top banner image  

topleft corner image     top right corner image
 


bullet

JACC Homepage JACC Imaging Homepage
Still not a subscriber to JACC Imaging or JACC Interventions?

     top nav image

     

J Am Coll Cardiol Intv, 2009; 2:91-96, doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2008.11.005
© 2009 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow View Related Cardiosource Journal Scan
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dixon, S. R.
Right arrow Articles by O'Neill, W. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Dixon, S. R.
Right arrow Articles by O'Neill, W. W.

Clinical Research

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)

Initial U.S. Experience

Simon R. Dixon, MB ChB*, José P.S. Henriques, MD, PhD{dagger}, Laura Mauri, MD, MSc{ddagger}, Krischan Sjauw, MD{dagger}, Andrew Civitello, MD§, Biswajit Kar, MD§, Pranav Loyalka, MD§, Frederic S. Resnic, MD{ddagger}, Paul Teirstein, MD||, Raj Makkar, MD, Igor F. Palacios, MD#, Michael Collins, MD**, Jeffrey Moses, MD**, Karim Benali, MD, MSc{dagger}{dagger}, William W. O'Neill, MD{ddagger}{ddagger},*

* William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, Michigan
{dagger} Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
{ddagger} Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
§ Texas Heart Institute, Houston, Texas
|| Scripps Clinic, La Jolla, California
Cedars Sinai, Los Angeles, California
# Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
** Columbia Presbyterian, New York, New York
{dagger}{dagger} Abiomed Inc., Danvers, Massachusetts
{ddagger}{ddagger} University of Miami, Miami, Florida

* Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. William W. O'Neill, Leonard M. Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, P.O. Box 016099 (R.699), Miami, Florida 33101 (Email: woneill{at}med.miami.edu).

Objectives: We sought to evaluate the safety and feasibility of the Impella 2.5 system (Abiomed Inc., Danvers, Massachusetts) in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

Background: The Impella 2.5 is a miniaturized percutaneous cardiac assist device, which provides up to 2.5 l/min forward flow from the left ventricle into the systemic circulation.

Methods: In a prospective, multicenter study, 20 patients underwent high-risk PCI with minimally invasive circulatory support employing the Impella 2.5 system. All patients had poor left ventricular function (ejection fraction ≤35%) and underwent PCI on an unprotected left main coronary artery or last patent coronary conduit. Patients with recent ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction or cardiogenic shock were excluded. The primary safety end point was the incidence of major adverse cardiac events at 30 days. The primary efficacy end point was freedom from hemodynamic compromise during PCI (defined as a decrease in mean arterial pressure below 60 mm Hg for >10 min).

Results: The Impella 2.5 device was implanted successfully in all patients. The mean duration of circulatory support was 1.7 ± 0.6 h (range: 0.4 to 2.5 h). Mean pump flow during PCI was 2.2 ± 0.3 l/min. At 30 days, the incidence of major adverse cardiac events was 20% (2 patients had a periprocedural myocardial infarction; 2 patients died at days 12 and 14). There was no evidence of aortic valve injury, cardiac perforation, or limb ischemia. Two patients (10%) developed mild, transient hemolysis without clinical sequelae. None of the patients developed hemodynamic compromise during PCI.

Conclusions: The Impella 2.5 system is safe, easy to implant, and provides excellent hemodynamic support during high-risk PCI. (The PROTECT I Trial; NCT00534859)

Key Words: percutaneous coronary intervention • high risk • circulatory support

Abbreviations and Acronyms
  EF = ejection fraction
  INR = international normalized ratio
  LV = left ventricle/ventricular
  PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Eur Heart JHome page
N. R. Desai and D. L. Bhatt
Evaluating percutaneous support for cardiogenic shock: data shock and sticker shock
Eur. Heart J., September 1, 2009; 30(17): 2073 - 2075.
[Full Text] [PDF]



 
   
 
home link current link search link archive link topics link cardiology careers link