Short-term mechanical support with the Impella 5.x for mitral valve surgery in advanced heart failure—protected cardiac surgery

IntroductionSurgical treatment of patients with mitral valve regurgitation and advanced heart failure remains challenging. In order to avoid peri-operative low cardiac output, Impella 5.0 or 5.5 (5.x), implanted electively in a one-stage procedure, may serve as a peri-operative short-term mechanical circulatory support system (st-MCS) in patients undergoing mitral valve surgery.MethodsBetween July 2017 and April 2022, 11 consecutive patients underwent high-risk mitral valve surgery for mitral regurgitation supported with an Impella 5.x system (Abiomed, Inc. Danvers, MA). All patients were discussed in the heart team and were either not eligible for transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) or surgery was considered favorable. In all cases, the indication for Impella 5.x implantation was made during the preoperative planning phase.ResultsThe mean age at the time of surgery was 61.6 ± 7.7 years. All patients presented with mitral regurgitation due to either ischemic (n = 5) or dilatative (n = 6) cardiomyopathy with a mean ejection fraction of 21 ± 4% (EuroScore II 6.1 ± 2.5). Uneventful mitral valve repair (n = 8) or replacement (n = 3) was performed via median sternotomy (n = 8) or right lateral mini thoracotomy (n = 3). In six patients, concomitant procedures, either tricuspid valve repair, aortic valve replacement or CABG were necessary. The mean duration on Impella support was 8 ± 5 days. All, but one patient, were successfully weaned from st-MCS, with no Impella-related complications. 30-day survival was 90.9%.ConclusionProtected cardiac surgery with st-MCS using the Impella 5.x is safe and feasible when applied in high-risk mitral valve surgery without st-MCS-related complications, resulting in excellent outcomes. This strategy might offer an alternative and comprehensive approach for the treatment of patients with mitral regurgitation in advanced heart failure, deemed ineligible for TEER or with need of concomitant surgery

Central extracorporeal circulatory life support (cECLS) in selected patients with critical cardiogenic shock

BackgroundPercutaneous extracorporeal life support (pECLS) is increasingly applied in cardiogenic shock (CS) despite a lack of evidence from randomized trials. The in-hospital mortality rate of pECLS still reaches up to 60%, while vascular access site complications remain a shortcoming. Surgical approaches with central cannulation for ECLS (cELCS) have emerged as a bail-out option. To date, no systematic approach exists that allows a definition of inclusion or exclusion criteria for cECLS.Methods and resultsThis single-center, retrospective, case-control study includes all patients fulfilling criteria for CS at the West German Heart and Vascular Center Essen/Germany between 2015 and 2020 who underwent cECLS (n = 58), excluding post-cardiotomy patients. Seventeen patients received cECLS (29.3%) as a first-line treatment strategy and 41 patients as a second-line strategy (70.7%). The main complications leading to the use of cECLS as a second-line strategy were limb ischemia (32.8%) and ongoing insufficient hemodynamic support (27.6%). The first-line cECLS cohort showed a 30-day mortality rate of 53.3% that was constant during follow-up. The 30-day mortality rate of secondary cECLS candidates was 69.8% and the rate at 3 and 6 months was 79.1%. Younger patients (<55 years) were more likely to exhibit survival benefit with cECLS (p = 0.043).ConclusionSurgical cECLS in CS is a feasible therapy for highly selected patients with hemodynamic instability, vascular complications, or peripheral access site limitations as complementary strategy in experienced centers

New Wound Management of Driveline Infections with Cold Atmospheric Plasma

The use of ventricular assist devices as a bridge to transplant or as destination therapy has increased. Wound complications increase morbidity in this cohort. Cold atmospheric plasma is a source of reactive oxygen and nitrogen species and can reduce the microbial load in skin wounds without negative effects on the surrounding tissue. We evaluated our cold atmospheric plasma treatment for LVAD driveline infections in a retrospective single-center study for peri- and postintervention outcome analysis. Between April 2019 and September 2019, 15 male patients were included (5 HVAD, 10 HeartMate III). The wounds were treated for a mean of 368.5 s with a reduction of bacterial load in treated wounds in 60% of patients, regardless of the pathogen. The most common pathogen was staphylococcus aureus (n = 8 patients). There was a significant reduction of the wound scale (scale 2.80 vs. 1.18; p < 0.001) plus a significant reduction in size (16.08 vs. 1.90 cm3 ; p = 0.047). Seven patients (46.6%) were free from any signs of local or systemic infection during 1-year follow-up. Five patients (33%) received a heart transplantation. Cold atmospheric plasma treatment is a potent, safe, and painless adjuvant technique for treating driveline infection without the need for repeating surgical interventions

Central extracorporeal life support with left ventricular decompression for the treatment of refractory cardiogenic shock and lung failure

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this prospective study was to evaluate the effects and functional outcome of central extracorporeal life support (ECLS) with left ventricular decompression for the treatment of refractory cardiogenic shock and lung failure. METHODS: Between August 2010 and August 2013, 12 consecutive patients (2 female) with a mean age of 31.6 ± 15.1 years received central ECLS with left ventricular decompression for the treatment of refractory cardiogenic shock and lung failure. Underlying disease was acute cardiac decompensation due to dilated cardiomyopathy (n = 3, 25%), coronary artery disease with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) (n = 3, 25%), and acute myocarditis (n = 6, 50%). We routinely implemented ECLS by cannulating the ascending aorta, right atrium and inserting a left ventricular decompression cannula vent via the right superior pulmonary vein. RESULTS: All patients were successfully bridged to either recovery (n = 3, 25%), long-term biventricular support (n = 6, 50%) or cardiac transplantation (n = 3, 25%). Seven patients (58.3%) were discharged after a mean hospital stay of 42 ± 11.9 days. The overall survival from ECLS implantation to the end of the study was 58.3%. The cumulative ICU stay was 23.1 ± 9.6 days. The length of support was 8.0 ± 4.3 days (range 3-17 days). CONCLUSIONS: We strongly recommend left ventricular decompression in refractory cardiogenic shock and lung failure to avoid pulmonary edema, left heart distension and facilitate myocardial recovery