Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Detroit Medical Center/Wayne State University Medical School of Medicine, Detroit, MI (M.P.).
Department of Cardiology, University Heart Centre Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany (B.S., D.W.).
Circ Heart Fail. 2019 Jul;12(7):e005981. doi: 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.119.005981. Epub 2019 Jul 12.
Ventricular septal defect (VSD) is a lethal complication of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and is often associated with cardiogenic shock. The optimal form of percutaneous mechanical circulatory support (MCS) for AMI-VSD is unknown.
We used a previously validated cardiovascular model to simulate AMI-VSD with parameters adjusted to replicate average hemodynamics reported in the literature, including a pulmonary-to-systemic blood flow ratio of 3.0. We then predicted effects of different types of percutaneous MCS (including intra-aortic balloon pumping, Impella, TandemHeart, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation) on pressures and flows throughout the cardiovascular system. The simulation replicated all major hemodynamic parameters reported in the literature with AMI-VSD. Inotropes and vasopressors worsened left-to-right shunting, whereas vasodilators decreased shunting at the expense of worsening hypotension. All MCS devices increased forward blood flow and arterial pressure but other effects varied among devices. Impella 5.0 provided the greatest degree of pulmonary capillary wedge pressure reductions and decreased left-to-right shunting. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation worsened pulmonary capillary wedge pressure and shunting, which could be improved by adding Impella or passive left ventricular vent. Pulmonary-to-systemic blood flow ratio could not be reduced below 2.0, and pulmonary flows remained high with all forms of MCS.
Although no form of percutaneous MCS normalized hemodynamics in AMI-VSD, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure and shunting were worsened by extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and improved by Impella. Accordingly, based on hemodynamics alone, Impella provides the optimal form of support in AMI-VSD. However, other factors, including team experience, device availability, potential for tissue ingestion, and clinical characteristics, need to be considered when choosing a percutaneous MCS device for AMI-VSD.
室间隔缺损(VSD)是急性心肌梗死(AMI)的致命并发症,常伴有心源性休克。AMI-VSD 的最佳经皮机械循环支持(MCS)形式尚不清楚。
我们使用了一个先前经过验证的心血管模型来模拟 AMI-VSD,参数调整为复制文献中报告的平均血液动力学,包括 3.0 的肺到全身血流比。然后,我们预测了不同类型的经皮 MCS(包括主动脉内球囊泵、Impella、TandemHeart 和体外膜肺氧合)对整个心血管系统压力和流量的影响。该模拟复制了 AMI-VSD 文献中报告的所有主要血液动力学参数。正性肌力药和血管加压药加重左右分流,而血管扩张剂以低血压为代价减少分流。所有 MCS 装置均增加了前向血流和动脉压,但各装置的其他效果不同。Impella 5.0 可最大程度地降低肺毛细血管楔压并减少左右分流。体外膜肺氧合增加了肺毛细血管楔压和分流,通过添加 Impella 或被动左心室通风可以改善。肺到全身血流比不能降低到 2.0 以下,所有形式的 MCS 都保持高肺血流。
尽管没有一种经皮 MCS 能使 AMI-VSD 的血液动力学正常化,但体外膜肺氧合会加重肺毛细血管楔压和分流,并通过 Impella 改善。因此,仅根据血液动力学,Impella 在 AMI-VSD 中提供了最佳的支持形式。然而,在为 AMI-VSD 选择经皮 MCS 装置时,还需要考虑其他因素,包括团队经验、设备可用性、潜在的组织摄取以及临床特征。