ArticleESC heart failure2021
Initial experience covering 50 consecutive cases of large Impella implantation at a single heart centre.
Article in ESC heart failure, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Microaxial pump-supported coronary surgery without CPB to optimize outcome in severely impaired left ventricles.ESC heart failure · 2025Article
- AI driven mechanical circulatory support: Can AI and Impella team up to beat cardiogenic shock.ESC heart failure · 2024Article
- Review
- Impact of Impella Support on Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Postcardiotomy Cardiogenic Shock.Annals of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery : official journal of the Association of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeons of Asia · 2024Observational
- Bridging with surgically placed microaxial left ventricular assist devices: a high-volume centre experience.European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery · 2023Article
- Outcomes of surgical Impella placement in acute cardiogenic shock.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2023Article
- Cardiogenic Shock: Searching for a Better Lifeboat.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2022Article
- Microaxial Left Ventricular Assist Device in Cardiogenic Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Outcome of Patients Supported by Large Impella Systems After Re-implantation Due to Continued or Recurrent Need of Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Initial experience covering 50 consecutive cases of large Impella implantation at a single heart centre.ESC heart failure · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsPre-operative or post-operative heart failure (HF) and cardiogenic shock of various natures frequently remain refractory to conservative treatment and require mechanical circulatory support. We report our clinical experience with large Impella systems (5.0 or 5.5; i.e. Impella 5+) (Abiomed Inc., Boston, USA) and evaluate the parameters that determined patient outcome. METHODS AND
resultsThe initial 50 cases of Impella 5+ implanted for acute HF between November 2018 and August 2020 at a single centre were enrolled in this study. Data, including preoperative characteristics, perioperative clinical course information, and post-operative outcomes, were retrospectively collected from the hospital data management and quality assurance system. Descriptive and univariate analyses were performed. Among the 49 patients in this study, 28 (56.0%) survived in the first 30 days post-operatively, and 3 died of non-cardiac reasons later. In-hospital mortality was significantly higher in patients with biventricular failure [P < 0.01, odds ratio (OR) 5.63] or dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) (P = 0.02, OR 15.8), whereas ischaemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) was associated with lower mortality (P = 0.03, OR 0.24). Interestingly, the mortality was comparable between the 'solo' Impella group and the veno-arterial extracorporal membrane oxygenation (va-ECMO) plus Impella (ECMELLA) group, despite the severity of the patients' profile in the ECMELLA group ('solo' vs. ECMELLA; 55.6% vs. 52.6%, P = 1.00). All patients who received an additional temporary right ventricular assist device (tRVAD) were successfully weaned from va-ECMO.
conclusionsOur results suggest that biventricular failure and DCM are predictors of higher mortality in patients with Impella. Considering the pathophysiology of HF, implantation of a large Impella system seems to be promising, especially for ICM patients. The large Impella system might be more effective for better prognosis of patients under va-ECMO, and combination therapy with tRVAD seems to be a promising strategy for early weaning from va-ECMO.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.