Ventricular Assist Device in Acute Myocardial Infarction

Original Title: Ventricular Assist Device in Acute Myocardial Infarction. Reference: Deepak Acharya et al. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67(16):1871-1880.

 

Patients undergoing acute myocardial infarction (AMI) with acute cardiac failure or cardiogenic shock have a high mortality rate with the conventional treatment.

This study assessed the outcomes of patients with AMI receiving a durable ventricular assist device.

All patients in the INTERMACS registry (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support) receiving a ventricular assist device in the context of AMI were included and compared with those receiving similar devices in other clinical contexts (not AMI).

In all, 502 patients with AMI received an assist device, 443 left ventricular assist devices; 33 biventricular assist devices; and 26 total artificial hearts.

Population mean age was 58.3 years and more than 70% were men.

In the group receiving the device in the context of AMI there was a higher proportion of patients had pre-operative intra-aortic balloon pumps (57.6% vs. 25.3%; p < 0.01), intubation (58% vs. 8.3%; p < 0.01), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

On month after ventricular assist device implantation, 91.8% of AMI patients were alive and continued with the support, 7.2% died on the device and 1% had a heart transplant.

After one year, 52% were alive and still on the support device, 25.7% had a heart transplant, 1.6% recovered and had the device removed, and 20.7% died on the device.

After adjusting for clinical differences, the AMI group requiring the device presented a short term mortality rate similar to that of the non AMI group (HR: 0.89; p = 0.30) but later on the first group saw a lower rate (HR: 0.55; p = 0.02).

Conclusion
Patients receiving a permanent ventricular assist device in the context of AMI in cardiogenic shock have a similar outcome to that of patients with similar devices despite being more critically sick prior implantation. Ventricular assist device implantation is an effective therapy for patients with post MI acute heart failure or cardiogenic shock when standard therapy fails.

More articles by this author

AHA 2024 | SUMMIT

It has been previously shown that the pharmacological treatment of obesity (semaglutide) can reduce cardiovascular events in patients with cardiac failure (CF) and preserved...

AHA 2024 – BPROAD

Hypertension (elevated blood pressure, BP) is the most common comorbidity among diabetic patients and has been associated with higher cardiovascular risk, though as a...

Coronary Artery Disease in Aortic Stenosis: CABG + SAVR vs. TAVR + PCI: Data from Spanish Centers

Multiple randomized studies have shown comparable or superior efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) vs. coronary artery bypass graft (CABG).  However, many of...

Evolution of Small Balloon-Expandable Valves

Small aortic rings (20 mm) have posed a significant challenge for both surgery and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) due to their association with an...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

Long Term Results of the International Chimney Registry

The International Chimney Registry was an observational study aimed at assessing the use of chimney stenting during TAVR either to predict or treat coronary...

CANNULATE TAVR extended study: Impact of Commissural and Coronary Alignment in Coronary Cannulation Following TAVR with Evolut Fx

The new valve Evolut FX has shown better commissural alignment vs. its predecessor Evolut Pro+. Prior studies have already shown commissure alignment facilitates post...

TRISCEND II: Transcatheter Replacement vs. Medical Treatment for Tricuspid Regurgitation

The EVOQUE device is designed with an intra-annular sealing system that provides excellent anatomical compatibility and an adaptable shape. It is currently available in...