Citations

Background: Mechanical support strategies used for patients in shock prior to heart transplantation (OHT) correlates with post-transplant outcomes. OHT timing in patients supported by Impella 5.5 remains an evolving decision point, influenced by patient stability and donor logistics. With the emergence of organ transport technologies, we sought to determine whether the choice of system was associated with variations in pre-transplant support duration. Method: A retrospective review between Jan 2020 and May 2025 was completed. Patients were categorized by donor transport technology: traditional cooler, Organ Care System (OCS), or SherpaPak. The primary outcome was duration of Impella support (days) prior to transplant. Group-wise comparisons were performed using Kruskal-Wallis testing. Result: A total of 129 patients were assessed across three transport methods: traditional cooler:12, OCS: 35, SherpaPak: 84. Median age at transplant was 58 (51-65) years with EF of 17% (15-22). Cold ischemic time differed significantly across transport technologies (Kruskal-Wallis H = 77.4, p < 0.001) and was longest in OCS cases (417 min), compared to SherpaPak (236 min) and traditional cooler (234 min). The median duration of Impella support prior to OHT was 27 days for organs transported via traditional cooler, 25 days for those using OCS, and 28.5 days for SherpaPak with near-significant difference by transport method (H=5.77, p=0.056). There was no significant difference of rejection within the first year after OHT. Conclusion: Donor transport technology choice may serve as a surrogate for broader transplant logistics and selection strategies as evidenced by significant differences in ischemic time and near-significant trends in Impella support duration.

Background: Progressive heart failure cardiogenic shock (HFCS) often requires escalation to temporary or durable mechanical circulatory support (MCS) as a bridge to transplant (BTT). Following the 2018 UNOS allocation changes, our center revised its BTT strategy to optimize support and shorten wait times. At our institution, the Impella 5.5 with SmartAssist via the axillary approach was selectively used for patients who remained refractory to guideline-directed medical therapy, failed single-inotrope therapy, and were not considered suitable durable LVAD candidates by our multidisciplinary heart team. We compared transplant-related outcomes of BTT patients supported with Impella 5.5 versus durable LVAD. Methods: We performed a single-center retrospective review of all heart and heart/kidney transplant candidates at Mayo Clinic Florida from October 2018 to February 2021. INTERMACS profile, baseline characteristics, and perioperative data were collected at the time of device implantation and throughout the transplant hospitalization. Results: A total of 87 heart and 4 heart–kidney transplants were completed. Forty-five patients (49%) required MCS as BTT: 27 (60%) with a durable LVAD and 18 (40%) with an Impella 5.5. All eighteen patients with Impella 5.5 as BTT (100%) were transplanted compared to nineteen patients with durable LVAD (70%), p = 0.001. The median time from listing to transplant was substantially shorter with Impella (32 vs. 696 days, p < 0.001), and this difference persisted across INTERMACS profiles. UNOS status at transplant was more urgent for Impella than LVAD (p < 0.001). Transplant surgery following Impella support required shorter cardiopulmonary bypass time (181 vs. 219 min, p < 0.001) and resulted in lower postoperative vasoactive-inotropic requirements (7.9 vs. 13, p = 0.003). No patients in the Impella group died or were delisted while awaiting transplant, whereas 5 LVAD patients (26%) died or were removed due to LVAD complications (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Our data demonstrates that the use of the Impella 5.5 as BTT was associated with significantly shorter waitlist time, higher transplantation rates, reduced perioperative morbidity, and lower postoperative vasoactive support compared with durable LVAD as BTT. These benefits were achieved despite a higher severity of illness at transplantation in the Impella cohort.

Introduction: Takotsubo cardiomyopathy (TCM), also known as stress cardiomyopathy or Broken Heart Syndrome, is a reversible, transient state of myocardial dyskinesis and apical ballooning. Infrequently, TCM may progress to severe life-threatening complications such as cardiogenic shock. Early mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is crucial to myocardial recovery in these cases. We present one of the first cases of TCM successfully treated with the advanced micro-axial minimally invasive Impella 5.5 with SmartAssist MCS device. Case Presentation: A female in her late 70s with a history of hypothyroidism, atrial fibrillation post-ablation, and cholelithiasis was referred to our facility for an elective cholecystectomy. Post-anesthesia induction with propofol 2.1 mg/kg (140 mg bolus), she became bradycardic and hypotensive, eventually leading to asystole, requiring CPR and termination of the procedure. Echocardiography revealed a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 24% with mid-ventricular akinesis and apical ballooning with mild mitral regurgitation, suggesting the diagnosis of TCM. Cardiac catheterization showed RA 20 and mean PA 42 mmHg. Lactate was 18.7 mmol/L and LDH 1776 U/L, suggesting progressive shock. Continuous epinephrine 0.1 mcg/kg/min and norepinephrine 0.06 mcg/kg/min were titrated for BP 97/58, and she was initially supported with the Impella CP device. Despite aggressive efforts, rising LDH levels and increased vasopressor needs indicated inadequate organ perfusion, requiring an upgrade to Impella 5.5. Impella 5.5 support for 11 days led to impressive myocardial recovery, leading to reductions, and eventual discontinuation, of inotropes and vasopressors. Post-Impella 5.5 explantation, her LVEF was 59–65% and she was discharged with Mobile Cardiac Outpatient Telemetry (MCOT) monitoring for her arrhythmias and reinitiation of guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMTs) for her comorbidities. Her 2-month follow-up shows sustained LVEF greater than 45% with functional improvements. Conclusions: Early escalation within 24 h of Impella CP to Impella 5.5 provided stabilization of cardiometabolic shock, preventing end-organ damage, allowing recovery of native heart function while maintaining ambulatory status, and allowing for optimizing medical therapy. It presents a safe, minimally invasive, and cost-effective intervention in TCM cases refractory to GDMT or when additional time is needed for decision-making in cases presenting with CS.

Background: Right atrial thrombus (RAT), though rare, carries a high risk of pulmonary or systemic embolism and a 25–44% mortality rate. In LVAD candidates, coexisting RAT significantly complicates perioperative management due to their critical condition and high risk of decompensation during surgery. Percutaneous thrombectomy offers a less invasive, lower-risk alternative to open surgery, enabling faster recovery. Case Presentation: We present a case of a 76-year-old male with ischemic cardiomyopathy and heart failure secondary to Adriamycin chemotherapy with an ejection fraction (EF) of 26%, diabetes mellitus, and stage 3 chronic kidney disease, scheduled for left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. Preoperative echocardiography revealed a large, multilobulated, mobile thrombus in the right atrium. Given the high surgical risk and thrombus mobility, percutaneous thrombectomy using the AngioVac system (Angiodynamics, Latham, NY, USA) was performed. The thrombus was successfully removed, and the patient was discharged on apixaban for long-term anticoagulation. Advanced medical therapy and transplant/durable LVAD evaluation were delayed by 35 days to allow for the stabilization of any postoperative effects. Conclusions: This case underscores the efficacy of percutaneous thrombectomy as a bridge to LVAD in high-risk patients, reducing thromboembolic complications and supporting safe LVAD implantation.

Background: Patients with end-stage heart failure-related cardiogenic shock (HF-CS) are conclusively associated with a poor health-related quality of life (HRQL). Axillary mechanical circulatory support (aMCS), such as the Impella 5.5, is increasingly used in this population and may improve HRQL during hospitalization by providing enhanced left ventricular unloading. We aimed to assess changes in HRQL between admission and two weeks after Impella 5.5 placement in patients with HF-CS, using the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ). Methods: We conducted a prospective longitudinal analysis on patients with the Impella 5.5 between May 2023 and July 2023. Participants completed the condensed KCCQ-12 at admission and again two weeks post-implantation. Changes in the scores were evaluated using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results: Fifteen patients were enrolled. The median age was 59 years (50–63), and the median ejection fraction at implantation was 20% (15–30). On admission, most patients reported an overall HRQL of poor-to-fair (46.7%) according to the summary KCCQ-12 score. The median overall summary score increased significantly after Impella 5.5 support (50.52 vs. 28.13, p = 0.005). Symptom frequency (70.83 vs. 43.75, p = 0.009) and quality-of-life (50.00 vs. 12.50, p = 0.023) domains improved significantly, while physical limitation showed a positive trend and social limitation remained unchanged. These HRQL improvements occurred alongside a significant shift toward lower SCAI shock stages, marked increases in cardiac output and cardiac index, and no escalation in vasoactive-inotropic requirements. Conclusions: Impella 5.5 support in HF-CS patients was associated with early and clinically meaningful improvements in HRQL, particularly in symptom frequency and quality of life, during the critical pre-transplant or recovery period. These findings suggest that the Impella 5.5 may provide both physiological and patient-perceived benefits in this high-risk population.

The use of temporary mechanical circulatory support in refractory heart failure cardiogenic shock (HFCS) has risen, leading to potential complications. Post-Cardiac Injury Syndrome (PCIS) from Impella insertion is rare but may result from subclavian artery manipulation and aortic irritation. We report the first case of pericarditis (PCIS) caused by Impella 5.5 insertion in an HFCS patient awaiting heart transplantation. The patient developed chest pain, tachycardia, and hypotension post-Impella insertion. Laboratory results and electrocardiograms confirmed PCIS. Treatment with Ibuprofen and Colchicine was successful. He received a heart transplant 14 days later. This case emphasizes recognizing iatrogenic pericarditis after Impella insertion and the need to avoid additional myocardial strain.

Klippel–Trenaunay (KT) syndrome and Cardiac Sarcoidosis (CS) are two distinct medical conditions that rarely coexist, each presenting unique challenges in diagnosis and management. Here, we present a rare case of a 30-year-old male with a history of KT syndrome complicated by recurrent deep vein thrombosis, who presented with symptoms of acute heart failure including shortness of breath, fatigue, dizziness, palpitations, and chest pain and was subsequently diagnosed with isolated CS. We discuss the importance of thorough clinical evaluation and multimodal diagnostic approaches in this complex scenario with overlapping symptoms and diagnostic dilemmas.

Background: The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) staging system is a crucial tool for categorizing cardiogenic shock (CS) and guiding interventions. SCAI staging is traditionally static and may not capture dynamic changes. We evaluated the impact of axillary mechanical circulatory support and SCAI stage transition in patients with CS supported until heart transplantation. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on patients with Impella support as bridge to transplant. Hemodynamic and vasoactive support parameters were collected and SCAI stage recorded at baseline and after 72 hours. Results: 36 patients were included in the analysis. The median age was 61 (52 – 68) with an EF of 19% (15-26%) (Figure 1). Before Impella placement, the distribution of patients across SCAI stages was as follows: 19 patients in SCAI B, 8 patients in SCAI C, and 9 patients in SCAI D. After 72 hours of Impella support, 7 patients initially classified as SCAI C transitioned to SCAI B with one deteriorating to SCAI D (Figure 2). Patients in SCAI D showed notable improvement, with 8 out of 9 patients transitioning to SCAI B. For patients initially SCAI B, RA changed from 10 to 11 mmHg, and PCWP decreased from 23 to 17 mmHg. The Fick CI increased from 2.53 to 3.02 L/min/m 2 (p=0.04), and the vasoactive inotropic score (VIS) decreased from 7.5-5.0 (p=0.05). In patients initially classified as SCAI C, RA pressure decreased from 13 to 8 mmHg, and PCWP reduced from 32 to 30 mmHg. The Fick CI improved from 1.79 to 2.61 L/min/m 2 (p<0.001), while the VIS decreased from 9.2 to 6.3 (p=0.004). For those initially in SCAI D, RA pressure reduced from 8 to 5 mmHg, and PCWP decreased from 27 to 18 mmHg. The Fick CI increased from 1.55 to 2.67 L/min/m 2 (p=0.002), and the VIS was notably reduced from 4.75 to 3.8 (p=0.36). All 36 patients survived to heart transplantation without major pre-transplant complications. Conclusion: SCAI stage C-E mortality ranges from 25 – 50% or worse. Implementing Impella 5.5 support reduced SCAI severity and may be associated with improved survival in HFCS. We demonstrated lower VIS after Impella 5.5 and a 100% event free survival to heart transplantation despite a 25% baseline SCAI D cohort. Larger data should be evaluated to assess this trend.