Acute cardiac care · 2012
Comparison of Impella and intra-aortic balloon pump in high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: vascular complications and incidence of bleeding.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Boudoulas Konstantinos Dean, Pederzolli Andrew, Saini Uksha, Gumina Richard J, Mazzaferri Ernest L, Davis Michael, Bush Charles A, Capers Quinn, Magorien Raymond, Pompili Vincent J
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Compare vascular complications and incidence of bleeding of Impella 2.5 and intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) in high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI).
BACKGROUND: Large arterial sheath size for device insertion is associated with vascular and/or bleeding complications; gastrointestinal bleeding may also occur with anti-coagulation use.
METHODS: Patients with an acute coronary syndrome receiving Impella 2.5 or IABP during high-risk PCI were studied (13 Impella; 62 IABP). Vascular complications and incidence of bleeding were compared.
RESULTS: Post-procedure hematocrit was similar between groups. Blood transfusion occurred in 38.4% and 32.2% of patients in the Impella and IABP groups, respectively (P = NS); 65.3%, 30.7% and 3.8% of bleeding were due to vascular access site/procedure related, gastrointestinal and genitourinary, respectively. There was no statistical significant difference in vascular complications between the Impella and IABP groups (15.3% and 6.4% of patients, respectively); mesenteric ischemia (n = 1) and aortic rupture (n = 1) were only in the IABP group. In-hospital and one-year mortality were not statistically significant between groups.
CONCLUSION: Impella can be used as safely as IABP during high-risk PCI with similar vascular and bleeding complications. Importantly, approximately one third of bleeding was from the gastrointestinal system warranting careful prophylactic measures and monitoring.
BACKGROUND: Large arterial sheath size for device insertion is associated with vascular and/or bleeding complications; gastrointestinal bleeding may also occur with anti-coagulation use.
METHODS: Patients with an acute coronary syndrome receiving Impella 2.5 or IABP during high-risk PCI were studied (13 Impella; 62 IABP). Vascular complications and incidence of bleeding were compared.
RESULTS: Post-procedure hematocrit was similar between groups. Blood transfusion occurred in 38.4% and 32.2% of patients in the Impella and IABP groups, respectively (P = NS); 65.3%, 30.7% and 3.8% of bleeding were due to vascular access site/procedure related, gastrointestinal and genitourinary, respectively. There was no statistical significant difference in vascular complications between the Impella and IABP groups (15.3% and 6.4% of patients, respectively); mesenteric ischemia (n = 1) and aortic rupture (n = 1) were only in the IABP group. In-hospital and one-year mortality were not statistically significant between groups.
CONCLUSION: Impella can be used as safely as IABP during high-risk PCI with similar vascular and bleeding complications. Importantly, approximately one third of bleeding was from the gastrointestinal system warranting careful prophylactic measures and monitoring.