In-hospital outcomes of percutaneous ventricular assist devices versus intra-aortic balloon pumps in non-ischemia related cardiogenic shock

Gbolahan O. Ogunbayo; Le Dung Ha; Qamar Ahmad; Naoki Misumida; Ayman Elbadawi; Odunayo Olorunfemi; Andrew Kolodziej; Adrian W. Messerli; Ahmed Abdel-Latif; Claude S. Elayi; Maya Guglin

doi:10.1016/j.hrtlng.2018.02.002

In-hospital outcomes of percutaneous ventricular assist devices versus intra-aortic balloon pumps in non-ischemia related cardiogenic shock

Gbolahan O. Ogunbayo, Le Dung Ha, Qamar Ahmad, Naoki Misumida, Ayman Elbadawi, Odunayo Olorunfemi, Andrew Kolodziej, Adrian W. Messerli, Ahmed Abdel-Latif, Claude S. Elayi, Maya Guglin

Internal Medicine

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

11 Scopus citations

Abstract

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.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	392-397
Number of pages	6
Journal	Heart and Lung
Volume	47
Issue number	4
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrtlng.2018.02.002
State	Published - Jul 1 2018

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Elsevier Inc.

Keywords

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

Access to Document

10.1016/j.hrtlng.2018.02.002

Cite this

Ogunbayo, G. O., Ha, L. D., Ahmad, Q., Misumida, N., Elbadawi, A., Olorunfemi, O., Kolodziej, A., Messerli, A. W., Abdel-Latif, A., Elayi, C. S., & Guglin, M. (2018). In-hospital outcomes of percutaneous ventricular assist devices versus intra-aortic balloon pumps in non-ischemia related cardiogenic shock. Heart and Lung, 47(4), 392-397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrtlng.2018.02.002

@article{d914e9f532a443ab8f42f770d69acd8a,

title = "In-hospital outcomes of percutaneous ventricular assist devices versus intra-aortic balloon pumps in non-ischemia related cardiogenic shock",

abstract = "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.",

keywords = "Cardiogenic shock, Heart failure, Impella devices, Intra-aortic balloon pump, Mechanical circulatory support, Percutaneous ventricular assist devices",

author = "Ogunbayo, {Gbolahan O.} and Ha, {Le Dung} and Qamar Ahmad and Naoki Misumida and Ayman Elbadawi and Odunayo Olorunfemi and Andrew Kolodziej and Messerli, {Adrian W.} and Ahmed Abdel-Latif and Elayi, {Claude S.} and Maya Guglin",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2018 Elsevier Inc.",

year = "2018",

month = jul,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1016/j.hrtlng.2018.02.002",

language = "English",

volume = "47",

pages = "392--397",

number = "4",

}

Ogunbayo, GO, Ha, LD, Ahmad, Q, Misumida, N, Elbadawi, A, Olorunfemi, O, Kolodziej, A, Messerli, AW, Abdel-Latif, A, Elayi, CS & Guglin, M 2018, 'In-hospital outcomes of percutaneous ventricular assist devices versus intra-aortic balloon pumps in non-ischemia related cardiogenic shock', Heart and Lung, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 392-397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrtlng.2018.02.002

TY - JOUR

T1 - In-hospital outcomes of percutaneous ventricular assist devices versus intra-aortic balloon pumps in non-ischemia related cardiogenic shock

AU - Ogunbayo, Gbolahan O.

AU - Ha, Le Dung

AU - Ahmad, Qamar

AU - Misumida, Naoki

AU - Elbadawi, Ayman

AU - Olorunfemi, Odunayo

AU - Kolodziej, Andrew

AU - Messerli, Adrian W.

AU - Abdel-Latif, Ahmed

AU - Elayi, Claude S.

AU - Guglin, Maya

PY - 2018/7/1

Y1 - 2018/7/1

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - Cardiogenic shock

KW - Heart failure

KW - Impella devices

KW - Intra-aortic balloon pump

KW - Mechanical circulatory support

KW - Percutaneous ventricular assist devices

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85045331613&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85045331613&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2018.02.002

DO - 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2018.02.002

M3 - Article

C2 - 29656961

AN - SCOPUS:85045331613

SN - 0147-9563

VL - 47

SP - 392

EP - 397

JO - Heart and Lung

JF - Heart and Lung

IS - 4

ER -

In-hospital outcomes of percutaneous ventricular assist devices versus intra-aortic balloon pumps in non-ischemia related cardiogenic shock

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this