Schibilsky David, Kruger Tobias, Lausberg Henning F, Eisenlohr Christoph, Haller Christoph, Nemeth Attila, Schibilsky Barbara, Haeberle Helene, Rosenberger Peter, Walker Tobias, Schlensak Christian
Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University Medical Center Tuebingen, Germany.
Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Medical Center Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
Artif Organs. 2016 Sep;40(9):909-16. doi: 10.1111/aor.12804.
The catheter-based Impella 5.0 left ventricular assist device is a powerful and less invasive alternative for patients in cardiogenic shock. The use as second-line therapy in patients with precedent extracorporeal life support (ECLS) has not been described before now. We analyzed our experience of consecutive patients treated with this alternative strategy. From April 2014 to December 2014, eight patients had been implanted as a second-line option after ECLS support. The reason for the change from ECLS to Impella 5.0 was absence of cardiac recovery for primary weaning and complications of ECLS therapy. The mean time of ECLS support prior to Impella implantation was 12 ± 7 days. The implantation of the Impella 5.0/CP was technically successful in all patients, and the ECLS could be explanted in all eight patients who received Impella implantation as a second-line treatment. The second-line Impella 5.0 therapy resulted in two patients who turned into left ventricular assist device (LVAD) candidates, two primary weaning candidates, and four patients who died in the setting of sepsis or absent cardiac recovery and contraindications for durable LVAD therapy. Thereby, the overall hospital discharge survival as well as the 180-day survival was 50% for Impella 5.0 implantations as second-line procedure after ECLS. The latest follow-up survival of this second-line strategy after ECLS was three out of eight, as one patient died after 299 days of LVAD support due to sepsis. The use of Impella 5.0 constitutes a possible second-line therapeutic option for those patients who do not show cardiac recovery during prolonged ECLS support or suffer from complications of ECLS therapy. This treatment allows additional time for decisions regarding cardiac recovery or indication for durable LVAD therapy.
基于导管的Impella 5.0左心室辅助装置对于心源性休克患者而言是一种强大且侵入性较小的替代方案。此前尚未有将其用作接受过体外生命支持(ECLS)患者的二线治疗的相关描述。我们分析了采用这种替代策略连续治疗患者的经验。2014年4月至2014年12月,8例患者在接受ECLS支持后作为二线选择植入了该装置。从ECLS转换为Impella 5.0的原因是无法实现初次撤机的心脏功能恢复以及ECLS治疗的并发症。在植入Impella之前,ECLS支持的平均时间为12±7天。所有患者的Impella 5.0/CP植入在技术上均获成功,并且在作为二线治疗接受Impella植入的所有8例患者中,ECLS均得以拔除。二线Impella 5.0治疗使2例患者成为左心室辅助装置(LVAD)候选者,2例成为初次撤机候选者,4例患者在脓毒症或心脏功能未恢复以及存在永久性LVAD治疗禁忌证的情况下死亡。因此,作为ECLS后的二线手术,Impella 5.0植入的总体出院生存率以及180天生存率均为50%。在ECLS后采用这种二线策略的最新随访生存率为8例中的3例,因为1例患者在接受LVAD支持299天后因脓毒症死亡。对于那些在长时间ECLS支持期间未出现心脏功能恢复或患有ECLS治疗并发症的患者,使用Impella 5.0构成了一种可能的二线治疗选择。这种治疗为有关心脏功能恢复或永久性LVAD治疗指征的决策提供了额外时间。