open access
Challenging multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention supported with Impella 2.5 ventricular assist device
, 1, 1
Affiliations- 1st Chair and Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Warsaw, Poland
open access
Abstract
Abstract
Keywords
Impella, PCI, MCS
About this articleTitle
Challenging multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention supported with Impella 2.5 ventricular assist device
Journal
Disaster and Emergency Medicine Journal
Issue
Article type
Case report
Pages
90-93
Published online
2021-07-01
Page views
488
Article views/downloads
447
DOI
Bibliographic record
Disaster Emerg Med J 2021;6(2):90-93.
Keywords
Impella
PCI
MCS
Authors
Karolina Jasinska
Aleksandra Gasecka
Arkadiusz Pietrasik
Janusz Kochman
References (12)- Left Ventricular Assist Devices. SpringerReference. .
- Burzotta F, Russo G, Previ L, et al. Impella: pumps overview and access site management. Minerva Cardioangiol. 2018; 66(5): 606–611.
- Saxena A, Garan AR, Kapur NK, et al. Partial mechanical circulatory support in an ovine model of post-infarction remodeling. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2013; 32(8): 815–822.
- Thiele H, Zeymer U, Neumann FJ, et al. IABP-SHOCK II Trial Investigators. Intraaortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med. 2012; 367(14): 1287–1296.
- Bahekar A, Singh M, Singh S, et al. Cardiovascular outcomes using intra-aortic balloon pump in high-risk acute myocardial infarction with or without cardiogenic shock: a meta-analysis. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol Ther. 2012; 17(1): 44–56.
- Burzotta F, Russo G, Basile E, et al. [How to choose between intra-aortic balloon pump, Impella and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation]. G Ital Cardiol (Rome). 2018; 19(6 Suppl 1): 5S–513S.
- O'Neill WW, Schreiber T, Wohns DHW, et al. The current use of Impella 2.5 in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: results from the USpella Registry. J Interv Cardiol. 2014; 27(1): 1–11.
- Seyfarth M, Sibbing D, Bauer I, et al. A randomized clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a percutaneous left ventricular assist device versus intra-aortic balloon pumping for treatment of cardiogenic shock caused by myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008; 52(19): 1584–1588.
- Dangas GD, Kini AS, Sharma SK, et al. Impact of hemodynamic support with Impella 2.5 versus intra-aortic balloon pump on prognostically important clinical outcomes in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (from the PROTECT II randomized trial). Am J Cardiol. 2014; 113(2): 222–228.
- Amin AP, Spertus JA, Curtis JP, et al. The Evolving Landscape of Impella Use in the United States Among Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Mechanical Circulatory Support. Circulation. 2020; 141(4): 273–284.
- Chieffo A, Ancona MB, Burzotta F, et al. Collaborators. Observational multicentre registry of patients treated with IMPella mechanical circulatory support device in ITaly: the IMP-IT registry. EuroIntervention. 2020; 15(15): e1343–e1350.
- Alushi B, Douedari A, Froehlig G, et al. Impella versus IABP in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. Open Heart. 2019; 6(1): e000987.