Outcome of patients with non‐ischaemic cardiogenic shock supported by percutaneous left ventricular assist device

Abstract Aims Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices (pVADs) are used to haemodynamically stabilize patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) caused by acute myocardial infarction (AMI). One out of every two patients has a non‐ischaemic cause of CS, and these patients differ profoundly from patients with AMI‐related CS. We assessed the usefulness of pVAD support for patients with non‐ischaemic CS. Methods and results We analysed 106 patients with CS and Impella® support between 2015 and 2018. CS was non‐ischaemic in 36 patients and AMI‐related in 70 patients. Compared with the AMI group, those in the non‐ischaemic group were significantly younger [median age 62 (50.8, 70.8) years vs. 68 (58.0, 75.5) years, P = 0.007] and had more patients with severely reduced left ventricular function (94% vs. 79%, P = 0.035) and worse glomerular filtration rate [45 (27, 57) mL/min vs. 60 (44, 78) mL/min]. Propensity score matching yielded 31 patients with non‐ischaemic CS and 31 patients with AMI‐related CS, without a difference in baseline laboratory values or comorbidities. In both groups, pVAD support was performed along with haemodynamic stabilization, reduction of catecholamines and normalization of lactate levels. In 7 days, systolic blood pressure increased from 91 (80, 101) mmHg at baseline to 100 (100, 120) mmHg in the non‐ischaemic CS group (P = 0.001) and 89 (80, 100) mmHg at baseline to 112 (100, 128) mmHg in the AMI‐related CS group (P = 0.001). Moreover, in 7 days, the need of catecholamines (calculated as vasoactive‐inotropic score) decreased from 32.0 (11.1, 47.0) at baseline to 5.3 (0, 16.1) in the non‐ischaemic group (P = 0.001) and from 35.2 (18.11, 67.0) to zero (0, 0) in the AMI‐related CS group (P = 0.001). Lactate level decreased from 3.8 (2.8, 5.9) mmol/L at baseline to 1.0 (0.8, 2.1) mmol/L (P = 0.001) in the non‐ischaemic CS group and from 3.8 (2.6, 6.5) mmol/L to 1.2 (1.0, 2.0) mmol/L in the AMI‐related group (P = 0.001). In the non‐ischaemic CS group, eight patients (25.8%) were upgraded to veno‐arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA‐ECMO) or long‐term mechanical circulatory support. Two of these upgraded patients received heart transplantation. In the AMI group, eight patients (25.8%) were upgraded to VA‐ECMO or long‐term mechanical circulatory support. Ninety‐day survival did not significantly differ between the groups (non‐ischaemic CS group 48.4%, AMI‐related CS group 45.2%, P = 0.799). Conclusions pVAD support is useful for haemodynamic stabilization of patients with non‐ischaemic CS and is valuable as a bridge to patients' recovery or long‐term left ventricular support and heart transplantation.