Pseudoaneurysm Formation After “Preclose”-Assisted Impella Insertion in a Patient With Cardiogenic Shock

Le résumé fourni par la source

The use of mechanical support devices such as the Impella CP (Abiomed, Danvers, MA) is a growing form of treatment for patients with cardiogenic shock (CS). Despite the increase in usage, there remains a dearth in literature regarding potential complications. Vascular complications such as pseudoaneurysms (PAs) are rare but important potential complications that can occur with use of the Impella. We present Impella-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in a patient with CS, "Preclosed" with the Perclose ProGlide (Abbott, Plymouth, MN) device complicated by development of a PA. A 62-year-old male patient with a history of diabetes and hypertension presented to our emergency room (ER) with chest pain and electrocardiogram (ECG) findings consistent with an acute anterior wall ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). This was further complicated by refractory CS. The patient was urgently taken to the cardiac catherization laboratory. After exchange of sequential dilators, a single Perclose device was used prior to the insertion of the Impella sheath. The patient then underwent a successful Impella-assisted PCI of his left anterior descending artery. Upon stabilization of hemodynamics, the patient was taken to the catheterization laboratory for Impella removal. After removal of Impella, imaging detected extravasation of contrast, without development of hematoma, later confirmed to be a PA via computed tomography (CT) scans and ultrasound Doppler imaging. The PA was successfully managed with injection of thrombin. The PA was likely caused by shearing forces of the dilators, the 14-F Impella sheath and foot of the device. We propose deploying the Perclose device earlier in the process of dilating the access site to avoid such complication. This is one of the first case reports that detail the occurrence and management of a PA with Impella insertion.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.