Journal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs · 2021
Temporary surgical ventricular assist device for treatment of acute myocardial infarction and refractory cardiogenic shock in the percutaneous device era.
Историческая статьяСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Singh Sameer K, Witer Lucas, Kaku Yuji, Masoumi Amirali, Fried Justin A, Yuzefpolskaya Melana, Colombo Paolo C, Sayer Gabriel, Uriel Nir, Naka Yoshifumi, Takayama Hiroo, Takeda Koji
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Acute myocardial infarction with refractory cardiogenic shock (AMI-RCS) is associated with poor outcomes. Several percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices exist; however, limitations exist regarding long-term use. Herein, we describe our experience with the temporary surgical CentriMag VAD.
METHODS: We reviewed 74 patients with AMI-RCS who underwent CentriMag VAD insertion as bridge-to-decision device from 2007 to 2020. Patients were divided into groups based on introduction of the "shock team" model: Era 1 (2007-2014, n = 51) and Era 2 (2015-2020, n = 23).
RESULTS: Era 2 had higher proportion of patients with INTERMACS Profile I. The use of percutaneous MCS as bridge to VAD and the use of minimally invasive VAD were higher in Era 2. There were fewer postoperative bleeding events in Era 2 (80% vs 61%, p = .07). Thirty-day mortality was 23% and 1-year survival was 55%, which were no differences between eras. Destinations after CentriMag VAD included myocardial recovery (39%), durable LVAD (27%), and transplantation (5%).
CONCLUSION: CentriMag VAD device represents a viable bridge-to-decision device with acceptable short- and long-term outcomes for patients with AMI-RCS. Stable outcomes in a progressively sicker population may be related to changes in practice patterns as well as introduction of the "shock team" concept.
METHODS: We reviewed 74 patients with AMI-RCS who underwent CentriMag VAD insertion as bridge-to-decision device from 2007 to 2020. Patients were divided into groups based on introduction of the "shock team" model: Era 1 (2007-2014, n = 51) and Era 2 (2015-2020, n = 23).
RESULTS: Era 2 had higher proportion of patients with INTERMACS Profile I. The use of percutaneous MCS as bridge to VAD and the use of minimally invasive VAD were higher in Era 2. There were fewer postoperative bleeding events in Era 2 (80% vs 61%, p = .07). Thirty-day mortality was 23% and 1-year survival was 55%, which were no differences between eras. Destinations after CentriMag VAD included myocardial recovery (39%), durable LVAD (27%), and transplantation (5%).
CONCLUSION: CentriMag VAD device represents a viable bridge-to-decision device with acceptable short- and long-term outcomes for patients with AMI-RCS. Stable outcomes in a progressively sicker population may be related to changes in practice patterns as well as introduction of the "shock team" concept.