Multicentre comparison of various microaxial pump devices as a bridge to durable assist device implantation

Abstract Aims Patients with acute decompensated advanced heart failure requiring left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation often experience progressive cardiac function deterioration, negatively impacting surgical outcomes. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of different microaxial flo...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Marta L. Medina, Daniel Lewin, Hendrik Treede, Sebastian V. Rojas, Alexander Bernhardt, Michael Billion, Anna L. Meyer, Ivan Netuka, Janajade Kooij, Marina Pieri, Antonio Loforte, Mauro Rinaldi, Mariusz K. Szymanski, Adriaan O. Kraajieveld, Christian J.H. Moeller, Payam Akhyari, Khalil Jawad, Bastian Schmack, Gloria Färber, Assad Haneya, Daniel Zimpfer, Gaik Nersesian, Ilija Djordjevic, Diyar Saeed, Finn Gustafsson, Anna M. Scandroglio, Bart Meyns, Steffen Hofmann, Jan Belohlavek, Jan Gummert, Pia Lanmueller, Evgenij V. Potapov, Mehmet Oezkur
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2025-08-01
Series:ESC Heart Failure
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1002/ehf2.15282
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849407219101073408
author Marta L. Medina
Daniel Lewin
Hendrik Treede
Sebastian V. Rojas
Alexander Bernhardt
Michael Billion
Anna L. Meyer
Ivan Netuka
Janajade Kooij
Marina Pieri
Antonio Loforte
Mauro Rinaldi
Mariusz K. Szymanski
Adriaan O. Kraajieveld
Christian J.H. Moeller
Payam Akhyari
Khalil Jawad
Bastian Schmack
Gloria Färber
Assad Haneya
Daniel Zimpfer
Gaik Nersesian
Ilija Djordjevic
Diyar Saeed
Finn Gustafsson
Anna M. Scandroglio
Bart Meyns
Steffen Hofmann
Jan Belohlavek
Jan Gummert
Pia Lanmueller
Evgenij V. Potapov
Mehmet Oezkur
author_facet Marta L. Medina
Daniel Lewin
Hendrik Treede
Sebastian V. Rojas
Alexander Bernhardt
Michael Billion
Anna L. Meyer
Ivan Netuka
Janajade Kooij
Marina Pieri
Antonio Loforte
Mauro Rinaldi
Mariusz K. Szymanski
Adriaan O. Kraajieveld
Christian J.H. Moeller
Payam Akhyari
Khalil Jawad
Bastian Schmack
Gloria Färber
Assad Haneya
Daniel Zimpfer
Gaik Nersesian
Ilija Djordjevic
Diyar Saeed
Finn Gustafsson
Anna M. Scandroglio
Bart Meyns
Steffen Hofmann
Jan Belohlavek
Jan Gummert
Pia Lanmueller
Evgenij V. Potapov
Mehmet Oezkur
author_sort Marta L. Medina
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Aims Patients with acute decompensated advanced heart failure requiring left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation often experience progressive cardiac function deterioration, negatively impacting surgical outcomes. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of different microaxial flow pump (mAFP) support devices (Impella®) in achieving optimal left ventricular unloading for preconditioning and facilitating definitive treatment in this high‐risk patient cohort. Methods and results A retrospective analysis was conducted across 19 high‐volume European centres. The study population included patients transitioning from temporary to durable circulatory support over a 7.5‐year period, with a median follow‐up of 1 year. Patients were categorized based on mAFP support capacity: those receiving high‐flow support (>5 L/min, ‘5+’) and those with lower‐flow support (3.5 L/min, ‘CP’). Patients who were initially treated with CP but subsequently upgraded to 5+ support were classified in the 5+ group. Demographic and clinical characteristics, mobilization, right heart function, and organ dysfunction outcomes were analysed. A total of 339 patients received preoperative mAFP support prior to LVAD implantation. The 5+ group comprised 247 patients (73%), including 38 patients who were upgraded from CP, while the CP group included 92 patients (27%). Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were comparable between groups, except for mobilization status, which showed significant differences (P < 0.001). Patients in the 5+ group achieved higher rates of full and partial mobilization compared to the CP group. Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) was more frequently required in the CP group than in the 5+ group (40.5% vs. 33.8%; P < 0.001). Additionally, right ventricular assist device (RVAD) implantation was significantly more common in the CP group (29.2% vs. 18.2%; P = 0.026). Patients in the 5+ group demonstrated greater reductions in both vasoactive inotropic scores (P = 0.006) and inotropic scores (P = 0.008). Furthermore, liver dysfunction (P = 0.016), renal failure (P = 0.041), and the need for dialysis (P = 0.013) were significantly more prevalent in the CP group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of LVAD operative duration (P = 0.637) or cardiopulmonary bypass time (P = 0.408). Conclusions High‐flow mAFP devices (+5) provided superior haemodynamic support, enhanced left ventricular unloading, and reduced dependence on catecholamines compared to lower‐flow CP devices. These improvements were associated with lower rates of right ventricular failure, renal dysfunction, and liver injury. However, no statistically significant difference was observed between mAFP groups regarding 30‐day mortality rates.
format Article
id doaj-art-dd5c1780cfd842fa8729872218ee3d06
institution Kabale University
issn 2055-5822
language English
publishDate 2025-08-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series ESC Heart Failure
spelling doaj-art-dd5c1780cfd842fa8729872218ee3d062025-08-20T03:36:08ZengWileyESC Heart Failure2055-58222025-08-011242552256410.1002/ehf2.15282Multicentre comparison of various microaxial pump devices as a bridge to durable assist device implantationMarta L. Medina0Daniel Lewin1Hendrik Treede2Sebastian V. Rojas3Alexander Bernhardt4Michael Billion5Anna L. Meyer6Ivan Netuka7Janajade Kooij8Marina Pieri9Antonio Loforte10Mauro Rinaldi11Mariusz K. Szymanski12Adriaan O. Kraajieveld13Christian J.H. Moeller14Payam Akhyari15Khalil Jawad16Bastian Schmack17Gloria Färber18Assad Haneya19Daniel Zimpfer20Gaik Nersesian21Ilija Djordjevic22Diyar Saeed23Finn Gustafsson24Anna M. Scandroglio25Bart Meyns26Steffen Hofmann27Jan Belohlavek28Jan Gummert29Pia Lanmueller30Evgenij V. Potapov31Mehmet Oezkur32Department of Cardiac and Vascular Surgery University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz Mainz GermanyDepartment of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery Deutsches Herzzentrum der Charité (DHZC) Berlin GermanyDepartment of Cardiac and Vascular Surgery University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz Mainz GermanyHeart and Diabetes Center, North Rhine‐Westphalia Bad Oeynhausen GermanyDepartment of Cardiovascular Surgery University Heart Center Hamburg Hamburg GermanyDepartment of Cardiac Surgery Schüchtermann Clinic Bad Rothenfelde GermanyDepartment of Cardiac Surgery Heidelberg University Hospital Heidelberg GermanyInstitute of Clinical and Experimental Medicine Prague Czech RepublicDepartment of Cardiac Surgery University Hospitals Leuven Leuven BelgiumDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute Milan ItalyDeparment of Cardiac Surgery, IRCCS Bologna St. Orsola University Hospital Bologna ItalyDepartment of Surgical Sciences University of Turin Turin ItalyDepartment of Cardiology University Medical Center Utrecht Utrecht NetherlandsDepartment of Cardiology University Medical Center Utrecht Utrecht NetherlandsDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery Rigshospitalet Copenhagen DenmarkDepartment of Cardiovascular Surgery University Hospital Duesseldorf Duesseldorf GermanyDepartment of Cardiac Surgery Leipzig Heart Center Leipzig GermanyDepartment of Cardiac Surgery University of Essen Essen GermanyDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery Jena University Hospital Jena GermanyDepartment of Cardiovascular Surgery University Hospital Schleswig‐Holstein Kiel GermanyDepartment of Surgery, Division of Cardiac Surgery Medical University of Vienna Vienna AustriaDepartment of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery Deutsches Herzzentrum der Charité (DHZC) Berlin GermanyDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery University Hospital Cologne Cologne GermanyDepartment of Cardiac Surgery Leipzig Heart Center Leipzig GermanyDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery Rigshospitalet Copenhagen DenmarkDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute Milan ItalyDepartment of Cardiac Surgery University Hospitals Leuven Leuven BelgiumDepartment of Cardiac Surgery Schüchtermann Clinic Bad Rothenfelde GermanyInstitute of Clinical and Experimental Medicine Prague Czech RepublicHeart and Diabetes Center, North Rhine‐Westphalia Bad Oeynhausen GermanyDepartment of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery Deutsches Herzzentrum der Charité (DHZC) Berlin GermanyDepartment of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery Deutsches Herzzentrum der Charité (DHZC) Berlin GermanyDepartment of Cardiac and Vascular Surgery University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz Mainz GermanyAbstract Aims Patients with acute decompensated advanced heart failure requiring left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation often experience progressive cardiac function deterioration, negatively impacting surgical outcomes. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of different microaxial flow pump (mAFP) support devices (Impella®) in achieving optimal left ventricular unloading for preconditioning and facilitating definitive treatment in this high‐risk patient cohort. Methods and results A retrospective analysis was conducted across 19 high‐volume European centres. The study population included patients transitioning from temporary to durable circulatory support over a 7.5‐year period, with a median follow‐up of 1 year. Patients were categorized based on mAFP support capacity: those receiving high‐flow support (>5 L/min, ‘5+’) and those with lower‐flow support (3.5 L/min, ‘CP’). Patients who were initially treated with CP but subsequently upgraded to 5+ support were classified in the 5+ group. Demographic and clinical characteristics, mobilization, right heart function, and organ dysfunction outcomes were analysed. A total of 339 patients received preoperative mAFP support prior to LVAD implantation. The 5+ group comprised 247 patients (73%), including 38 patients who were upgraded from CP, while the CP group included 92 patients (27%). Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were comparable between groups, except for mobilization status, which showed significant differences (P < 0.001). Patients in the 5+ group achieved higher rates of full and partial mobilization compared to the CP group. Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) was more frequently required in the CP group than in the 5+ group (40.5% vs. 33.8%; P < 0.001). Additionally, right ventricular assist device (RVAD) implantation was significantly more common in the CP group (29.2% vs. 18.2%; P = 0.026). Patients in the 5+ group demonstrated greater reductions in both vasoactive inotropic scores (P = 0.006) and inotropic scores (P = 0.008). Furthermore, liver dysfunction (P = 0.016), renal failure (P = 0.041), and the need for dialysis (P = 0.013) were significantly more prevalent in the CP group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of LVAD operative duration (P = 0.637) or cardiopulmonary bypass time (P = 0.408). Conclusions High‐flow mAFP devices (+5) provided superior haemodynamic support, enhanced left ventricular unloading, and reduced dependence on catecholamines compared to lower‐flow CP devices. These improvements were associated with lower rates of right ventricular failure, renal dysfunction, and liver injury. However, no statistically significant difference was observed between mAFP groups regarding 30‐day mortality rates.https://doi.org/10.1002/ehf2.15282Microaxial flow pumpDurable mechanical circulatory supportCardiogenic shockImpellaLeft heart failure
spellingShingle Marta L. Medina
Daniel Lewin
Hendrik Treede
Sebastian V. Rojas
Alexander Bernhardt
Michael Billion
Anna L. Meyer
Ivan Netuka
Janajade Kooij
Marina Pieri
Antonio Loforte
Mauro Rinaldi
Mariusz K. Szymanski
Adriaan O. Kraajieveld
Christian J.H. Moeller
Payam Akhyari
Khalil Jawad
Bastian Schmack
Gloria Färber
Assad Haneya
Daniel Zimpfer
Gaik Nersesian
Ilija Djordjevic
Diyar Saeed
Finn Gustafsson
Anna M. Scandroglio
Bart Meyns
Steffen Hofmann
Jan Belohlavek
Jan Gummert
Pia Lanmueller
Evgenij V. Potapov
Mehmet Oezkur
Multicentre comparison of various microaxial pump devices as a bridge to durable assist device implantation
ESC Heart Failure
Microaxial flow pump
Durable mechanical circulatory support
Cardiogenic shock
Impella
Left heart failure
title Multicentre comparison of various microaxial pump devices as a bridge to durable assist device implantation
title_full Multicentre comparison of various microaxial pump devices as a bridge to durable assist device implantation
title_fullStr Multicentre comparison of various microaxial pump devices as a bridge to durable assist device implantation
title_full_unstemmed Multicentre comparison of various microaxial pump devices as a bridge to durable assist device implantation
title_short Multicentre comparison of various microaxial pump devices as a bridge to durable assist device implantation
title_sort multicentre comparison of various microaxial pump devices as a bridge to durable assist device implantation
topic Microaxial flow pump
Durable mechanical circulatory support
Cardiogenic shock
Impella
Left heart failure
url https://doi.org/10.1002/ehf2.15282
work_keys_str_mv AT martalmedina multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT daniellewin multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT hendriktreede multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT sebastianvrojas multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT alexanderbernhardt multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT michaelbillion multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT annalmeyer multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT ivannetuka multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT janajadekooij multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT marinapieri multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT antonioloforte multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT maurorinaldi multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT mariuszkszymanski multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT adriaanokraajieveld multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT christianjhmoeller multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT payamakhyari multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT khaliljawad multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT bastianschmack multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT gloriafarber multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT assadhaneya multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT danielzimpfer multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT gaiknersesian multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT ilijadjordjevic multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT diyarsaeed multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT finngustafsson multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT annamscandroglio multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT bartmeyns multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT steffenhofmann multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT janbelohlavek multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT jangummert multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT pialanmueller multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT evgenijvpotapov multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation
AT mehmetoezkur multicentrecomparisonofvariousmicroaxialpumpdevicesasabridgetodurableassistdeviceimplantation