Introduction: This study compared inpatient outcomes related to the use of these two devices among patients who developed cardiogenic shock not due to acute myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization. Methods: We extracted admission-level records of patients with a diagnosis of cardiogenic shock who underwent either PVAD or IABP implantation from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database from 2010 to 2014. Our outcomes of interest were mortality and length of stay. Results: Inpatient mortality was significantly higher in the PVAD cohort. In multivariate analysis, PVAD use in these patients was associated with higher mortality. There was no difference in the length of stay between both groups among patients that survived to discharge. Conclusion: In our analysis of the NIS database, the use of PVADs in patients with cardiogenic shock of non-ischemic origin was associated with higher mortality when compared to IABP use.
|Number of pages||6|
|Journal||Heart and Lung|
|State||Published - Jul 1 2018|
Bibliographical noteFunding Information:
Funding: Penny Warren Research Award, University of Kentucky; Dr. Abdel-Latif is supported by the University of Kentucky Clinical and Translational Science Pilot Award (UL1TR000117), the UK COBRE Early Career Program (P20 GM103527) and the NIH Grant R56 HL124266.
© 2018 Elsevier Inc.
- Cardiogenic shock
- Heart failure
- Impella devices
- Intra-aortic balloon pump
- Mechanical circulatory support
- Percutaneous ventricular assist devices
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
- Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
- Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine