Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Introduction: Evidence regarding the impact of prophylactic implantation of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO) during coronary or structural procedures is limited. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the in-hospital and medium term outcomes of ECMO support in complex percutaneous coronary or structural intervention.
Methods: The present is an observational prospective study including consecutive patients who underwent to prophylactic ECMO implantation for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), structural or combined interventions between July 2018 and July 2020 in Maria Pia Hospital GVM Care & Research, Turin, Italy. Primary endpoints were in-hospital and medium term all-cause death. Secondary endpoints were vascular complication, bleeding and procedural success.
Results: 27 patients were included with a mean age of 80 ± 6 years, 10 (37%) being diabetics and 19 (70%) with severe left ventricle dysfunction. Mean Logistic Euroscore was 28.7 ± 18.7. Seven patients (26%) underwent complex coronary revascularization, 7 (26%) combined PCI + TAVI, 5 (19%) combined PCI + Mitraclip, 5 (19%) TAVI alone and finally 3 (11%) combined TAVI + Mitraclip. The procedural success was 96%, with only one in-hospital death due to major vascular complication at the ECMO vascular access. At a mean follow-up of 11 ± 6.8 months 4 deaths were recorded (3 from not cardiovascular causes).
Conclusions: Prophylactic use of ECMO may be beneficial for high risk patients undergoing complex combined coronary/structural percutaneous interventions with good in-hospital and mid-term outcomes in term of safety and procedural success.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.carrev.2020.12.020 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!