由微轴流泵支持的心源性休克的血流动力学斜坡试验:方案描述、可行性和血流动力学反应。

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL
Yuki Ikeda, Saeko Iikura, Shohei Nakahara, Yu Takigami, Yuko Eda, Yuichiro Iida, Takeru Nabeta, Shunsuke Ishii, Nobuhiro Sato, Junya Ako
{"title":"由微轴流泵支持的心源性休克的血流动力学斜坡试验:方案描述、可行性和血流动力学反应。","authors":"Yuki Ikeda, Saeko Iikura, Shohei Nakahara, Yu Takigami, Yuko Eda, Yuichiro Iida, Takeru Nabeta, Shunsuke Ishii, Nobuhiro Sato, Junya Ako","doi":"10.1097/MAT.0000000000002555","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Evidence-based protocols for microaxial flow pump (MAFP) weaning remain limited. This study aimed to standardize the ramp test for MAFP and evaluate its feasibility and associated hemodynamic trajectories. In this single-center prospective study, we developed and implemented an Impella ramp test in 54 cardiogenic shock patients who met pretest stability criteria. Forty-six patients (85%) completed the full protocol, while the test was terminated in eight patients according to predefined safety criteria (significant disturbances in arterial pressure or pulmonary artery wedge pressure [PAWP], or sustained arrhythmias), with prompt recovery observed upon returning to the baseline P-level. Under continuous hemodynamic monitoring via a pulmonary artery catheter, the Impella P-level was reduced stepwise from P8 to P2 at 5 minute intervals, while systemic arterial pulse pressure (SAPP), cardiac power output (CPO), and PAWP were recorded. In the overall cohort, SAPP increased by 12.2 mm Hg, CPO decreased by 0.09 W, and PAWP increased by 2.5 mm Hg. Patients supported with Impella 5.5 experienced a greater reduction in flow (-2.8 vs. -1.4 L/minute) and more pronounced hemodynamic changes compared to those with Impella CP. The Impella ramp test is feasible and safe, providing quantitative hemodynamic insights that may inform individualized clinical decision-making and MAFP weaning strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":8844,"journal":{"name":"ASAIO Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hemodynamic Ramp Test in Cardiogenic Shock Supported by Microaxial Flow Pump: Protocol Description, Feasibility, and Hemodynamic Response.\",\"authors\":\"Yuki Ikeda, Saeko Iikura, Shohei Nakahara, Yu Takigami, Yuko Eda, Yuichiro Iida, Takeru Nabeta, Shunsuke Ishii, Nobuhiro Sato, Junya Ako\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/MAT.0000000000002555\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Evidence-based protocols for microaxial flow pump (MAFP) weaning remain limited. This study aimed to standardize the ramp test for MAFP and evaluate its feasibility and associated hemodynamic trajectories. In this single-center prospective study, we developed and implemented an Impella ramp test in 54 cardiogenic shock patients who met pretest stability criteria. Forty-six patients (85%) completed the full protocol, while the test was terminated in eight patients according to predefined safety criteria (significant disturbances in arterial pressure or pulmonary artery wedge pressure [PAWP], or sustained arrhythmias), with prompt recovery observed upon returning to the baseline P-level. Under continuous hemodynamic monitoring via a pulmonary artery catheter, the Impella P-level was reduced stepwise from P8 to P2 at 5 minute intervals, while systemic arterial pulse pressure (SAPP), cardiac power output (CPO), and PAWP were recorded. In the overall cohort, SAPP increased by 12.2 mm Hg, CPO decreased by 0.09 W, and PAWP increased by 2.5 mm Hg. Patients supported with Impella 5.5 experienced a greater reduction in flow (-2.8 vs. -1.4 L/minute) and more pronounced hemodynamic changes compared to those with Impella CP. The Impella ramp test is feasible and safe, providing quantitative hemodynamic insights that may inform individualized clinical decision-making and MAFP weaning strategies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8844,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ASAIO Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ASAIO Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/MAT.0000000000002555\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ASAIO Journal","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MAT.0000000000002555","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

基于证据的微轴流泵(MAFP)脱机方案仍然有限。本研究旨在规范MAFP的斜坡试验,并评估其可行性和相关的血流动力学轨迹。在这项单中心前瞻性研究中,我们在54名符合试验前稳定性标准的心源性休克患者中开发并实施了Impella斜坡试验。46名患者(85%)完成了完整的方案,而8名患者根据预先确定的安全标准(动脉压或肺动脉楔压[PAWP]明显紊乱,或持续心律失常)终止了试验,在恢复到基线p水平后观察到迅速恢复。在肺动脉导管连续血流动力学监测下,每隔5分钟将Impella p水平由P8逐步降至P2,同时记录全身动脉脉压(SAPP)、心功率输出(CPO)和paap。在整个队列中,SAPP增加了12.2 mm Hg, CPO减少了0.09 W, paap增加了2.5 mm Hg。与Impella CP相比,Impella 5.5患者的血流减少幅度更大(-2.8 vs -1.4 L/分钟),血流动力学变化更明显。Impella斜坡试验是可行和安全的,可以提供定量的血流动力学见解,可以为个性化的临床决策和MAFP断奶策略提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Hemodynamic Ramp Test in Cardiogenic Shock Supported by Microaxial Flow Pump: Protocol Description, Feasibility, and Hemodynamic Response.

Evidence-based protocols for microaxial flow pump (MAFP) weaning remain limited. This study aimed to standardize the ramp test for MAFP and evaluate its feasibility and associated hemodynamic trajectories. In this single-center prospective study, we developed and implemented an Impella ramp test in 54 cardiogenic shock patients who met pretest stability criteria. Forty-six patients (85%) completed the full protocol, while the test was terminated in eight patients according to predefined safety criteria (significant disturbances in arterial pressure or pulmonary artery wedge pressure [PAWP], or sustained arrhythmias), with prompt recovery observed upon returning to the baseline P-level. Under continuous hemodynamic monitoring via a pulmonary artery catheter, the Impella P-level was reduced stepwise from P8 to P2 at 5 minute intervals, while systemic arterial pulse pressure (SAPP), cardiac power output (CPO), and PAWP were recorded. In the overall cohort, SAPP increased by 12.2 mm Hg, CPO decreased by 0.09 W, and PAWP increased by 2.5 mm Hg. Patients supported with Impella 5.5 experienced a greater reduction in flow (-2.8 vs. -1.4 L/minute) and more pronounced hemodynamic changes compared to those with Impella CP. The Impella ramp test is feasible and safe, providing quantitative hemodynamic insights that may inform individualized clinical decision-making and MAFP weaning strategies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ASAIO Journal
ASAIO Journal 医学-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
7.10%
发文量
651
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: ASAIO Journal is in the forefront of artificial organ research and development. On the cutting edge of innovative technology, it features peer-reviewed articles of the highest quality that describe research, development, the most recent advances in the design of artificial organ devices and findings from initial testing. Bimonthly, the ASAIO Journal features state-of-the-art investigations, laboratory and clinical trials, and discussions and opinions from experts around the world. The official publication of the American Society for Artificial Internal Organs.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信