Open AccessVenoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation With Concomitant Impella Versus Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Cardiogenic Shock
Author(s) -
Saraschandra Vallabhajosyula,
John C. O’Horo,
Phanindra Antharam,
Sindhura Ananthaneni,
John M. Stulak,
Shan M. Dunlay,
David R. Holmes,
Gregory W. Barsness
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
asaio journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.961
H-Index - 66
eISSN - 1538-943X
pISSN - 1058-2916
DOI - 10.1097/mat.0000000000001039
Subject(s) - cardiogenic shock , extracorporeal membrane oxygenation , medicine , impella , concomitant , cardiology , retrospective cohort study , myocardial infarction
There are contrasting data on concomitant Impella device in cardiogenic shock patients treated with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA ECMO) (ECPELLA). This study sought to compare early mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock treated with ECPELLA in comparison to VA ECMO alone. We reviewed the published literature from 2000 to 2018 for randomized, cohort, case-control, and case series studies evaluating adult patients requiring VA ECMO for cardiogenic shock. Five retrospective observational studies, representing 425 patients, were included. Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation with concomitant Impella strategy was used in 27% of the patients. Median age across studies varied between 51 and 63 years with 59-88% patients being male. Use of ECPELLA was associated with higher weaning from VA ECMO and bridging to permanent ventricular assist device or cardiac transplant in three and four studies, respectively. The studies showed moderate heterogeneity with possible publication bias. The two studies that accounted for differences in baseline characteristics between treatment groups reported lower 30 day mortality with ECPELLA versus VA ECMO. The remaining three studies did not adjust for potential confounding and were at high risk for selection bias. In conclusion, ECPELLA is being increasingly used as a strategy in patients with cardiogenic shock. Additional large, high-quality studies are needed to evaluate clinical outcomes with ECPELLA.