Matos, Nikki

Prehabilitation with Impella 5.5 offers hemodynamic support while allowing early mobilization, yet its overall effect on post-transplant recovery remains unclear. The aim was to assess recovery during Impella 5.5–supported prehabilitation and determine its association with early post-heart transplant outcomes, including a potential dose–response relationship with ambulatory activity. We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study of adults bridged to transplant with Impella 5.5 between April 1, 2022 and September 30, 2024. Daily walking distance, recorded by nursing staff, served as the intervention. Primary outcome was postoperative hospital length of stay (LOS); the secondary outcome was time to extubation. Fine–Gray competing-risk models, adjusted for age, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, and days of Impella support, assessed associations. Longitudinal recovery trajectories were analyzed with linear mixed-effects models incorporating restricted cubic splines. Among 82 eligible patients, 65 met the inclusion criteria. Patients who walked farther during Impella 5.5 support in the intensive care unit (ICU) had shorter hospital stays and were taken off the ventilator sooner after transplantation. The overall recovery peaked during the first 2–3 weeks of support, with smaller recovery thereafter, indicating that most functional recovery occurred early during prehabilitation.

Heart transplantation is a well-established treatment for end-stage heart failure, but many patients present in poor physical condition, complicating outcomes. The Impella 5.5 device, used in cardiogenic shock, may support pretransplant rehabilitation by stabilizing organ function and promoting functional improvement. This retrospective cohort study assessed the relationship between functional status, measured by standardized Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care Basic Mobility (AM-PAC) scores, and days alive outside the hospital within 30 days post-transplant (DAOH-30). Patients who received Impella 5.5 support before transplantation between January 2019 and October 2023 were included, excluding those without AM-PAC scores within 24 hours pretransplant. Among 65 patients, the median DAOH-30 was 15 days (interquartile range [IQR], 8–19). Higher pretransplant standardized AM-PAC scores correlate with increased DAOH-30 (adjusted coefficient 0.3; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.01–0.6; p = 0.04), as did AM-PAC score improvement during rehabilitation (adjusted coefficient 0.35; 95% CI = 0.01–0.6; p = 0.04). Extended rehabilitation was associated with greater functional gains. These findings suggest that better pretransplant functional status and rehabilitation-related improvements were associated with increased DAOH-30. The Impella 5.5 device facilitates rehabilitation and may enhance post-transplant outcomes. Further research should refine strategies to optimize rehabilitation and recovery in this high-risk population.

Background: Impella 5.5® with Smart Assist is a minimally invasive Left Ventricular Assist Devices (LVAD) approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for treating ongoing cardiogenic shock for up to 14 days. The Impella® intends to reduce ventricular workload and provide the circulatory support necessary for myocardial recovery. Research Question: Compared to standard practice, does adding an extension piece to the purge tube side arm of the Impella® Device decrease the incidence of device failure and positively impact the health outcome of adult patients receiving Impella® support? Study Design and Methods: A retrospective chart review of ICU patients was done at a tertiary care center from August 2018 to August 2022 to assess the differences in patient outcomes related to Impella® Device utilization before and after the implementation of the extension piece to the purge tube sidearm. Among patients reviewed, a total of 20 were included in our review, with seven not having the purge tube side arm extension added, while 13 patients had the extension. Results: The two study groups had no significant difference in patient health outcomes. Additionally, there were no instances of device failure requiring explanation without the extension tubing. However, there were no cases of the purge cassette cracking with the addition of the extension tubing. Conclusion: The addition of extension tubing to the purge cassette of the Impella® Device did not impact patient health outcomes or the incidence of device failure. There was a complete reduction in the incidence of the purge cassette cracking, which could reduce the potential for infection or device failure over a long period of mechanical support. There is a need for long-term prospective studies to confirm the results.