AHA 2018 | More Evidence for the Impella Device, But Larger Trials Are Necessary

In this pilot study, unloading the left ventricle with the Impella CP circulatory support device and delaying angioplasty by about 30 minutes appeared to be feasible and safe in patients with acute myocardial infarction without cardiogenic shock. This work sought to test the hypothesis that the device reduces ischemia-reperfusion injury.

AHA 2018 | El dispositivo Impella gana evidencia, pero hacen faltan estudios más grandesThe trial included 50 patients who had the Impella CP implanted and were randomized to immediate angioplasty or angioplasty after a 30-minute delay.

 

The study (presented at the American Heart Association [AHA] Scientific Sessions and published simultaneously in Circulation) showed that delaying reperfusion was associated with an obvious increase in door-to-balloon time (from 73 to 97 minutes), but not with an increase in adverse events or infarct size at 30 days.

 

There was no evidence of prohibitive risk that would prevent investigators from starting a much larger multicenter study next year.


Read also: AHA 2018 | Canakinumab Reduces Hospitalization for Cardiac Failure in Respondents.


The Impella device was successfully implanted and removed after a minimum of 3 hours of support.

 

As regards the safety endpoint, there was one death and one case of stroke in the immediate angioplasty group and 3 deaths and two flow-limiting dissections of the femoral artery when removing the device in the delayed group.

 

Original title: Unloading the Left Ventricle Before Reperfusion in Patients with Anterior ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Pilot Study Using the Impella CP.

Reference: Kapur N et al. Circulation. 2018; Epub ahead of print.

 


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

We are interested in your opinion. Please, leave your comments, thoughts, questions, etc., below. They will be most welcome.

More articles by this author

Is IVUS Always Necessary for Left Main Coronary Artery PCI?

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the unprotected left main coronary artery is a highly complex procedure because of the large amount of myocardium at...

Dual-Prep Registry: Atherectomy and IVL for Severe Coronary Calcification

Severe coronary calcification remains one of the most challenging scenarios in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Although rotational or orbital atherectomy and intravascular lithotripsy (IVL)...

Prehospital heparin in STEMI: A safe strategy associated with improved early reperfusion

Early reperfusion remains the main prognostic determinant in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Although primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the treatment...

Plaque Ruptures in Non-Culprit Arteries: Follow-Up With Intravascular Imaging

Plaque rupture remains one of the most important pathophysiological mechanisms in acute coronary syndromes. However, not all ruptures manifest clinically as ischemia, myocardial infarction,...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img
Jornadas Guatemala 2026

Recent Articles

UNICORN Technique to Prevent Coronary Obstruction During TAVI: Initial Results From a Multicenter Study

Coronary obstruction is an uncommon but potentially catastrophic complication of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), particularly in valve-in-valve procedures, TAV-in-TAV interventions, or in patients...

Supera vs. Eluvia at 3 Years in Severely Calcified Femoropopliteal Lesions

Severe calcification remains one of the main predictors of restenosis and the need for repeat revascularization following endovascular treatment of femoropopliteal disease. In this...

Is IVUS Always Necessary for Left Main Coronary Artery PCI?

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the unprotected left main coronary artery is a highly complex procedure because of the large amount of myocardium at...