Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation with or without simultaneous intra-aortic balloon pump support as a direct bridge to heart transplantation: results from a nationwide Spanish registry
Ver/ Abrir
Identificadores
URI: https://hdl.handle.net/10902/36185DOI: 10.1093/icvts/ivz155
ISSN: 1569-9293
ISSN: 1569-9285
Registro completo
Mostrar el registro completo DCAutoría
Barge-Caballero, Gonzalo; Castel-Lavilla, María A.; Almenar-Bonet, Luis; Garrido-Bravo, Iris P.; Delgado, Juan F.; Rangel-Sousa, Diego; González-Costello, José; Segovia-Cubero, Javier; Farrero-Torres, Marta; Lambert-Rodríguez, José Luis; Crespo-Leiro, María G.; Hervás-Sotomayor, Daniela; Portolés-Ocampo, Ana; Martínez-Sellés, Manuel; De la Fuente-Galán, Luis; Rábago-Juan-Aracil, Gregorio; González Vílchez, Francisco Jesús
Fecha
2019Derechos
© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.
Publicado en
Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, 2019, 29(5), 670-677
Editorial
Oxford University Press
Enlace a la publicación
Palabras clave
Heart transplantation
Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation
Intra-aortic balloon pump
Resumen/Abstract
Objectives: To investigate the potential clinical benefit of an intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) in patients supported with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) as a bridge to heart transplantation (HT).
Methods: We studied 169 patients who were listed for urgent HT under VA-ECMO support at 16 Spanish institutions from 2010 to 2015. The clinical outcomes of patients under simultaneous IABP support (n=73) were compared to a control group of patients without IABP support (n=96).
Results: There were no statistically significant differences between the IABP and control groups with regard to the cumulative rates of transplantation (71.2% vs 81.2%, P=0.17), death during VA-ECMO support (20.6% vs 14.6%, P=0.31), transition to a different mechanical circulatory support device (5.5% vs 5.2%, P=0.94) or weaning from VA-ECMO support due to recovery (2.7% vs 0%, P=0.10). There was a higher incidence of bleeding events in the IABP group (45.2% vs 25%, P=0.006; adjusted odds ratio 2.18, 95% confidence interval 1.02-4.67). In-hospital postoperative mortality after HT was 34.6% in the IABP group and 32.5% in the control group (P=0.80). One-year survival after listing for urgent HT was 53.3% in the IABP group and 52.2% in the control group (log rank P=0.75). Multivariate adjustment for potential confounders did not change this result (adjusted hazard ratio 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.56-1.58).
Conclusions: In our study, simultaneous IABP therapy in transplant candidates under VA-ECMO support did not significantly reduce morbidity or mortality.
Colecciones a las que pertenece
- D22 Artículos [1134]