Design, concept and first in-vitro results of the percutaneous, pulsatile left ventricular assist device-PERKAT LV

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
D Kretzschmar ◽  
P.C Schulze ◽  
M.W Ferrari

Abstract Introduction A very high morbidity and mortality is associated with cardiogenic shock due to left ventricular failure despite encouraging developments in interventional cardiology. Patients suffering from cardiogenic shock often require temporary mechanical circulatory support to stabilize organ perfusion. In addition, an increasing number of patients with complex multi-vessel diseases cannot undergo surgical myocardial revascularization as recommended by recent guidelines due to their comorbidities. Those patients could benefit from a protected PCI approach using a temporary mechanical assist device. The available LVAD systems have specific advantages and disadvantages. Purpose It was our aim to develop a percutaneous, pulsatile assist device that unloads the left ventricle in a physiologic way. Methods The PERKAT-LV (“PERkutane KATheterpumptechnologie”) device consists of a self-expanding nitinol pump chamber which is covered by foils. Those foils carry multiple outflow valves at the proximal part of the pump chamber. A flexible suction tube with a pigtail-shaped tip and inflow holes are attached to its distal part. The system is designed for 16F percutaneous implantation via the femoral artery. Pulling back the outer sheath unfolds the nitinol chamber in the descending aorta while the flexible suction tube bypasses the aortic arch and ascending aorta with its tip in the left ventricle. In the second implantation step, a standard IABP balloon is placed into the pumping chamber and is connected to an external IABP console. Balloon deflation generates a blood flow from the left ventricle into PERKAT LV. During balloon inflation, blood leaves the system through the outflow foil valves in the descending aorta. Positioning and schematic drawing of PERKAT-LV is demonstrated in Figure 1. Results Preliminary in-vitro studies using a prototype of the PERKAT LV device were performed. It was tested in different afterload settings (0, 40, 80 and 120 mmHg) using a standard 30 ccl IABP balloon and varying inflation/deflations rates (70, 80, 90, 100, 110 and 120/min). We detected flow rates ranging from 2.0 to 3.0 L/min depending on the afterload setting and inflation/deflation rate. Conclusion The novel percutaneously implantable and pulsatile working PERKAT-LV device offers left ventricular unloading and circulatory support of up to 3.0 L/min in a first feasibility study. At the moment, the system is extensively studied under in vitro conditions. First in vivo evaluation will follow in the near future. Based on the current results, we believe that the system is a promising novel approach for percutaneous application of temporary left ventricular mechanical support. Figure 1 Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Public grant(s) – National budget only. Main funding source(s): German Federal Ministry of Education and Research

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Auriane Bidaut ◽  
Erwan Flécher ◽  
Nicolas Nesseler ◽  
Karl Bounader ◽  
André Vincentelli ◽  
...  

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Toru Kondo ◽  
Naoki Shibata ◽  
shingo kazama ◽  
Yuki Kimura ◽  
Hideo Oishi ◽  
...  

Background: In cardiogenic shock refractory to medical treatment, choosing and changing mechanical circulatory support to stabilize hemodynamics until cardiac recovery or next treatment is a strategic cornerstone for improving the outcome. We aimed to clarify the differences in treatment course and outcome between Impella 5.0 and extracorporeal left ventricular assist device (eLVAD) in patients with cardiogenic shock refractory to medical therapy or other mechanical circulatory support. Methods: We performed a retrospective medical record review of consecutive patients who were treated with Impella 5.0 or eLVAD as a bridge to decision (BTD) at our medical center from December 2011 to January 2020. Results: A total of 26 patients (median age 40 years, 16 males) were analyzed. Of seven patients managed with Impella 5.0, one patients used Impella CP and four patients used peripheral veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) before Impella 5.0 implantation. On the other hand, of 19 patients managed with eLVAD, 11 patients used VA-ECMO before eLVAD implantation. In patients managed with Impella 5.0, Impella 5.0 was removed successfully in two patients (29%) and four patients (71%) underwent the operation for durable LVAD. In patients managed with eLVAD, eLVAD was successfully removed in three patients (16%), nine patients (47%) required durable LVAD, and seven patients (37%) died during eLVAD management. The period between implantation of Impella 5.0 or eLVAD to durable LVAD surgery was significantly shorter with Impella 5.0 (58 [38 - 95] vs. 235 [126 - 318] days, p=0.001). During durable LVAD implantation, cardiopulmonary bypass time was significantly shorter and a significantly smaller amount of red blood cells transfusion was required with Impella 5.0 (149 [125 - 182] vs. 192 [170 - 250] minutes, p=0.042; 7.0 [5.0 - 9.5] vs. 15.0 [10.0- 2.0] units, p=0.019, respectively). There were 4 massive stroke events in eLVAD, but no massive stroke events in Impella 5.0. In Impella 5.0. Conclusions: Impella 5.0 facilitates smoother management as a BTD and reduces surgical invasiveness during durable LVAD implantation. Impella 5.0 would be a more effective option for success to cardiac recovery or next therapy than eLVAD.


Author(s):  
Daniel C. Choi ◽  
Mark B. Anderson ◽  
George P. Batsides

The Impella 5.0 microaxial pump is a miniaturized left ventricular assist device commonly used for circulatory support in acute cardiogenic shock. The catheter-based pump is designed to be inserted either into a peripheral artery or directly into the ascending aorta. We report the first case in which the Impella 5.0 device was placed directly into the ascending aorta via a small right anterior thoracotomy in a patient following acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock.


2018 ◽  
Vol 42 (6) ◽  
pp. 318-320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paulino A Alvarez ◽  
Nicole Byram ◽  
J Brad Williams ◽  
Miriam Jacob ◽  
Marinela Kreiss ◽  
...  

Anemia is common in patients with mechanical circulatory support and is associated with increased morbidity. Repletion using parenteral iron infusions has been proven to be beneficial in patients with heart failure. In this report, we describe a case of increased power and flows of continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (LVAD) during an iron dextran infusion. We subsequently studied the effects of iron dextran infusion in an in vitro LVAD mock circulatory loop. The observed increase in flow and power was most likely due to drug–patient interaction rather than drug–LVAD interaction. Mock loops and in vivo animal models may be necessary for proactive evaluation of the safety of intravenous (IV) preparations in this patient population.


2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (S2) ◽  
pp. 265-274
Author(s):  
Vipin Mehta ◽  
Rajamiyer V. Venkateswaran

Abstract Purpose Prognosis of patients presenting with INTERMACS 1 critical cardiogenic shock is generally poor. The aim of our study was to investigate the results of CentriMag™ extracorporeal short-term mechanical circulatory support as a bridge to decision in patients presenting with critical cardiogenic shock in our unit. Methods We retrospectively analysed 63 consecutive patients from January 2005 to June 2017, who were treated with a CentriMag™ device at our institution as a bridge to decision. Patients requiring extracorporeal support for post-cardiotomy shock and for primary graft dysfunction after heart transplantation were excluded. Results Patients’ median age was 44 years (IQR 31–52, range 15.4–62.0) and 42 (67%) were male. Primary diagnosis at presentation was ischaemic cardiomyopathy (n = 24; 38.1%), viral myocarditis (n = 19; 30.2%), idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy (n = 8; 12.7%), and others (n = 12; 19%). The median duration of support was 25 (IQR 9.5–56) days. A total of 7 (11%) patients were supported with peripheral veno-arterial (VA) extra corporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), 6 (9%) with central VA ECMO, 8 (13%) with left ventricular assist device (LVAD), 17 (27%) with biventricular assist device (BiVAD), and 25 (40%) with ECMO and then converted to BiVAD. Overall, 22 (34.9%) patients died while on CentriMag™ mechanical circulatory support. Complications included bleeding requiring reoperation/intervention in 24 (38%), renal failure requiring dialysis in 29 (46%), bacterial infections in 23 (37%), fungal infections in 15 (24%), critical limb ischaemia in 6 (10%), and stroke in 8 (13%). The overall survival to successful explant from CentriMag™ was 65.1% (n = 41) and survival to hospital discharge was 58.7% (n = 37). Of these, 10 (16%) had cardiac recovery and were successfully explanted, 20 (32%) were bridged to heart transplantation, 11 (17%) were bridged to long-term left ventricular assist device, 3 (4.7%) were later on transplanted, and 1 (1.6%) recovered to decommissioning. The 1-, 5-, and 10-year survival rates were 55%, 46%, and 23% respectively. Conclusion Our results demonstrate an excellent outcome with the use of the CentriMag™ device in this seriously ill population. Despite requiring multiple procedures, over 58% of patients were discharged from hospital with 5-year survival of 46%.


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Y.X Yang ◽  
J.X Wang ◽  
X.W Li ◽  
P.J Lu ◽  
M.N Bai ◽  
...  

Abstract Background 1. Despite early revascularization, the mortality of patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) remains high. 2. Mechanical circulation support devices (MCS) are widely utilized in clinical due to unloading left ventricle and augmenting cardiac output. 3. Whether left ventricular assist device (LVAD) including TandemHeart and Impella is superior to Intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) for AMI-CS remains unclear. Aim To investigate the efficacy and safety of LVAD versus IABP for AMI-CS. Methods 1. We searched the relevant literature on PUBMED, EMBASE and Cochrane Library. 2. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. The secondary endpoints were in-hospital myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis (ST), stroke, sepsis, major bleeding and limb ischemia. 3. Two investigators performed the studies selection and data extraction independently. 4. The quality of randomized controlled trials and observational studies was assessed by using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale respectively. 5. Results were analyzed by computing pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs). Results 1. The process of literature search strategy is shown in Figure 1. 2. Main characteristics of the included studies can be seen in Table 1. 3. There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality (RR:0.97, 95% CI:0.80–1.17, P=0.76), in-hospital MI (RR:0.64, 95% CI:0.22–1.85, P=0.41), ST (RR:0.74, 95% CI:0.13–4.12, P=0.73), stroke (RR:1.36, 95% CI:0.37–4.94, P=0.64) and sepsis (RR:1.30, 95% CI:0.54–3.13, P=0.56) between LVAD and IABP group. However, the incidences of in-hospital major bleeding (RR:2.61,95% CI:1.61–4.23, P=0.0001) and limb ischemia (RR:4.91, 95% CI:2.07–11.64, P=0.0003) were significantly higher in LVAD than IABP group. Conclusion LVAD was not associated with reduced 30-day mortality but with increased in-hospital major bleeding and limb ischemia for patients with AMI-CS compared with IABP. Figure 1 Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Public Institution(s). Main funding source(s): National 135 Key Research and Development Program in 2016


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document