{"title":"非急性冠状动脉综合征心源性休克患者接受Impella引入的早期门至卸车和住院死亡率","authors":"Taikan Terauchi, Masayoshi Yamamoto, Daigo Hiraya, Yoshitaka Motegi, Kentaro Minami, Naoto Kawamatsu, Kimi Sato, Hiroaki Watabe, Tomoko Machino-Ohtsuka, Tomoya Hoshi, Tomoko Ishizu","doi":"10.1016/j.jjcc.2025.08.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The association between early Impella (Abiomed, Inc., Danvers, MA, USA) introduction and outcomes in patients with non-acute coronary syndrome (ACS) cardiogenic shock remains unclear. This study aimed to examine whether early Impella introduction leads to better outcomes in patients with non-ACS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with non-ACS cardiogenic shock treated with Impella (n = 731), who were registered in the Japanese Registry for Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Devices, were categorized based on the time from admission to Impella introduction (door-to-unloading time): groups A (within 6 h), B (6-24 h), C (1-3 days), and D (>3 days). The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality; the secondary endpoints included left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) at Impella removal and adverse event frequency.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In-hospital mortality rates increased with delayed Impella introduction: 25.9 %, 34.2 %, 37.8 %, and 45.0 % in groups A, B, C, and D, respectively, with a significant difference between groups A and D (p < 0.001). The LVEF at Impella removal was significantly higher in group A than in group D [46 (35-57)% vs. 36 (26-50)%, p = 0.01]. Group D was an independent prognostic factor for in-hospital mortality compared with group A in all cohorts [odds ratio (OR), 1.98; 95 % confidence interval (CI), 1.01-3.91; p = 0.04] and in patients with myocarditis (OR, 2.87; 95 % CI, 1.06-7.80; p = 0.04).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Early Impella introduction in patients with non-ACS cardiogenic shock is associated with lower in-hospital mortality, especially in those with myocarditis.</p>","PeriodicalId":15223,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cardiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Early door-to-unloading and in-hospital mortality in patients with non-acute coronary syndrome cardiogenic shock undergoing Impella introduction.\",\"authors\":\"Taikan Terauchi, Masayoshi Yamamoto, Daigo Hiraya, Yoshitaka Motegi, Kentaro Minami, Naoto Kawamatsu, Kimi Sato, Hiroaki Watabe, Tomoko Machino-Ohtsuka, Tomoya Hoshi, Tomoko Ishizu\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jjcc.2025.08.004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The association between early Impella (Abiomed, Inc., Danvers, MA, USA) introduction and outcomes in patients with non-acute coronary syndrome (ACS) cardiogenic shock remains unclear. This study aimed to examine whether early Impella introduction leads to better outcomes in patients with non-ACS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with non-ACS cardiogenic shock treated with Impella (n = 731), who were registered in the Japanese Registry for Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Devices, were categorized based on the time from admission to Impella introduction (door-to-unloading time): groups A (within 6 h), B (6-24 h), C (1-3 days), and D (>3 days). The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality; the secondary endpoints included left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) at Impella removal and adverse event frequency.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In-hospital mortality rates increased with delayed Impella introduction: 25.9 %, 34.2 %, 37.8 %, and 45.0 % in groups A, B, C, and D, respectively, with a significant difference between groups A and D (p < 0.001). The LVEF at Impella removal was significantly higher in group A than in group D [46 (35-57)% vs. 36 (26-50)%, p = 0.01]. Group D was an independent prognostic factor for in-hospital mortality compared with group A in all cohorts [odds ratio (OR), 1.98; 95 % confidence interval (CI), 1.01-3.91; p = 0.04] and in patients with myocarditis (OR, 2.87; 95 % CI, 1.06-7.80; p = 0.04).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Early Impella introduction in patients with non-ACS cardiogenic shock is associated with lower in-hospital mortality, especially in those with myocarditis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15223,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of cardiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of cardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jjcc.2025.08.004\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jjcc.2025.08.004","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Early door-to-unloading and in-hospital mortality in patients with non-acute coronary syndrome cardiogenic shock undergoing Impella introduction.
Background: The association between early Impella (Abiomed, Inc., Danvers, MA, USA) introduction and outcomes in patients with non-acute coronary syndrome (ACS) cardiogenic shock remains unclear. This study aimed to examine whether early Impella introduction leads to better outcomes in patients with non-ACS.
Methods: Patients with non-ACS cardiogenic shock treated with Impella (n = 731), who were registered in the Japanese Registry for Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Devices, were categorized based on the time from admission to Impella introduction (door-to-unloading time): groups A (within 6 h), B (6-24 h), C (1-3 days), and D (>3 days). The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality; the secondary endpoints included left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) at Impella removal and adverse event frequency.
Results: In-hospital mortality rates increased with delayed Impella introduction: 25.9 %, 34.2 %, 37.8 %, and 45.0 % in groups A, B, C, and D, respectively, with a significant difference between groups A and D (p < 0.001). The LVEF at Impella removal was significantly higher in group A than in group D [46 (35-57)% vs. 36 (26-50)%, p = 0.01]. Group D was an independent prognostic factor for in-hospital mortality compared with group A in all cohorts [odds ratio (OR), 1.98; 95 % confidence interval (CI), 1.01-3.91; p = 0.04] and in patients with myocarditis (OR, 2.87; 95 % CI, 1.06-7.80; p = 0.04).
Conclusions: Early Impella introduction in patients with non-ACS cardiogenic shock is associated with lower in-hospital mortality, especially in those with myocarditis.
期刊介绍:
The official journal of the Japanese College of Cardiology is an international, English language, peer-reviewed journal publishing the latest findings in cardiovascular medicine. Journal of Cardiology (JC) aims to publish the highest-quality material covering original basic and clinical research on all aspects of cardiovascular disease. Topics covered include ischemic heart disease, cardiomyopathy, valvular heart disease, vascular disease, hypertension, arrhythmia, congenital heart disease, pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment, new diagnostic techniques, and cardiovascular imaging. JC also publishes a selection of review articles, clinical trials, short communications, and important messages and letters to the editor.