Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Current Cardiology Reports 4/2024

26-02-2024 | Interventional Procedure in Cardiology | Myocardial Disease (A Abbate and M Merlo, Section Editors)

Mechanical Circulatory Support for High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Authors: Silvia Moscardelli, Reza Masoomi, Pedro Villablanca, Ahmad Jabri, Ankitkumar K. Patel, Francesco Moroni, Lorenzo Azzalini

Published in: Current Cardiology Reports | Issue 4/2024

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose of Review

This review will focus on the indications of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) for high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and then analyze in detail all MCS devices available to the operator, evaluating their mechanisms of action, pros and cons, contraindications, and clinical data supporting their use.

Recent Findings

Over the last decade, the interventional cardiology arena has witnessed an increase in the complexity profile of the patients and lesions treated in the catheterization laboratory. Patients with significant comorbidity burden, left ventricular dysfunction, impaired hemodynamics, and/or complex coronary anatomy often cannot tolerate extensive percutaneous revascularization. Therefore, a variety of MCS devices have been developed and adopted for high-risk PCI.

Summary

Despite the variety of MCS available to date, a detailed characterization of the patient requiring MCS is still lacking. A precise selection of patients who can benefit from MCS support during high-risk PCI and the choice of the most appropriate MCS device in each case are imperative to provide extensive revascularization and improve patient outcomes. Several new devices are being tested in early feasibility studies and randomized clinical trials and the experience gained in this context will allow us to provide precise answers to these questions in the coming years.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Bortnick AE, Epps KC, Selzer F, Anwaruddin S, Marroquin OC, Srinivas V, et al. Five-year follow-up of patients treated for coronary artery disease in the face of an increasing burden of co-morbidity and disease complexity (from the NHLBI Dynamic Registry). Am J Cardiol. 2014;113:573–9.CrossRefPubMed Bortnick AE, Epps KC, Selzer F, Anwaruddin S, Marroquin OC, Srinivas V, et al. Five-year follow-up of patients treated for coronary artery disease in the face of an increasing burden of co-morbidity and disease complexity (from the NHLBI Dynamic Registry). Am J Cardiol. 2014;113:573–9.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Protty M, Sharp ASP, Gallagher S, Farooq V, Spratt JC, Ludman P, et al. Defining percutaneous coronary intervention complexity and risk: an analysis of the United Kingdom BCIS database 2006–2016. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2022;15:39–49.CrossRefPubMed Protty M, Sharp ASP, Gallagher S, Farooq V, Spratt JC, Ludman P, et al. Defining percutaneous coronary intervention complexity and risk: an analysis of the United Kingdom BCIS database 2006–2016. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2022;15:39–49.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Khandelwal G, Spirito A, Tanner R, Koshy AN, Sartori S, Salehi N, et al. Validation of UK-BCIS CHIP score to predict 1-year outcomes in a contemporary united states population. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2023;16:1011–20.CrossRefPubMed Khandelwal G, Spirito A, Tanner R, Koshy AN, Sartori S, Salehi N, et al. Validation of UK-BCIS CHIP score to predict 1-year outcomes in a contemporary united states population. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2023;16:1011–20.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Nayyar M, Donovan KM, Khouzam RN. When more is not better—appropriately excluding patients from mechanical circulatory support therapy. Ann Transl Med. 2018;6:9–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Nayyar M, Donovan KM, Khouzam RN. When more is not better—appropriately excluding patients from mechanical circulatory support therapy. Ann Transl Med. 2018;6:9–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
go back to reference Kim SH, Baumann S, Behnes M, Borggrefe M, Akin I. Patient selection for protected percutaneous coronary intervention: Who benefits the most? Cardiol Clin. W.B. Saunders; 2020:507–16. Kim SH, Baumann S, Behnes M, Borggrefe M, Akin I. Patient selection for protected percutaneous coronary intervention: Who benefits the most? Cardiol Clin. W.B. Saunders; 2020:507–16.
6.
go back to reference Atkinson TM, Ohman EM, O’neill WW, Rab T, Cigarroa JE. Statement from the interventional council of the ACC a practical approach to mechanical circulatory support in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention an interventional perspective. JACC: Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9:871–83.PubMed Atkinson TM, Ohman EM, O’neill WW, Rab T, Cigarroa JE. Statement from the interventional council of the ACC a practical approach to mechanical circulatory support in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention an interventional perspective. JACC: Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9:871–83.PubMed
7.
go back to reference Lawton JS, Tamis-Holland JE, Bangalore S, Bates ER, Beckie TM, Bischoff JM, et al. 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI guideline for coronary artery revascularization: a report of the american college of cardiology/american heart association joint committee on clinical practice guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022;79:e21–129.CrossRefPubMed Lawton JS, Tamis-Holland JE, Bangalore S, Bates ER, Beckie TM, Bischoff JM, et al. 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI guideline for coronary artery revascularization: a report of the american college of cardiology/american heart association joint committee on clinical practice guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022;79:e21–129.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference •• Zeitouni M, Marquis-Gravel G, Smilowitz NR, Zakroysky P, Wojdyla DM, Amit AP, et al. Prophylactic mechanical circulatory support use in elective percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with stable coronary artery disease. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2022;15:E011534. Findings from this study suggest that the use of prophylactic MCS has increased over time for elective PCI in patients with stable coronary artery disease. Intra-aortic balloon pump was associated with higher major adverse cardiac events but lower risk of procedural complications compared with other MCS.CrossRefPubMed •• Zeitouni M, Marquis-Gravel G, Smilowitz NR, Zakroysky P, Wojdyla DM, Amit AP, et al. Prophylactic mechanical circulatory support use in elective percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with stable coronary artery disease. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2022;15:E011534. Findings from this study suggest that the use of prophylactic MCS has increased over time for elective PCI in patients with stable coronary artery disease. Intra-aortic balloon pump was associated with higher major adverse cardiac events but lower risk of procedural complications compared with other MCS.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Werner N, Akin I, Al-Rashid F, Bauer T, Ibrahim K, Karatolios K, et al. Expertenkonsensus zum praktischen Einsatz von Herzkreislaufunterstützungssystemen bei Hochrisiko-Koronarinterventionen. Kardiologe. 2017;11:460–72.CrossRef Werner N, Akin I, Al-Rashid F, Bauer T, Ibrahim K, Karatolios K, et al. Expertenkonsensus zum praktischen Einsatz von Herzkreislaufunterstützungssystemen bei Hochrisiko-Koronarinterventionen. Kardiologe. 2017;11:460–72.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Atkinson TM, Ohman EM, O’Neill WW, Rab T, Cigarroa JE. A practical approach to mechanical circulatory support in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9:871–83.CrossRefPubMed Atkinson TM, Ohman EM, O’Neill WW, Rab T, Cigarroa JE. A practical approach to mechanical circulatory support in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9:871–83.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Kearney KE, Mccabe JM, Riley RF. Patient selection and procedural strategy are key in treating this evolving patient population. Hemodynamic Support for High-Risk PCI. Cardiac Interv Today. 2019;13:44–8. Kearney KE, Mccabe JM, Riley RF. Patient selection and procedural strategy are key in treating this evolving patient population. Hemodynamic Support for High-Risk PCI. Cardiac Interv Today. 2019;13:44–8.
12.
go back to reference Grodin JL, Mullens W, Dupont M, Wu Y, Taylor DO, Starling RC, et al. Prognostic role of cardiac power index in ambulatory patients with advanced heart failure. Eur J Heart Fail. 2015;17:689–96.CrossRefPubMed Grodin JL, Mullens W, Dupont M, Wu Y, Taylor DO, Starling RC, et al. Prognostic role of cardiac power index in ambulatory patients with advanced heart failure. Eur J Heart Fail. 2015;17:689–96.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Papaioannou TG, Stefanadis C. Basic principles of the intraaortic balloon pump and mechanisms affecting its performance. ASAIO J. 2005;51:296–300.CrossRefPubMed Papaioannou TG, Stefanadis C. Basic principles of the intraaortic balloon pump and mechanisms affecting its performance. ASAIO J. 2005;51:296–300.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Perera D, Stables R, Thomas M, Booth J, Pitt M, Blackman D, et al. Elective intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation during high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention a randomized controlled trial. J Am Med Assoc. 2010;308:867–74. Available from: https://jamanetwork.com/ Perera D, Stables R, Thomas M, Booth J, Pitt M, Blackman D, et al. Elective intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation during high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention a randomized controlled trial. J Am Med Assoc. 2010;308:867–74. Available from: https://​jamanetwork.​com/​
15.
go back to reference Perera D, Stables R, Clayton T, De Silva K, Lumley M, Clack L, et al. Long-term mortality data from the balloon pump-assisted coronary intervention study (BCIS-1): A randomized, controlled trial of elective balloon counterpulsation during high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention. Circulation. 2013;127:207–12.CrossRefPubMed Perera D, Stables R, Clayton T, De Silva K, Lumley M, Clack L, et al. Long-term mortality data from the balloon pump-assisted coronary intervention study (BCIS-1): A randomized, controlled trial of elective balloon counterpulsation during high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention. Circulation. 2013;127:207–12.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Glazier JJ, Kaki A. The impella device: Historical background, clinical applications and future directions. Int J Angiol. 2019;28:118–23.CrossRefPubMed Glazier JJ, Kaki A. The impella device: Historical background, clinical applications and future directions. Int J Angiol. 2019;28:118–23.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Rihal CS, Naidu SS, Givertz MM, Szeto WY, Burke JA, Kapur NK, et al. 2015 SCAI/ACC/HFSA/STS clinical expert consensus statement on the use of percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices in cardiovascular care. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65:e7–26.CrossRefPubMed Rihal CS, Naidu SS, Givertz MM, Szeto WY, Burke JA, Kapur NK, et al. 2015 SCAI/ACC/HFSA/STS clinical expert consensus statement on the use of percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices in cardiovascular care. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65:e7–26.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Van Edom CJ, Gramegna M, Baldetti L, Beneduce A, Castelein T, Dauwe D, et al. Management of bleeding and hemolysis during percutaneous microaxial flow pump support: a practical approach. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2023;16:1707–20.CrossRefPubMed Van Edom CJ, Gramegna M, Baldetti L, Beneduce A, Castelein T, Dauwe D, et al. Management of bleeding and hemolysis during percutaneous microaxial flow pump support: a practical approach. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2023;16:1707–20.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Dixon SR, Henriques JPS, Mauri L, Sjauw K, Civitello A, Kar B, et al. A prospective feasibility trial investigating the use of the impella 2.5 system in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (The PROTECT I Trial). JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2:91–6.CrossRefPubMed Dixon SR, Henriques JPS, Mauri L, Sjauw K, Civitello A, Kar B, et al. A prospective feasibility trial investigating the use of the impella 2.5 system in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (The PROTECT I Trial). JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2:91–6.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Ww O, Kleiman NS, Moses J, Henriques JP, Dixon S, Massaro J, et al. Interventional cardiology a prospective, randomized clinical trial of hemodynamic support with impella 2.5 versus intra-aortic balloon pump in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention The PROTECT II Study. Circulation. 2012;126:1717–27. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.CrossRef Ww O, Kleiman NS, Moses J, Henriques JP, Dixon S, Massaro J, et al. Interventional cardiology a prospective, randomized clinical trial of hemodynamic support with impella 2.5 versus intra-aortic balloon pump in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention The PROTECT II Study. Circulation. 2012;126:1717–27. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1161/​CIRCULATIONAHA.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Dangas GD, Kini AS, Sharma SK, Henriques JPS, Claessen BE, Dixon SR, et al. Impact of hemodynamic support with Impella 2.5 versus intra-aortic balloon pump on prognostically important clinical outcomes in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (from the PROTECT II randomized trial). Am J Cardiol. 2014;113:222–8.CrossRefPubMed Dangas GD, Kini AS, Sharma SK, Henriques JPS, Claessen BE, Dixon SR, et al. Impact of hemodynamic support with Impella 2.5 versus intra-aortic balloon pump on prognostically important clinical outcomes in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (from the PROTECT II randomized trial). Am J Cardiol. 2014;113:222–8.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Sjauw KD, Konorza T, Erbel R, Danna PL, Viecca M, Minden HH, et al. Supported high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention with the impella 2.5 device. The Europella Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:2430–4.CrossRefPubMed Sjauw KD, Konorza T, Erbel R, Danna PL, Viecca M, Minden HH, et al. Supported high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention with the impella 2.5 device. The Europella Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:2430–4.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Maini B, Naidu SS, Mulukutla S, Kleiman N, Schreiber T, Wohns D, et al. Real-world use of the Impella 2.5 circulatory support system in complex high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: The USpella Registry. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;80:717–25.CrossRefPubMed Maini B, Naidu SS, Mulukutla S, Kleiman N, Schreiber T, Wohns D, et al. Real-world use of the Impella 2.5 circulatory support system in complex high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: The USpella Registry. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;80:717–25.CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference • O’Neill WW, Anderson M, Burkhoff D, Grines CL, Kapur NK, Lansky AJ, et al. Improved outcomes in patients with severely depressed LVEF undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with contemporary practices. Am Heart J. 2022;248:139–49. The PROTECT III study demonstrates improved completeness of revascularization, less bleeding, and improved 90-day clinical outcomes compared to matched patients from the PROTECT II trial (Impella-supported high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention among patients with severely depressed LVEF.CrossRefPubMed • O’Neill WW, Anderson M, Burkhoff D, Grines CL, Kapur NK, Lansky AJ, et al. Improved outcomes in patients with severely depressed LVEF undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with contemporary practices. Am Heart J. 2022;248:139–49. The PROTECT III study demonstrates improved completeness of revascularization, less bleeding, and improved 90-day clinical outcomes compared to matched patients from the PROTECT II trial (Impella-supported high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention among patients with severely depressed LVEF.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Afana M, Altawil M, Basir M, Alqarqaz M, Alaswad K, Eng M, et al. Transcaval access for the emergency delivery of 5.0 liters per minute mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2021;97:555–64.CrossRefPubMed Afana M, Altawil M, Basir M, Alqarqaz M, Alaswad K, Eng M, et al. Transcaval access for the emergency delivery of 5.0 liters per minute mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2021;97:555–64.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference McCabe JM, Kaki AA, Pinto DS, Kirtane AJ, Nicholson WJ, Grantham JA, et al. Percutaneous axillary access for placement of microaxial ventricular support devices: The axillary access registry to monitor safety (ARMS). Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2021;14:e009657.CrossRefPubMed McCabe JM, Kaki AA, Pinto DS, Kirtane AJ, Nicholson WJ, Grantham JA, et al. Percutaneous axillary access for placement of microaxial ventricular support devices: The axillary access registry to monitor safety (ARMS). Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2021;14:e009657.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Azzalini L, Condos G, Kearney KE, Lombardi WL, McCabe JM. Mechanical circulatory support via percutaneous transcarotid access for high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2023;16:106–8.CrossRefPubMed Azzalini L, Condos G, Kearney KE, Lombardi WL, McCabe JM. Mechanical circulatory support via percutaneous transcarotid access for high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2023;16:106–8.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Upadhyay R, Alrayes H, Arno S, Kaushik M, Basir MB. Current landscape of temporary percutaneous mechanical circulatory support technology. US Cardiol Rev. 2021;15:15-e21.CrossRef Upadhyay R, Alrayes H, Arno S, Kaushik M, Basir MB. Current landscape of temporary percutaneous mechanical circulatory support technology. US Cardiol Rev. 2021;15:15-e21.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Kovacic JC, Nguyen HT, Karajgikar R, Sharma SK, Kini AS. The impella recover 2.5 and TandemHeart ventricular assist devices are safe and associated with equivalent clinical outcomes in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;82:E28-37.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kovacic JC, Nguyen HT, Karajgikar R, Sharma SK, Kini AS. The impella recover 2.5 and TandemHeart ventricular assist devices are safe and associated with equivalent clinical outcomes in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;82:E28-37.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
go back to reference Gandhi KD, Moras EC, Niroula S, Lopez PD, Aggarwal D, Bhatia K, et al. Left ventricular unloading with impella versus IABP in patients with VA-ECMO: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Cardiol. 2023;208:53–9.CrossRefPubMed Gandhi KD, Moras EC, Niroula S, Lopez PD, Aggarwal D, Bhatia K, et al. Left ventricular unloading with impella versus IABP in patients with VA-ECMO: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Cardiol. 2023;208:53–9.CrossRefPubMed
31.
go back to reference Chiang M, Gonzalez PE, Basir MB, O’Neill BP, Lee J, Frisoli T, et al. Modified Transcaval left atrial venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation without preplanning contrast CT: Step-by-step guide. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2022;15:e181–5.CrossRefPubMed Chiang M, Gonzalez PE, Basir MB, O’Neill BP, Lee J, Frisoli T, et al. Modified Transcaval left atrial venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation without preplanning contrast CT: Step-by-step guide. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2022;15:e181–5.CrossRefPubMed
33.
go back to reference Bai M, Lu A, Pan C, Hu S, Qu W, Zhao J, et al. Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in elective high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions. Front Med (Lausanne). 2022;9. Bai M, Lu A, Pan C, Hu S, Qu W, Zhao J, et al. Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in elective high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions. Front Med (Lausanne). 2022;9.
34.
go back to reference Shaukat A, Hryniewicz-Czeneszew K, Sun B, Mudy K, Wilson K, Tajti P, et al. Outcomes of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support for complex high-risk elective percutaneous coronary interventions: a single-center experience and review of the literature. J Invasive Cardiol. 2018;30:456–60.PubMed Shaukat A, Hryniewicz-Czeneszew K, Sun B, Mudy K, Wilson K, Tajti P, et al. Outcomes of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support for complex high-risk elective percutaneous coronary interventions: a single-center experience and review of the literature. J Invasive Cardiol. 2018;30:456–60.PubMed
35.
go back to reference van den Brink FS, Meijers TA, Hofma SH, van Boven AJ, Nap A, Vonk A, et al. Prophylactic veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention. Neth Hear J. 2020;28:139–44.CrossRef van den Brink FS, Meijers TA, Hofma SH, van Boven AJ, Nap A, Vonk A, et al. Prophylactic veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention. Neth Hear J. 2020;28:139–44.CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Tomasello SD, Boukhris M, Ganyukov V, Galassi AR, Shukevich D, Haes B, et al. Outcome of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support for complex high-risk elective percutaneous coronary interventions: a single-center experience. Heart and Lung: Journal of Acute and Critical Care. 2015;44:309–13.CrossRefPubMed Tomasello SD, Boukhris M, Ganyukov V, Galassi AR, Shukevich D, Haes B, et al. Outcome of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support for complex high-risk elective percutaneous coronary interventions: a single-center experience. Heart and Lung: Journal of Acute and Critical Care. 2015;44:309–13.CrossRefPubMed
37.
go back to reference Samol A, Schmidt S, Zeyse M, Wiemer M, Luani B. High-risk PCI under support of a pulsatile left ventricular assist device – First German experience with the iVAC2L system. Int J Cardiol. 2019;297:30–5.CrossRefPubMed Samol A, Schmidt S, Zeyse M, Wiemer M, Luani B. High-risk PCI under support of a pulsatile left ventricular assist device – First German experience with the iVAC2L system. Int J Cardiol. 2019;297:30–5.CrossRefPubMed
38.
go back to reference Uil CAD, Daemen J, Lenzen MJ, Maugenest AM, Joziasse L, Van Geuns RJ, et al. Pulsatile iVAC 2L circulatory support in high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention. EuroIntervention. 2017;12:1689–96.CrossRef Uil CAD, Daemen J, Lenzen MJ, Maugenest AM, Joziasse L, Van Geuns RJ, et al. Pulsatile iVAC 2L circulatory support in high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention. EuroIntervention. 2017;12:1689–96.CrossRef
39.
go back to reference De Maria GL, Garcia-Garcia HM, Scarsini R, Finn A, Sato Y, Virmani R, et al. Novel device-based therapies to improve outcome in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. Oxford University Press; 2021:687–97. De Maria GL, Garcia-Garcia HM, Scarsini R, Finn A, Sato Y, Virmani R, et al. Novel device-based therapies to improve outcome in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. Oxford University Press; 2021:687–97.
40.
go back to reference Van de Hoef TP, Nolte F, Delewi R, Henriques JPS, Spaan JAE, Tijssen JGP, et al. Intracoronary hemodynamic effects of pressure-controlled intermittent coronary sinus occlusion (PICSO): results from the First-In-Man Prepare PICSO Study. J Interv Cardiol. 2012;25:549–56.CrossRefPubMed Van de Hoef TP, Nolte F, Delewi R, Henriques JPS, Spaan JAE, Tijssen JGP, et al. Intracoronary hemodynamic effects of pressure-controlled intermittent coronary sinus occlusion (PICSO): results from the First-In-Man Prepare PICSO Study. J Interv Cardiol. 2012;25:549–56.CrossRefPubMed
41.
go back to reference Azzalini L, Montorfano M, Latib A, Colombo A. High-risk left main percutaneous coronary intervention supported by pressure-controlled intermittent coronary sinus occlusion. EuroIntervention. 2016;12:e1437–e1437.CrossRefPubMed Azzalini L, Montorfano M, Latib A, Colombo A. High-risk left main percutaneous coronary intervention supported by pressure-controlled intermittent coronary sinus occlusion. EuroIntervention. 2016;12:e1437–e1437.CrossRefPubMed
42.
go back to reference Williams MJ, Dow CJ, Newell JB, Palacios IF, Picard MH. Prevalence and timing of regional myocardial dysfunction after rotational coronary atherectomy. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996;28:861–9.CrossRefPubMed Williams MJ, Dow CJ, Newell JB, Palacios IF, Picard MH. Prevalence and timing of regional myocardial dysfunction after rotational coronary atherectomy. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996;28:861–9.CrossRefPubMed
43.
go back to reference Zein R, Patel C, Mercado-Alamo A, Schreiber T, Kaki A. A review of the impella devices. Interv Cardiol: Rev Res Resour. 2022;17:17–e05.CrossRef Zein R, Patel C, Mercado-Alamo A, Schreiber T, Kaki A. A review of the impella devices. Interv Cardiol: Rev Res Resour. 2022;17:17–e05.CrossRef
44.
go back to reference Smith L, Peters A, Mazimba S, Ragosta M, Taylor AM. Outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock treated with TandemHeart® percutaneous ventricular assist device: Importance of support indication and definitive therapies as determinants of prognosis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2018;92:1173–81.CrossRefPubMed Smith L, Peters A, Mazimba S, Ragosta M, Taylor AM. Outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock treated with TandemHeart® percutaneous ventricular assist device: Importance of support indication and definitive therapies as determinants of prognosis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2018;92:1173–81.CrossRefPubMed
45.
go back to reference Richardson ASC, Tonna JE, Nanjayya V, Nixon P, Abrams DC, Raman L. Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation in adults. Interim guideline consensus statement from the extracorporeal life support organization. ASAIO J. 2021;67:221–8.CrossRefPubMed Richardson ASC, Tonna JE, Nanjayya V, Nixon P, Abrams DC, Raman L. Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation in adults. Interim guideline consensus statement from the extracorporeal life support organization. ASAIO J. 2021;67:221–8.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Mechanical Circulatory Support for High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
Authors
Silvia Moscardelli
Reza Masoomi
Pedro Villablanca
Ahmad Jabri
Ankitkumar K. Patel
Francesco Moroni
Lorenzo Azzalini
Publication date
26-02-2024
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Current Cardiology Reports / Issue 4/2024
Print ISSN: 1523-3782
Electronic ISSN: 1534-3170
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11886-024-02029-2

Other articles of this Issue 4/2024

Current Cardiology Reports 4/2024 Go to the issue

Ischemic Heart Disease (D Mukherjee, Section Editor)

A role for colchicine in coronary artery disease?

Peripheral Vascular Disease (S Kinlay, Section Editor)

Open Surgical Therapy for Peripheral Artery Disease

Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes (H Jneid, Section Editor)

Updates on Non-Statin LDL-Lowering Therapy

Global Cardiovascular Health (L Sperling and D Gaita, Section Editors)

The global epidemic of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease