Abstract
Background
Acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock (AMICS) is a severe complication associated with exceedingly high mortality rates. While mechanical circulatory support (MCS) has emerged as a potential intervention, the evidence base for independent MCS use remains weak. In contrast, systematic reviews of observational studies have revealed significant mortality reduction when a combination of MCS was used: VA-ECMO in conjunction with a left ventricular (LV) unloading device (Impella or IABP). The ongoing dilemma concerning the selection between two LV unloading devices (VA-ECMO + Impella vs. VA-ECMO + IABP) warrants further investigation and clarification.
Aim
This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the short-term efficacy and safety of VA-ECMO + Impella versus VA-ECMO + IABP in treatment of AMICS.
Methods
A systematic search was performed on the EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane databases. Studies reporting the short-term (30-day/inpatient) mortality and complications of adult patients with AMICS treated with VA-ECMO + Impella and VA-ECMO + IABP were included. Subgroup analysis was performed including studies with ACS predominant CS (CS etiology 100% by AMI).
Results
Four observational studies with 14,247 patients were included. There was no significant difference in mortality between VA-ECMO + Impella and VA-ECMO + IABP (56.5% vs. 66.5%; OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.79−1.02; p = 0.09). However, VA-ECMO + Impella was associated with significantly lower mortality in patients with ACS predominant CS (53.2% vs. 67.7%; OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.62−0.85; p < 0.0001). VA-ECMO + Impella was concomitantly associated with a significantly higher risk of complications.
Conclusions
When comparing LV unloading devices in patients with AMICS requiring a combination of MCS, VA-ECMO + Impella was superior in mortality reduction only in the cohort where 100% of CS was caused by AMI.
Acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock (AMICS) is a severe complication associated with exceedingly high mortality rates. While mechanical circulatory support (MCS) has emerged as a potential intervention, the evidence base for independent MCS use remains weak. In contrast, systematic reviews of observational studies have revealed significant mortality reduction when a combination of MCS was used: VA-ECMO in conjunction with a left ventricular (LV) unloading device (Impella or IABP). The ongoing dilemma concerning the selection between two LV unloading devices (VA-ECMO + Impella vs. VA-ECMO + IABP) warrants further investigation and clarification.
Aim
This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the short-term efficacy and safety of VA-ECMO + Impella versus VA-ECMO + IABP in treatment of AMICS.
Methods
A systematic search was performed on the EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane databases. Studies reporting the short-term (30-day/inpatient) mortality and complications of adult patients with AMICS treated with VA-ECMO + Impella and VA-ECMO + IABP were included. Subgroup analysis was performed including studies with ACS predominant CS (CS etiology 100% by AMI).
Results
Four observational studies with 14,247 patients were included. There was no significant difference in mortality between VA-ECMO + Impella and VA-ECMO + IABP (56.5% vs. 66.5%; OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.79−1.02; p = 0.09). However, VA-ECMO + Impella was associated with significantly lower mortality in patients with ACS predominant CS (53.2% vs. 67.7%; OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.62−0.85; p < 0.0001). VA-ECMO + Impella was concomitantly associated with a significantly higher risk of complications.
Conclusions
When comparing LV unloading devices in patients with AMICS requiring a combination of MCS, VA-ECMO + Impella was superior in mortality reduction only in the cohort where 100% of CS was caused by AMI.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 110-122 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 24 Dec 2024 |
Keywords / Materials (for Non-textual outputs)
- acute myocardial infarction
- cardiogenic shock
- impella
- intra‐aortic balloon pump
- microaxial flow pump
- veno‐arterial extracorporealmembrane oxygenation
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety of Combined Mechanical Circulatory Support in Acute Myocardial Infarction Related Cardiogenic Shock'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver