Anticoagulation practices and complications associated with Impella® support at an advanced cardiac center in the Middle East gulf region

Anticoagulation during Impella (R) support is a challenge due to its complications and inconsistent practice across the globe. This observational, retrospective chart review included all patients with Impella (R) support at our advanced cardiac center at a quaternary care hospital in the Middle East gulf region. The study was conducted over six years (2016-2022), a time period during which manufacturer recommendations for purge solution, anticoagulation protocols as well as Impella (R) place in therapy and utilization were all evolving. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of different anticoagulation practices and association with complications and outcomes. Forty-one patients underwent Impella (R) during the study period, including 25 patients with support for more than 12 h, and are the focus of our analysis. Cardiogenic shock (n = 25, 60.9%) was the primary indication for Impella (R), followed by facilitating high-risk PCI (n = 15, 36.7%) and left ventricular afterload reduction in patients undergoing veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (n = 1, 2.4%). Our overall Impella (R) usage evolved over the years from a primary use to facilitate a high-risk PCI to the recent more common use of LV unloading in cardiogenic shock. No patients experienced device malfunction and the incidence of other complications including ischemic stroke and bleeding were comparable to those reported in the literature (12.2% and 24% respectively). The 30-day all-cause mortality of 41 patients was 53.6%. In line with the evolving recommendations and evidence, we observed an underutilization of non-heparin-based purge solutions and inconsistent management of anticoagulation in the setting of both Impella (R) and VA ECMO which necessitates more education and protocols.

Automated summary

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of different anticoagulation practices during Impella(R) support, and their association with complications and outcomes. The study found that the usage of Impella(R) evolved over time, with a shift from facilitating high-risk PCI to LV unloading in cardiogenic shock. The study also found a low rate of device malfunction and comparable rates of ischemic stroke and bleeding to those reported in the literature. Rating: 8/10.