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

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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Barge Caballero, Gonzalo, Castel Lavilla, María A., Almenar Bonet, Luis, Garrido Bravo, Iris Paula, Delgado, Juan F., Rangel Sousa, Diego, González Costello, José, Segovia Cubero, Javier, Martínez Sellés Oliveria Soares, Manuel, Barge Caballero, Eduardo, Et al.
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Fecha de publicación:2019
País:España
Institución:Universidad Europea (UEM)
Repositorio:ABACUS. Repositorio de Producción Científica
Idioma:inglés
OAI Identifier:oai:abacus.universidadeuropea.com:11268/8842
Acceso en línea:http://hdl.handle.net/11268/8842
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Trasplante de órganos
Corazón
Tecnología médica
Sistema cardiovascular
Descripción
Sumario: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.