Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation with and without left ventricular unloading in patients with cardiac arrest: A nationwide analysis from the United States.
Abdilahi A Mohamoud, Adnan Khalif, Nadhem Abdallah, Mahmoud Ismayl, Abdirahman Wardhere, Andrew M Goldsweig
{"title":"Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation with and without left ventricular unloading in patients with cardiac arrest: A nationwide analysis from the United States.","authors":"Abdilahi A Mohamoud, Adnan Khalif, Nadhem Abdallah, Mahmoud Ismayl, Abdirahman Wardhere, Andrew M Goldsweig","doi":"10.1016/j.carrev.2025.09.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) using veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is a promising strategy for refractory cardiac arrest. However, the role of left ventricular (LV) unloading during ECPR remains uncertain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We queried the United States National Inpatient Sample (2016-2021) to identify adult patients with out-of-hospital (OHCA) and in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) who received ECPR. Patients were stratified based on the use of either VA-ECMO only or VA-ECMO with intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) or VA-ECMO with Impella (ECPELLA) for ventricular unloading. Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare in-hospital outcomes between the groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 6915 patients receiving ECPR, VA-ECMO alone was used in 5147 (74.4 %), VA-ECMO-IABP in 811 (11.7 %), and ECPELLA in 957 (13.9 %). In IHCA patients, ECPELLA was associated with 50 % lower odds of in-hospital mortality compared to VA-ECMO alone (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.50, 95 % CI 0.31-0.81, p < 0.01). No significant difference was found in OHCA patients. VA-ECMO-IABP was not associated with a mortality benefit vs. VA-ECMO alone in either OHCA or IHCA.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>LV mechanical unloading with ECPELLA was associated with improved survival in IHCA patients but not in OHCA patients compared to VA-ECMO alone. The addition of an IABP to VA-ECMO was not associated with a mortality benefit.</p>","PeriodicalId":47657,"journal":{"name":"Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carrev.2025.09.004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) using veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is a promising strategy for refractory cardiac arrest. However, the role of left ventricular (LV) unloading during ECPR remains uncertain.
Methods: We queried the United States National Inpatient Sample (2016-2021) to identify adult patients with out-of-hospital (OHCA) and in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) who received ECPR. Patients were stratified based on the use of either VA-ECMO only or VA-ECMO with intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) or VA-ECMO with Impella (ECPELLA) for ventricular unloading. Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare in-hospital outcomes between the groups.
Results: Among 6915 patients receiving ECPR, VA-ECMO alone was used in 5147 (74.4 %), VA-ECMO-IABP in 811 (11.7 %), and ECPELLA in 957 (13.9 %). In IHCA patients, ECPELLA was associated with 50 % lower odds of in-hospital mortality compared to VA-ECMO alone (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.50, 95 % CI 0.31-0.81, p < 0.01). No significant difference was found in OHCA patients. VA-ECMO-IABP was not associated with a mortality benefit vs. VA-ECMO alone in either OHCA or IHCA.
Conclusion: LV mechanical unloading with ECPELLA was associated with improved survival in IHCA patients but not in OHCA patients compared to VA-ECMO alone. The addition of an IABP to VA-ECMO was not associated with a mortality benefit.
期刊介绍:
Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine (CRM) is an international and multidisciplinary journal that publishes original laboratory and clinical investigations related to revascularization therapies in cardiovascular medicine. Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine publishes articles related to preclinical work and molecular interventions, including angiogenesis, cell therapy, pharmacological interventions, restenosis management, and prevention, including experiments conducted in human subjects, in laboratory animals, and in vitro. Specific areas of interest include percutaneous angioplasty in coronary and peripheral arteries, intervention in structural heart disease, cardiovascular surgery, etc.