Addresses for Correspondence
Alexander Ghannam MD
University of Florida College of Medicine – Jacksonville
Department of Surgery
655 West 8th Street
8th Floor, Clinical Center
Jacksonville, FL 32209
Fax: (904) 244-4867
Mobile: (313) 671-1666
Email: alex@ghannam.us
Manabu Takebe MD
University of Florida College of Medicine – Jacksonville
Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery
655 West 8th Street
5th Floor, Ambulatory Care Center
Jacksonville, FL 32209
Phone: (904) 244-3418
Fax: (904) 244-4867
Email: Manabu.Takebe@jax.ufl.edu
Scott Tatum PA-C
University of Florida College of Medicine – Jacksonville
Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery
655 West 8th Street
5th Floor, Ambulatory Care Center
Jacksonville, FL 32209
Phone: (904) 244-3418
Fax: (904) 244-4867
Email: Scott.Tatum@jax.ufl.edu
John Pirris MD
University of Florida College of Medicine – Jacksonville
Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery
655 West 8th Street
5th Floor, Ambulatory Care Center
Jacksonville, FL 32209
Phone: (904) 244-3418
Fax: (904) 244-4867
Email: John.Pirris@jax.ufl.edu
Funding: None
Key Words: Impella 5.5, Heart Failure, High Risk CABG, Aortic
Valve Leaflet Injury, Aortic Insufficiency
Abstract: A 73-year-old male with a history of severe coronary
artery disease and prior CABG presented with chest pain and elevated
troponins. His workup revealed an ejection fraction of 10-15% and
severe native coronary disease as well as stenosis of bypass grafts. He
underwent high-risk redo CABG with Impella 5.5 (Abiomed, Danvers, MA)
placement. The Impella was removed on postoperative day eight at which
time he went into cardiogenic shock from aortic valve leaflet disruption
and severe aortic insufficiency. Given that this patient had severe
aortic insufficiency and no calcium deposits around the aortic valve
annulus a multidisciplinary heart team decided he would be best served
by a surgical aortic valve replacement. He was taken back to the
operating room for a surgical aortic valve and intra-aortic balloon
pump. His postoperative course was complicated by pneumonia, sepsis, and
renal failure requiring continuous renal replacement therapy. He was
discharged to rehab after 42 days.Introduction: Impella (Abiomed, Danvers, MA) is a mechanical
support device designed for short term (<14 days) unloading
the left ventricle in patients with cardiogenic
shock.1,2 Based on the size chosen (2.5, 5.0, or 5.5),
the device is placed either percutaneously or via arteriotomy and
ultimately seated across the aortic valve. Impella has established
itself as an essential tool for multidisciplinary heart teams to treat
patients with acute myocardial infarction, high risk coronary artery
bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), left
ventricular dysfunction, and ultimately cardiogenic
shock.1 Risks associated with Impella are mostly
related to vascular access, however other significant complications
include stroke, myocardial infarction, acute renal dysfunction/failure,
hemolysis, bleeding, and aortic valve injury.2 There
are reports of aortic valve injury resulting in aortic regurgitation
after Impella 2.5 and 5.0 use, however it is unclear what the true
incidence of this complication is. 3-5Materials and Methods: High-risk redo CABG with Impella 5.5
placement via direct aortic approach. Redo sternotomy, aortic valve
replacement, and intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) placement for
perforated left coronary cusp on postoperative day eight. For the
purposes of drafting this manuscript, all activities were performed in
accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or
national research committee.
Results: A 73 year-old-male with a history of hypertension,
hyperlipidemia, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, tobacco abuse, and
coronary artery disease with previous CABG in 1995 presented with chest
pain, shortness of breath, and cough for three days. Initial evaluation
revealed elevated troponins and he was taken urgently for a left heart
catheterization which revealed diffuse native coronary disease, patent
left internal mammary to a diagonal, and two saphenous vein grafts with
minimal blood flow. Initial transthoracic echocardiography (TTE)
demonstrated ejection fraction (EF) of 10-15% and no structural heart
disease. After an extensive workup revealed significant hibernating
myocardium, a multidisciplinary heart team determined that he would be
best served by high-risk redo CABG with a plan for placement of Impella
5.5 via a direct aortic approach for support postoperatively.
The CABG was carried out in standard fashion and the Impella was placed
through a graft into the ascending aorta without the use of a wire while
on full cardiopulmonary bypass after the cross clamp had been removed.
Once the device appeared to be in an appropriate position based on TTE
guidance the graft was tunneled out superior to the right clavicle. His
initial course was unremarkable and he was extubated on postoperative
day one. TTE on postoperative day three demonstrated EF of 40% and
appropriate positioning of the device. On postoperative day eight he
underwent Impella removal at bedside at which time the device was turned
down to P0 and all other safety standards were followed according to the
clinical manual.2 A few hours after removal, he
experienced a drop in his cardiac index from 3.1 to 1.9
L/min/m2. Repeat TTE demonstrated severe aortic
regurgitation with a laceration of the left coronary cusp. A
multidisciplinary heart team was again employed to discuss aortic valve
replacement from surgical or transcatheter (TAVR) approach. Due to a
lack of calcium around the aortic valve annulus and concern for possible
valve migration,6 the heart team and the patient’s
family decided to pursue surgical aortic valve.
He was taken back to the OR on postoperative day eight for a 21mm
mechanical valve and an IABP placement. The IABP was removed following
day, however he developed purulent respiratory secretions and had
trouble being weaned from the ventilator. Bronchoalveolar lavage
revealed pseudomonas pneumonia. On postoperative day 18 he developed
worsening renal function eventually requiring continuous renal
replacement on day 21. He underwent tracheostomy and percutaneous
gastrostomy tube placement on day 25 and was able to be weaned from the
ventilator and transitioned from continuous renal replacement to
hemodialysis. He was discharged to a rehab facility on post-operative
day 42.
Conclusion: While Impella 5.5 is an integral tool in the
armamentarium of heart teams caring for patients in cardiogenic shock,
it is not without its pitfalls. It is unclear whether the valve was
injured on insertion or removal because device causes significant
ultrasound artifact on echocardiography.3 Although it
is not required in the manual, we believe device manipulation should be
conducted with a guidewire under echocardiographic and/or fluoroscopic
guidance regardless of approach. Our team ultimately chose to use a
surgical aortic valve to repair this lesion because of the paucity of
data regarding use of TAVR for aortic insufficiency. Many team members
also expressed concern about the risk of valve migration with minimal
calcification around the aortic valve.
Key Clinical Message: While Impella is an excellent device for
managing patients in cardiogenic shock, extreme care must be taken when
manipulating the device to prevent complications.
Conflict of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest
to disclose.