4.2 Article

Maximum level of mobility with axillary deployment of the Impella 5.0 is associated with improved survival

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL ORGANS
卷 41, 期 4, 页码 236-239

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0391398817752575

关键词

Hemodynamics; mechanical circulatory support

资金

  1. Abiomed Inc.
  2. Cardiac Assist Inc.
  3. Maquet Inc.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mobility is an important prognostic indicator for patients with cardiogenic shock. No studies have quantified peak mobility for patients with cardiogenic shock who are supported with the Impella 5.0 acute mechanical circulatory support device. The purpose of our study was to evaluate mobility levels among patients with cardiogenic shock being treated with an axillary Impella 5.0 pump. We retrospectively analyzed data from 19 patients receiving an Impella 5.0 device for cardiogenic shock at our institution from 2013 to 2016. We used the Johns Hopkins Highest Level of Mobility Scale to quantify maximum mobility level achieved during active Impella 5.0 support. Higher scores on a scale of 1-8 indicated more mobility. Activity Measure for Post Acute Care Scores were quantified for each patient to assess activity limitations, with a maximum score 24. The mean age of the total cohort was 60 +/- 12 years, and the mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 16% +/- 6%. In-hospital mortality was 47% (n = 9). Of the 19 Impella 5.0 implants, 10 survived, 6 died from withdrawal of care, and 3 died from worsening heart failure/cardiogenic shock. Similar rates of mobilization during the time of Impella implant were seen between groups. Compared to non-survivors, survivors achieved a higher maximum Johns Hopkins Highest Level of Mobility level, but similar Activity Measure for Post Acute Care scores. In conclusion, maximum mobility after Impella 5.0 implantation may be associated with improved survival. The clinical utility of exercise as a therapeutic intervention for patients requiring prolonged acute mechanical circulatory support requires further study.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据