» Articles » PMID: 27102502

Ventricular Assist Device in Acute Myocardial Infarction

Overview
Date 2016 Apr 23
PMID 27102502
Citations 10
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by acute heart failure or cardiogenic shock have high mortality with conventional management.

Objectives: This study evaluated outcomes of patients with AMI who received durable ventricular assist devices (VAD).

Methods: Patients in the INTERMACS (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support) registry who underwent VAD placement in the setting of AMI were included and compared with patients who received VAD for non-AMI indications.

Results: VAD were implanted in 502 patients with AMI: 443 left ventricular assist devices; 33 biventricular assist devices; and 26 total artificial hearts. Median age was 58.3 years, and 77.1% were male. At implantation, 66% were INTERMACS profile 1. A higher proportion of AMI than non-AMI patients had pre-operative intra-aortic balloon pumps (57.6% vs. 25.3%; p < 0.01), intubation (58% vs. 8.3%; p < 0.01), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (17.9% vs. 1.7%, p < 0.01), cardiac arrest (33.5% vs. 3.3%, p < 0.01), and higher-acuity INTERMACS profiles. At 1 month post-VAD, 91.8% of AMI patients were alive with ongoing device support, 7.2% had died on device, and 1% had been transplanted. At 1-year post-VAD, 52% of AMI patients were alive with ongoing device support, 25.7% had been transplanted, 1.6% had left VAD explanted for recovery, and 20.7% had died on device. The AMI group had higher unadjusted early phase hazard (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.24; p = 0.04) and reduced late-phase hazard of death (HR: 0.57; p = 0.04) than the non-AMI group did. After accounting for established risk factors, the AMI group no longer had higher early mortality hazard (HR: 0.89; p = 0.30), but it had lower late mortality hazard (HR: 0.55; p = 0.02).

Conclusions: Patients with AMI who receive VAD have outcomes similar to other VAD populations, despite being more critically ill pre-implantation. VAD therapy is an effective strategy for patients with AMI and acute heart failure or shock in whom medical therapy is failing.

Citing Articles

Case report: ST-elevation myocardial infarction complications. How far will you go?.

Egle R, Dainius K, Povilas J, Donatas V, Arslan M, Gabriele J Future Cardiol. 2025; 21(4):217-221.

PMID: 40011200 PMC: 11901384. DOI: 10.1080/14796678.2025.2471732.


The importance of coronary artery disease and special considerations for left ventricular assist device implantation.

Celik M, Stulak J, Maltais S Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2021; 10(2):268-270.

PMID: 33842221 PMC: 8033257. DOI: 10.21037/acs-2020-cfmcs-31.


An epicardial delivery of nitroglycerine by active hydraulic ventricular support drug delivery system improves cardiac function in a rat model.

Li X, Mikrani R, Li C, Naveed M, Liu Z, Abbas M Drug Deliv Transl Res. 2019; 10(1):23-33.

PMID: 31240626 DOI: 10.1007/s13346-019-00656-9.


Prospective Comparison of a Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Device and Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Patients With Cardiogenic Shock Following Acute Myocardial Infarction.

Garan A, Takeda K, Salna M, Vandenberge J, Doshi D, Karmpaliotis D J Am Heart Assoc. 2019; 8(9):e012171.

PMID: 31041870 PMC: 6512118. DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.119.012171.


3D printing approaches for cardiac tissue engineering and role of immune modulation in tissue regeneration.

Qasim M, Haq F, Kang M, Kim J Int J Nanomedicine. 2019; 14:1311-1333.

PMID: 30863063 PMC: 6388753. DOI: 10.2147/IJN.S189587.


References
1.
Pagani F, Lynch W, Swaniker F, Dyke D, Bartlett R, Koelling T . Extracorporeal life support to left ventricular assist device bridge to heart transplant: A strategy to optimize survival and resource utilization. Circulation. 1999; 100(19 Suppl):II206-10. DOI: 10.1161/01.cir.100.suppl_2.ii-206. View

2.
Hochman J, Sleeper L, Webb J, Dzavik V, Buller C, Aylward P . Early revascularization and long-term survival in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. JAMA. 2006; 295(21):2511-5. PMC: 1782030. DOI: 10.1001/jama.295.21.2511. View

3.
Singh M, White J, Hasdai D, Hodgson P, Berger P, Topol E . Long-term outcome and its predictors among patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction complicated by shock: insights from the GUSTO-I trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007; 50(18):1752-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2007.04.101. View

4.
Hochman J, Apolito R . The calm after the storm: long-term survival after cardiogenic shock. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007; 50(18):1759-60. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2007.07.046. View

5.
Stevenson L, Pagani F, Young J, Jessup M, Miller L, Kormos R . INTERMACS profiles of advanced heart failure: the current picture. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2009; 28(6):535-41. DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2009.02.015. View