Comparison of Impella and intra-aortic balloon pump in high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: vascular complications and incidence of bleeding.

Konstantinos Dean Boudoulas, Andrew Pederzolli, Uksha Saini, Richard J Gumina, Ernest L Mazzaferri, Michael Davis, Charles A Bush, Quinn Capers, Raymond Magorien, Vincent J Pompili
{"title":"Comparison of Impella and intra-aortic balloon pump in high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: vascular complications and incidence of bleeding.","authors":"Konstantinos Dean Boudoulas,&nbsp;Andrew Pederzolli,&nbsp;Uksha Saini,&nbsp;Richard J Gumina,&nbsp;Ernest L Mazzaferri,&nbsp;Michael Davis,&nbsp;Charles A Bush,&nbsp;Quinn Capers,&nbsp;Raymond Magorien,&nbsp;Vincent J Pompili","doi":"10.3109/17482941.2012.741244","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Compare vascular complications and incidence of bleeding of Impella 2.5 and intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) in high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI).</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Large arterial sheath size for device insertion is associated with vascular and/or bleeding complications; gastrointestinal bleeding may also occur with anti-coagulation use.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with an acute coronary syndrome receiving Impella 2.5 or IABP during high-risk PCI were studied (13 Impella; 62 IABP). Vascular complications and incidence of bleeding were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Post-procedure hematocrit was similar between groups. Blood transfusion occurred in 38.4% and 32.2% of patients in the Impella and IABP groups, respectively (P = NS); 65.3%, 30.7% and 3.8% of bleeding were due to vascular access site/procedure related, gastrointestinal and genitourinary, respectively. There was no statistical significant difference in vascular complications between the Impella and IABP groups (15.3% and 6.4% of patients, respectively); mesenteric ischemia (n = 1) and aortic rupture (n = 1) were only in the IABP group. In-hospital and one-year mortality were not statistically significant between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Impella can be used as safely as IABP during high-risk PCI with similar vascular and bleeding complications. Importantly, approximately one third of bleeding was from the gastrointestinal system warranting careful prophylactic measures and monitoring.</p>","PeriodicalId":87385,"journal":{"name":"Acute cardiac care","volume":"14 4","pages":"120-4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3109/17482941.2012.741244","citationCount":"23","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acute cardiac care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3109/17482941.2012.741244","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 23

Abstract

Objective: Compare vascular complications and incidence of bleeding of Impella 2.5 and intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) in high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI).

Background: Large arterial sheath size for device insertion is associated with vascular and/or bleeding complications; gastrointestinal bleeding may also occur with anti-coagulation use.

Methods: Patients with an acute coronary syndrome receiving Impella 2.5 or IABP during high-risk PCI were studied (13 Impella; 62 IABP). Vascular complications and incidence of bleeding were compared.

Results: Post-procedure hematocrit was similar between groups. Blood transfusion occurred in 38.4% and 32.2% of patients in the Impella and IABP groups, respectively (P = NS); 65.3%, 30.7% and 3.8% of bleeding were due to vascular access site/procedure related, gastrointestinal and genitourinary, respectively. There was no statistical significant difference in vascular complications between the Impella and IABP groups (15.3% and 6.4% of patients, respectively); mesenteric ischemia (n = 1) and aortic rupture (n = 1) were only in the IABP group. In-hospital and one-year mortality were not statistically significant between groups.

Conclusion: Impella can be used as safely as IABP during high-risk PCI with similar vascular and bleeding complications. Importantly, approximately one third of bleeding was from the gastrointestinal system warranting careful prophylactic measures and monitoring.

Impella与主动脉内球囊泵在高危经皮冠状动脉介入治疗中的比较:血管并发症及出血发生率。
目的:比较Impella 2.5与主动脉内球囊泵(IABP)在高危经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)中的血管并发症及出血发生率。背景:装置插入时动脉鞘尺寸过大与血管和/或出血并发症相关;使用抗凝剂也可能发生胃肠道出血。方法:对高危PCI术中接受Impella 2.5或IABP的急性冠状动脉综合征患者进行研究(13 Impella;62 IABP)。比较两组血管并发症及出血发生率。结果:两组术后红细胞压积相近。Impella组和IABP组输血发生率分别为38.4%和32.2% (P = NS);65.3%、30.7%和3.8%的出血与血管通路部位/手术相关、胃肠道和泌尿生殖系统有关。Impella组与IABP组血管并发症发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(分别为15.3%和6.4%);仅IABP组出现肠系膜缺血(n = 1)和主动脉破裂(n = 1)。住院和一年死亡率组间无统计学差异。结论:在血管及出血并发症相似的高危PCI手术中,Impella与IABP一样安全。重要的是,大约三分之一的出血来自胃肠道系统,需要仔细的预防措施和监测。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信