Outcomes of temporary mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock due to end-stage heart failure.
Abstract
Background: There are few reports of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) due to end-stage heart failure (ESHF). We evaluated our institutional MCS strategy and compared the outcomes of INTERMACS 1 and 2 patients with CS due to ESHF. Methods: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data (November 2014 to July 2019) from a single centre. ESHF was defined by a diagnosis of HF prior to presentation with CS. Other causes of CS (eg: acute myocardial infarction) were excluded. We compared the clinical course, complications and 90-day survival of patients with CS due to ESHF in INTERMACS profile 1 and 2. Results: We included 60 consecutive patients with CS due to ESHF Differences in baseline characteristics were consistent with the INTERMACS profiles. The duration of MCS was similar between INTERMACS 1 and 2 patients (14 (10-33) vs 15 (7-23) days, p = 0.439). There was no significant difference in the number of patients with complications that required intervention. Compared to INTERMACS 2, INTERMACS 1 patients had more organ dysfunction on support and significant lower 90-day survival (66% vs 34%, p = 0.016). Conclusion: Our temporary MCS strategy, including earlier intervention in patients with CS due to ESHF at INTERMACS 2 was associated with less organ dysfunction and better 90-day survival compared to INTERMACS 1 patients.Citation
Lim HS, Ranasinghe A, Quinn D, Chue C, Mascaro J. Outcomes of temporary mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock due to end-stage heart failure. J Intensive Care Soc. 2022 May;23(2):170-176. doi: 10.1177/1751143720988706. Epub 2021 Jan 22Type
ArticleAdditional Links
https://journals.sagepub.com/home/incPMID
35615244Publisher
SAGE Publicationsae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1177/1751143720988706