Efficacy of a 16 Fr sheath strategy during Impella support to reduce access site bleeding in patients with cardiogenic shock.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Heart and Vessels Pub Date : 2025-02-05 DOI:10.1007/s00380-025-02514-w
Yuka Tanizaki, Motoki Fukutomi, Takayuki Onishi, Tomo Ando, Shuichiro Takanashi, Tetsuya Tobaru
{"title":"Efficacy of a 16 Fr sheath strategy during Impella support to reduce access site bleeding in patients with cardiogenic shock.","authors":"Yuka Tanizaki, Motoki Fukutomi, Takayuki Onishi, Tomo Ando, Shuichiro Takanashi, Tetsuya Tobaru","doi":"10.1007/s00380-025-02514-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Access site bleeding is a complication which may occur during Impella support (Abiomed, Danvers, MA, USA), possibly due to unstable fixation of the device in the groin. Using a large-bore sheath for Impella insertion may reduce this complication. However, the efficacy and safety of this strategy are still unknown. The main aim of this study was to assess whether employing a large-bore sheath during Impella insertion mitigates access site bleeding without increasing limb ischemia. All consecutive patients who received either the Impella 2.5 or CP for cardiogenic shock from September 2019 to February 2023 were included in this study. We compared patients who underwent Impella insertion using the conventional peel-away introducer and the attached sheath (repositioning sheath) and patients in whom the Impella was inserted using a 16 Fr sheath. All patients received antegrade perfusion with a 4Fr sheath to prevent limb ischemia at the Impella site. The primary outcome was access site major bleeding: 36 patients were treated with a 16 Fr sheath and 39 were treated with a conventional sheath. The use of a 16 Fr sheath was associated with a significant reduction in major bleeding (33.0% vs. 64.0%, p = 0.01) in comparison to the conventional sheath. After adjusting for covariates, the risk of major bleeding at the access site in the 16 Fr sheath group was significantly lower than that in the conventional sheath group (adjusted odds ratio, 0.294; 95% confidence interval 0.087-0.991; p = 0.048). The insertion of Impella through a 16 Fr sheath significantly reduced the risk of major bleeding at the access site in comparison to the conventional sheath.</p>","PeriodicalId":12940,"journal":{"name":"Heart and Vessels","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heart and Vessels","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00380-025-02514-w","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Access site bleeding is a complication which may occur during Impella support (Abiomed, Danvers, MA, USA), possibly due to unstable fixation of the device in the groin. Using a large-bore sheath for Impella insertion may reduce this complication. However, the efficacy and safety of this strategy are still unknown. The main aim of this study was to assess whether employing a large-bore sheath during Impella insertion mitigates access site bleeding without increasing limb ischemia. All consecutive patients who received either the Impella 2.5 or CP for cardiogenic shock from September 2019 to February 2023 were included in this study. We compared patients who underwent Impella insertion using the conventional peel-away introducer and the attached sheath (repositioning sheath) and patients in whom the Impella was inserted using a 16 Fr sheath. All patients received antegrade perfusion with a 4Fr sheath to prevent limb ischemia at the Impella site. The primary outcome was access site major bleeding: 36 patients were treated with a 16 Fr sheath and 39 were treated with a conventional sheath. The use of a 16 Fr sheath was associated with a significant reduction in major bleeding (33.0% vs. 64.0%, p = 0.01) in comparison to the conventional sheath. After adjusting for covariates, the risk of major bleeding at the access site in the 16 Fr sheath group was significantly lower than that in the conventional sheath group (adjusted odds ratio, 0.294; 95% confidence interval 0.087-0.991; p = 0.048). The insertion of Impella through a 16 Fr sheath significantly reduced the risk of major bleeding at the access site in comparison to the conventional sheath.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Heart and Vessels
Heart and Vessels 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
13.30%
发文量
211
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Heart and Vessels is an English-language journal that provides a forum of original ideas, excellent methods, and fascinating techniques on cardiovascular disease fields. All papers submitted for publication are evaluated only with regard to scientific quality and relevance to the heart and vessels. Contributions from those engaged in practical medicine, as well as from those involved in basic research, are welcomed.
期刊最新文献
Clinical impacts of malnutrition based on the GLIM criteria using the MNA-SF for nutritional screening in patients with acute heart failure. Efficacy of a 16 Fr sheath strategy during Impella support to reduce access site bleeding in patients with cardiogenic shock. Author's response: long-term outcomes of PCI in CTO patients with multi-vessel disease. Reply to letter to the editor: "Long-term clinical outcomes after alcohol septal ablation for hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy in Japan: a retrospective study". Evaluation of intrarenal vein flow patterns during routine echocardiography.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1