Abstract 4141218: Prolonged Impella 5.5 Support – A Single-Center Experience

Background: The Impella 5.5 (Abiomed; I5.5) is a temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) device currently approved for periods of ≤14 days. Although many centers have reported successful I5.5 utilization beyond this duration, the indications and clinical outcomes associated with this practice are unknown. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients at our institution receiving I5.5 from April 2021-September 2023. Inclusion criteria were patients which received I5.5 at our institution that reached first event– specified as death/hospice, durable VAD/heart transplant, or recovery – prior to discharge or transfer. The primary outcome was differences in first event between patients receiving I5.5 support for ≤14-days vs >14-days. Secondary outcomes were complication rates, defined by occurrence of bleeding, stroke, significant hemolysis, or device migration/malfunction. Propensity-matching was utilized to help account for potential confounders. Statistical analysis involved Wilcoxon rank-sum testing and Chi-square/Fisher’s exact tests with Benjamini-Hochberg correction. Results: Among the 162 patients which met inclusion criteria, 76 (47%) required ≤14-days of support and 86 (53%) required >14-days. Baseline demographics and baseline INTERMACS profile and SCAI class were similar. In the ≤14-days group vs >14-day group, 54% vs 72% progressed to durable VAD/transplant (p = 0.02), 28% vs 21% died/pursued hospice (p = 0.48), and 18% vs 7% recovered (p = 0.04). Sub-group analysis on a propensity-matched cohort with similar INTERMACS profile and SCAI classification did not alter the above results, with similar probability of death/hospice (p = 0.52) and increased probability of durable VAD/transplant (54% ≤14-days, 71% >14-days; p = 0.04). Time-adjusted complication rates between cohorts were similar (IRR = 1.1 ≤14 vs >14-days; 95% CI 0.3 - 1.9), but overall complication frequency was higher in the >14-day group (11% ≤14-days, 41% >14 days, p < 0.01). Conclusion: I5.5-based tMCS beyond 14 days was not associated with increased mortality or decreased probability of eventual durable VAD/transplant. We did not observe an increased incidence rate of complications for I5.5 usage beyond 14 days but did note an increased absolute probability of complications with prolonged support. Future randomized-control studies which better control for potential confounds are warranted to better identify appropriate indications for I5.5 tMCS utilization beyond 14 days.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Circulation
Published
2024-11-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1161/circ.150.suppl_1.4141218
Primary Topic
Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Abstract 4141218: Prolonged Impella 5.5 Support – A Single-Center Experience

Ivan A. Kuznetsov, Joyce Wanglee Wald, Mauer Biscotti, Marisa Cevasco et al.
Circulation
Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices
article

Abstract 4141218: Prolonged Impella 5.5 Support – A Single-Center Experience

Ivan A. Kuznetsov, Joyce Wanglee Wald, Mauer Biscotti, Marisa Cevasco, Andrea Peterson, J. King, Omar Toubat, Jake Kieserman, Alyson N. Brown, C. Bermúdez, Alison Ranum
article en

Abstract

Background: The Impella 5.5 (Abiomed; I5.5) is a temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) device currently approved for periods of ≤14 days. Although many centers have reported successful I5.5 utilization beyond this duration, the indications and clinical outcomes associated with this practice are unknown. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients at our institution receiving I5.5 from April 2021-September 2023. Inclusion criteria were patients which received I5.5 at our institution that reached first event– specified as death/hospice, durable VAD/heart transplant, or recovery – prior to discharge or transfer. The primary outcome was differences in first event between patients receiving I5.5 support for ≤14-days vs >14-days. Secondary outcomes were complication rates, defined by occurrence of bleeding, stroke, significant hemolysis, or device migration/malfunction. Propensity-matching was utilized to help account for potential confounders. Statistical analysis involved Wilcoxon rank-sum testing and Chi-square/Fisher’s exact tests with Benjamini-Hochberg correction. Results: Among the 162 patients which met inclusion criteria, 76 (47%) required ≤14-days of support and 86 (53%) required >14-days. Baseline demographics and baseline INTERMACS profile and SCAI class were similar. In the ≤14-days group vs >14-day group, 54% vs 72% progressed to durable VAD/transplant (p = 0.02), 28% vs 21% died/pursued hospice (p = 0.48), and 18% vs 7% recovered (p = 0.04). Sub-group analysis on a propensity-matched cohort with similar INTERMACS profile and SCAI classification did not alter the above results, with similar probability of death/hospice (p = 0.52) and increased probability of durable VAD/transplant (54% ≤14-days, 71% >14-days; p = 0.04). Time-adjusted complication rates between cohorts were similar (IRR = 1.1 ≤14 vs >14-days; 95% CI 0.3 - 1.9), but overall complication frequency was higher in the >14-day group (11% ≤14-days, 41% >14 days, p < 0.01). Conclusion: I5.5-based tMCS beyond 14 days was not associated with increased mortality or decreased probability of eventual durable VAD/transplant. We did not observe an increased incidence rate of complications for I5.5 usage beyond 14 days but did note an increased absolute probability of complications with prolonged support. Future randomized-control studies which better control for potential confounds are warranted to better identify appropriate indications for I5.5 tMCS utilization beyond 14 days.

CirculationVol. 150(Suppl_1)
University of Pennsylvania (US)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 81%
Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.