not frail. The 1-year risk of adverse events increased proportionally to the number of domains fulfilled (for each criterion increase, all-cause death or HF hospitalization: hazard ratio [HR] 1.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.27-1.62; all-cause death: HR 1.72, 95% CI 1.46-2.02, HF hospitalizations: subHR 1.21, 95% CI 1.04-1.31; cardiovascular death: HR 1.77, 95% CI 1.45-2.15). Consistent results were found stratifying the cohort for FI quintiles. The FI as a continuous variable demonstrated higher discriminative ability than the number of domains fulfilled (area under the curve = 0.68 vs. 0.64, p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: Frailty in patients at risk for advanced HF, assessed via a multi-domain approach and the FI, is highly prevalent and identifies those at increased risk of adverse events. The FI was found to be slightly more effective in identifying patients at increased risk of mortality.

Characteristics and outcomes of patients with tricuspid regurgitation and advanced heart failure.

AIMS: To evaluate the role of tricuspid regurgitation in advanced heart failure. METHODS: The multicenter observational HELP-HF registry enrolled consecutive patients with heart failure and at least one 'I NEED HELP' criterion evaluated at four Italian centers between January 2020 and November 2021. Patients with no data on tricuspid regurgitation and/or receiving tricuspid valve intervention during follow-up were excluded. The population was stratified by no/mild tricuspid regurgitation vs. moderate tricuspid regurgitation vs. severe tricuspid regurgitation. Variables independently associated with tricuspid regurgitation, as well as the association between tricuspid regurgitation and clinical outcomes were investigated. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Among the 1085 patients included in this study, 508 (46.8%) had no/mild tricuspid regurgitation, 373 (34.4%) had moderate tricuspid regurgitation and 204 (18.8%) had severe tricuspid regurgitation. History of atrial fibrillation, any prior valve surgery, high dose of furosemide, preserved left ventricular ejection fraction, moderate/severe mitral regurgitation and pulmonary hypertension were found to be independently associated with an increased likelihood of severe tricuspid regurgitation. Estimated rates of 1-year all-cause death were of 21.4, 24.5 and 37.1% in no/mild tricuspid regurgitation, moderate tricuspid regurgitation and severe tricuspid regurgitation, respectively (log-rank P  < 0.001). As compared with nonsevere tricuspid regurgitation, severe tricuspid regurgitation was independently associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 1.38, 95% confidence interval 1.01-1.88, P  = 0.042), whereas moderate tricuspid regurgitation did not. CONCLUSION: In a contemporary, real-world cohort of patients with advanced heart failure, several clinical and echocardiographic characteristics are associated with an increased likelihood of severe tricuspid regurgitation. Patients with severe tricuspid regurgitation have an increased risk of mortality.

Guideline-directed medical therapy in severe heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: An analysis from the HELP-HF registry.

AIM: Persistent symptoms despite guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) and poor tolerance of GDMT are hallmarks of patients with advanced heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, real-world data on GDMT use, dose, and prognostic implications are lacking. METHODS AND RESULTS: We included 699 consecutive patients with HFrEF and at least one 'I NEED HELP' marker for advanced HF enrolled in a multicentre registry. Beta-blockers (BB) were administered to 574 (82%) patients, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers or angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ACEi/ARB/ARNI) were administered to 381 (55%) patients and 416 (60%) received mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA). Overall, ≥50% of target doses were reached in 41%, 22%, and 56% of the patients on BB, ACEi/ARB/ARNI and MRA, respectively. Hypotension, bradycardia, kidney dysfunction and hyperkalaemia were the main causes of underprescription and/or underdosing, but up to a half of the patients did not receive target doses for unknown causes (51%, 41%, and 55% for BB, ACEi/ARB/ARNI and MRA, respectively). The proportions of patients receiving BB and ACEi/ARB/ARNI were lower among those fulfilling the 2018 HFA-ESC criteria for advanced HF. Treatment with BB and ACEi/ARB/ARNI were associated with a lower risk of death or HF hospitalizations (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48-0.84, and HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58-0.95, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In a large, real-world, contemporary cohort of patients with severe HFrEF, with at least one marker for advanced HF, prescription and uptitration of GDMT remained limited. A significant proportion of patients were undertreated due to unknown reasons suggesting a potential role of clinical inertia either by the prescribing healthcare professional or by the patient. Treatment with BB and ACEi/ARB/ARNI was associated with lower mortality/morbidity.

Role of ejection fraction in patients at risk for advanced heart failure: insights from the HELP-HF registry.

AIMS: Patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (EF) (HFrEF), mildly reduced EF (HFmrEF), and preserved EF (HFpEF) may all progress to advanced HF, but the impact of EF in the advanced setting is not well established. Our aim was to assess the prognostic impact of EF in patients with at least one 'I NEED HELP' marker for advanced HF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with HF and at least one high-risk 'I NEED HELP' criterion from four centres were included in this analysis. Outcomes were assessed in patients with HFrEF (EF ≤ 40%), HFmrEF (EF 41-49%), and HFpEF (EF ≥ 50%) and with EF analysed as a continuous variable. The prognostic impact of medical therapy for HF in patients with EF < 50% and EF > 50% was also evaluated. All-cause death was the primary endpoint, and cardiovascular death was a secondary endpoint. Among 1149 patients enrolled [mean age 75.1 ± 11.5 years, 67.3% males, 67.6% hospitalized, median follow-up 260 days (inter-quartile range 105-390 days)], HFrEF, HFmrEF, and HFpEF were observed in 699 (60.8%), 122 (10.6%), and 328 (28.6%) patients, and 1 year mortality was 28.3%, 26.2%, and 20.1, respectively (log-rank P = 0.036). As compared with HFrEF patients, HFpEF patients had a lower risk of all-cause death [adjusted hazard ratio (HRadj ) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48-0.94, P = 0.022], whereas no difference was noted for HFmrEF patients. After multivariable adjustment, a lower risk of all-cause death (HRadj for 5% increase 0.94, 95% CI 0.89-0.99, P = 0.017) and cardiovascular death (HRadj for 5% increase 0.94, 95% CI 0.88-1.00, P = 0.049) was observed at higher EF values. Beta-blockers and renin-angiotensin system inhibitors or sacubitril/valsartan were associated with lower mortality in both EF < 50% and EF ≥ 50% groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with HF and at least one 'I NEED HELP' marker for advanced HF, left ventricular EF is still of prognostic value.

Clinical and prognostic implications of heart failure hospitalization in patients with advanced heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalization is associated with poor outcomes in patients with heart failure, but its prognostic role in advanced heart failure is still unsettled. We evaluated the prognostic role of heart failure hospitalization in patients with advanced heart failure. METHODS: The multicenter HELP-HF registry enrolled consecutive patients with heart failure and at least one high-risk 'I NEED HELP' marker. Characteristics and outcomes were compared between patients who were hospitalized for decompensated heart failure (inpatients) or not (outpatients) at the time of enrolment. The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause mortality or first heart failure hospitalization. RESULTS: Among the 1149 patients included [mean age 75.1 ±â€Š11.5 years, 67.3% men, median left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 35% (IQR 25-50%)], 777 (67.6%) were inpatients at the time of enrolment. As compared with outpatients, inpatients had lower LVEF, higher natriuretic peptides and a worse clinical profile. The 1-year rate of the primary endpoint was 50.9% in inpatients versus 36.8% in outpatients [crude hazard ratio 1.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.39-2.07, P < 0.001]. At multivariable analysis, inpatient status was independently associated with a higher risk of the primary endpoint (adjusted hazard ratio 1.54, 95% CI 1.23-1.93, P < 0.001). Among inpatients, the independent predictors of the primary endpoint were older age, lower SBP, heart failure association criteria for advanced heart failure and glomerular filtration rate 30 ml/min/1.73 m2 or less. CONCLUSION: Hospitalization for heart failure in patients with at least one high-risk 'I NEED HELP' marker is associated with an extremely poor prognosis supporting the need for specific interventions, such as mechanical circulatory support or heart transplantation.

Detailed Assessment of the "I Need Help" Criteria in Patients With Heart Failure: Insights From the HELP-HF Registry.

BACKGROUND: The "I Need Help" markers have been proposed to identify patients with advanced heart failure (HF). We evaluated the prognostic impact of these markers on clinical outcomes in a real-world, contemporary, multicenter HF population. METHODS: We included consecutive patients with HF and at least 1 high-risk "I Need Help" marker from 4 centers. The impact of the cumulative number of "I Need Help" criteria and that of each individual "I Need Help" criterion was evaluated. The primary end point was the composite of all-cause mortality or first HF hospitalization. RESULTS: Among 1149 patients enrolled, the majority had 2 (30.9%) or 3 (22.6%) "I Need Help" criteria. A higher cumulative number of "I Need Help" criteria was independently associated with a higher risk of the primary end point (adjusted hazard ratio for each criterion increase, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.11-1.27]; P<0.001), and patients with >5 criteria had the worst prognosis. Need of inotropes, persistently high New York Heart Association classes III and IV or natriuretic peptides, end-organ dysfunction, >1 HF hospitalization in the last year, persisting fluid overload or escalating diuretics, and low blood pressure were the individual criteria independently associated with a higher risk of the primary end point. CONCLUSIONS: In our HF population, a higher number of "I Need Help" criteria was associated with a worse prognosis. The individual criteria with an independent impact on mortality or HF hospitalization were need of inotropes, New York Heart Association class or natriuretic peptides, end-organ dysfunction, multiple HF hospitalizations, persisting edema or escalating diuretics, and low blood pressure.

Ischemic Etiology in Advanced Heart Failure: Insight from the HELP-HF Registry.

In patients with advanced heart failure (HF), defined according to the presence of at least one I-NEED-HELP criterium, the updated 2018 Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology (HFA-ESC) criteria for advanced HF identify a subgroup of patients with HF with worse prognosis, but whether ischemic etiology has a relevant prognostic impact in this very high-risk cohort is unknown. Patients from the HELP-HF registry were stratified according to ischemic etiology and presence of advanced HF based on 2018 HFA-ESC criteria. The primary end point was a composite of all-cause death and HF hospitalization at 1 year. Secondary end points were all-cause death, HF hospitalization, and cardiovascular death at 1 year. Ischemic etiology was a leading cause of HF, in both patients with advanced and nonadvanced HF (46.1% and 42.4%, respectively, p = 0.337). The risk of the primary end point (hazard ratio [HR] 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09 to 1.58) and all-cause mortality (HR 1.37, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.76) was increased in ischemic as compared with nonischemic patients. The risk of the primary end point was consistently higher in ischemic patients in both patients with advanced and nonadvanced HF (advanced HF, HR 1.50 95% CI 1.04 to 2.16; nonadvanced HF, HR 1.25 95% CI 1.01 to 1.56, pinteraction = 0.333), driven by an increased risk of mortality, mainly because of cardiovascular causes. In conclusion, ischemic etiology is the most common cause of HF in patients with at least one I-NEED-HELP marker and with or without advanced HF as defined by the 2018 HFA-ESC definition. In both patients with advanced and not-advanced HF, ischemic etiology carried an increased risk of worse prognosis.

Current Use of Oral Anticoagulation Therapy in Elderly Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: Results from an Italian Multicenter Prospective Study-The ISNEP Study.

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common heart arrhythmia, and its prevalence increases with age. Oral Anticoagulant Therapy (OAT) with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) or vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) is essential to avoid thromboembolic events in AF. However, this treatment is associated with a high risk of bleeding and low adherence in elderly patients. Aim: The aim was to evaluate the real-world use of OAT in a population of patients aged ≥80 years in twenty-three Italian centers and to investigate the tolerance of and patient satisfaction with this therapy. Methods: The ISNEP Study is a multicenter cross-sectional study enrolling patients with AF and aged ≥80 years and treated with either NOACs or VKAs. A written questionnaire was administered to each patient to evaluate the adherence to and patient satisfaction with this therapy. Results: The study included 641 patients with a mean age of 85 (82−87) years. The use of NOACs was reported in 93.0% of cases, with the remaining 7.0% treated with VKAs. A history of stroke events was reported in five (11.1%) and one (0.2%) patients in the VKA and NOAC groups, respectively. The rate of referred ecchymosis/epistaxis was significantly higher in the VKA group compared to the NOAC group (p < 0.001). Patients receiving NOACs reported a substantial improvement in their quality of life compared to the VKA group. Conclusions: A small, but not negligible, proportion of elderly AF patients is still treated with VKAs. Patients treated with NOAC have a higher level of satisfaction with the therapy and complete adherence.

Prognostic value of right atrial pressure-corrected cardiac power index in cardiogenic shock.

AIM: The pulmonary artery catheter (PAC)-derived cardiac power index (CPI) has been found of prognostic value in cardiogenic shock (CS) patients. The original CPI equation included the right atrial pressure (RAP), accounting for heart filling pressure as a determinant of systolic myocardial work, but this term was subsequently omitted. We hypothesized that the original CPI formula (CPIRAP ) is superior to current CPI for risk stratification in CS. METHODS AND RESULTS: A single-centre cohort of 80 consecutive Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) B-D CS patients with available PAC records was included. Overall in-hospital mortality was 21.3%. Results showed CPIRAP to be the strongest haemodynamic predictor of in-hospital death (padj  = 0.038), outperforming CPI [area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves: 0.726 and 0.673, P-for-difference = 0.025]. When the population was stratified according to the identified CPIRAP (0.28 W/m2 ) and accepted CPI (0.32 W/m2 ) thresholds, the cohort with discordant indexes (low CPIRAP and high CPI) comprised a group of 13 patients featuring a congested phenotype with frequent right ventricle or biventricular involvement. In this group, in-hospital mortality was high (30.8%) similar to those with concordant low CPI and CPIRAP . CONCLUSION: Incorporating RAP in CPI calculation (CPIRAP ) improves the prognostic yield in patients with CS SCAI B-D. A cut-off of 0.28 W/m2 identifies patients at higher risk of in-hospital mortality. The improved prognostic value of CPIRAP may derive from identification of patients with more intravascular congestion who may experience substantial in-hospital mortality, uncaptured by the commonly used CPI equation.

Prognostic impact of the updated 2018 HFA-ESC definition of advanced heart failure: results from the HELP-HF registry.

AIMS: The Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology (HFA-ESC) proposed a definition of advanced heart failure (HF) that has not been validated, yet. We assessed its prognostic impact in a consecutive series of patients with high-risk HF. METHODS AND RESULTS: The HELP-HF registry enrolled consecutive patients with HF and at least one high-risk 'I NEED HELP' marker, evaluated at four Italian centres between 1st January 2020 and 30th November 2021. Patients meeting the HFA-ESC advanced HF definition were compared to patients not meeting this definition. The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause mortality or first HF hospitalization. Out of 4753 patients with HF screened, 1149 (24.3%) patients with at least one high-risk 'I NEED HELP' marker were included (mean age 75.1 ± 11.5 years, 67.3% male, median left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] 35% [interquartile range 25%-50%]). Among them, 193 (16.8%) patients met the HFA-ESC advanced HF definition. As compared to others, these patients were younger, had lower LVEF, higher natriuretic peptides and a worse clinical profile. The 1-year rate of the primary endpoint was 69.3% in patients with advanced HF according to the HFA-ESC definition versus 41.8% in the others (hazard ratio [HR] 2.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.82-2.74, p < 0.001). The prognostic impact of the HFA-ESC advanced HF definition was confirmed after multivariable adjustment for relevant covariates (adjusted HR 1.98, 95% CI 1.57-2.50, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The HFA-ESC advanced HF definition had a strong prognostic impact in a contemporary, real-world, multicentre high-risk cohort of patients with HF.

Myocardial injury in patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia: Pivotal role of inflammation in COVID-19.

AIMS: Infection by SARS-CoV-2 may result in a systemic disease and a proportion of patients ranging 15%-44% experienced cardiac injury (CI) diagnosed by abnormal troponin levels. The aim of the present study was to analyse the clinical characteristics of a large series of hospitalized patients for COVID-19 in order to identify predisposing and/or protective factors of CI and the outcome. METHODS AND RESULTS: This is an observational, retrospective study on patients hospitalized in two Italian centres (San Raffaele Hospital and Cremona Hospital) for COVID-19 and at least one high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTnt) measurement during hospitalization. CI was defined if at least one hs-cTnt value was above the 99th percentile. The primary end-point was the occurrence of CI during hospitalization. We included 750 patients (median age 67, IQR 56-77 years; 69% males), of whom 46.9% had history of hypertension, 14.7% of chronic coronary disease and 22.3% of chronic kidney disease (CKD). Abnormal troponin levels (median troponin 74, IQR 34-147 ng/l) were detected in 390 patients (52%) during the hospitalization. At multivariable analysis age, CKD, cancer, C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were independently associated with CI. Independent predictors of very high troponin levels were chronic kidney disease and CRP levels. Patients with CI showed higher rate of all-cause mortality (40.0% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.001) compared to those without CI. CONCLUSION: This large, multicentre Italian study confirmed the high prevalence of CI and its prognostic role in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, highlighting the leading role of systemic inflammation for the occurrence of CI.

Non-Invasive Assessment of Left Ventricle Ejection Fraction: Where Do We Stand?

The left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF) is the preferred parameter applied for the non-invasive evaluation of LV systolic function in clinical practice. It has a well-recognized and extensive role in the clinical management of numerous cardiac conditions. Many imaging modalities are currently available for the non-invasive assessment of LVEF. The aim of this review is to describe their relative advantages and disadvantages, proposing a hierarchical application of the different imaging tests available for LVEF evaluation based on the level of accuracy/reproducibility clinically required.

Intra-Aortic Balloon Pumping in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure With Hypoperfusion: From Pathophysiology to Clinical Practice.

Trials on intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) use in cardiogenic shock related to acute myocardial infarction have shown disappointing results. The role of IABP in cardiogenic shock treatment remains unclear, and new (potentially more potent) mechanical circulatory supports with arguably larger device profile are emerging. A reappraisal of the physiological premises of intra-aortic counterpulsation may underpin the rationale to maintain IABP as a valuable therapeutic option for patients with acute decompensated heart failure and tissue hypoperfusion. Several pathophysiological features differ between myocardial infarction- and acute decompensated heart failure-related hypoperfusion, encompassing cardiogenic shock severity, filling status, systemic vascular resistances rise, and adaptation to chronic (if preexisting) left ventricular dysfunction. IABP combines a more substantial effect on left ventricular afterload with a modest increase in cardiac output and would therefore be most suitable in clinical scenarios characterized by a disproportionate increase in afterload without profound hemodynamic compromise. The acute decompensated heart failure syndrome is characterized by exquisite afterload-sensitivity of cardiac output and may be an ideal setting for counterpulsation. Several hemodynamic variables have been shown to predict response to IABP within this scenario, potentially guiding appropriate patient selection. Finally, acute decompensated heart failure with hypoperfusion may frequently represent an end stage in the heart failure history: IABP may provide sufficient hemodynamic support and prompt end-organ function recovery in view of more definitive heart replacement therapies while preserving ambulation when used with a transaxillary approach.

Regional differences in presentation characteristics, use of treatments and outcome of patients with cardiogenic shock: Results from multicenter, international registry.

BACKGROUND: Concurrent evidence about cardiogenic shock (CS) characteristics, treatment and outcome does not represent a global spectrum of patients and is therefore limited. The aim of this study was to investigate these regional differences. METHODS: To investigate regional differences in presentation characteristics, treatments and outcomes of patients treated with all types of cardiogenic shock (CS) in a single calendar year on a multi-national level. Consecutive patients from 19 tertiary care hospitals in 13 countries with CS who were treated between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2018 were enrolled in this study. RESULTS: In total, 699 cardiogenic shock patients were included in this study. Of these patients, 440 patients (63%) were treated in European hospitals and 259 (37%) were treated in Non-European hospitals. Female patients (P<0.01) and patients with a previous myocardial infarction (P=0.02) were more likely to present at Non-European hospitals; whereas older patients (P=0.01) and patients with cardiogenic shock due to acute heart failure (P<0.01) were more likely to present at European hospitals. Vasopressor use was more likely in Non-European hospitals (P=0.04), whereas use of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) was more likely in European hospitals (P<0.01). Despite adjustment for relevant confounders, 30-day in-hospital mortality risk was comparably high in CS patients treated in European vs. Non-European hospitals (hazard ratio 1.08, 95% CI 0.84-1.39, P=0.56). CONCLUSION: Despite marked heterogeneity in characteristics and treatment of CS patients, including fewer use of MCS but more frequent use of vasopressors in Non-European hospitals, 30-day in-hospital mortality did not differ between regions.

The Spectrum of COVID-19-Associated Myocarditis: A Patient-Tailored Multidisciplinary Approach.

BACKGROUND: Myocarditis lacks systematic characterization in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We enrolled consecutive patients with newly diagnosed myocarditis in the context of COVID-19 infection. Diagnostic and treatment strategies were driven by a dedicated multidisciplinary disease unit for myocarditis. Multimodal outcomes were assessed during prospective follow-up. RESULTS: Seven consecutive patients (57% males, age 51 ± 9 y) with acute COVID-19 infection received a de novo diagnosis of myocarditis. Endomyocardial biopsy was of choice in hemodynamically unstable patients (n = 4, mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 25 ± 9%), whereas cardiac magnetic resonance constituted the first exam in stable patients (n = 3, mean LVEF 48 ± 10%). Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis revealed an intra-myocardial SARS-CoV-2 genome in one of the six cases undergoing biopsy: in the remaining patients, myocarditis was either due to other viruses (n = 2) or virus-negative (n = 3). Hemodynamic support was needed for four unstable patients (57%), whereas a cardiac device implant was chosen in two of four cases showing ventricular arrhythmias. Medical treatment included immunosuppression (43%) and biological therapy (29%). By the 6-month median follow-up, no patient died or experienced malignant arrhythmias. However, two cases (29%) were screened for heart transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: Myocarditis associated with acute COVID-19 infection is a spectrum of clinical manifestations and underlying etiologies. A multidisciplinary approach is the cornerstone for tailored management.

Use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in high-risk acute pulmonary embolism: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) represents a therapeutic option for cardiopulmonary support in patients with high-risk pulmonary embolism (PE); however, no definite consensus exists on ECMO use in high-risk PE. Hence, we aim to provide insights into its real-world use pooling together all available published experiences. We performed a systematic review and pooled analysis of all published studies (up to April 17, 2020) investigating ECMO support in high-risk PE. All studies including at least four patients were collectively analyzed. Study outcomes were early all-cause death (primary endpoint) and relevant in-hospital adverse events. A total of 21 studies were included in the pooled analysis (n = 635 patients). In this population (mean age 47.8 ± 17.3 years, 44.5% females), ECMO was indicated for cardiac arrest in 62.3% and immediate ECMO support was pursued in 61.9% of patients. Adjunctive reperfusion therapies were implemented in 57.0% of patients. Pooled estimate rate of early all-cause mortality was 41.1% (95% CI 27.7%-54.5%). The most common in-hospital adverse event was major bleeding, with an estimated rate of 28.6% (95%CI 21.0%-36.3%). At meta-regression analyses, no significant impact of multiple covariates on the primary endpoint was found. In this systematic review of patients who received ECMO for high-risk PE, pooled all-cause mortality was 41.1%. Principal indication for ECMO was cardiac arrest, cannulation was chiefly performed at presentation, and major bleeding was the most common complication.