A method for maintaining vascular access when Impella exchange is required

A 45‐year old male with no prior cardiac history, presented with cardiogenic shock in the setting of an anterolateral ST elevation myocardial infarction. We first placed a 2.5 Impella for hemodynamic support, and proceeded with emergent percutaneous coronary intervention to the proximal LAD. Several hours following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the patient became acutely hypotensive and an echocardiogram revealed the Impella catheter was kinked within the left ventricle. The patient was taken back to the cath lab for Impella adjustment; however, damage to the distal catheter required the Impella be exchanged. As the patient was therapeutically anticoagulated and on dual antiplatelet therapy, we modified the Impella catheter in order to maintain existing vascular access during Impella exchange. This case demonstrates our method for maintaining vascular access during Impella exchange, thereby eliminating the need for a second arterial puncture. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

[1]  C. Terkelsen,et al.  Perforation of the Anterior Mitral Leaflet After Impella LP 5.0 Therapy in Cardiogenic Shock. , 2016, The American journal of cardiology.

[2]  E. Pantin,et al.  Coiled Impella Drive Line in the Left Ventricle: A Rare Complication of a Left Ventricular Assist Device. , 2015, Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia.

[3]  A. Shepard,et al.  Incidence and prognosis of vascular complications after percutaneous placement of left ventricular assist device. , 2015, Journal of vascular surgery.

[4]  L. Eisen,et al.  Ultrasound-Guided Catheterization of the Femoral Artery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. , 2015, The Journal of invasive cardiology.

[5]  J. Goldstein,et al.  2015 SCAI/ACC/HFSA/STS Clinical Expert Consensus Statement on the Use of Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices in Cardiovascular Care (Endorsed by the American Heart Association, the Cardiological Society of India, and Sociedad Latino Americana de Cardiologia Intervencion; Affirmation , 2015, Journal of cardiac failure.

[6]  J. Goldstein,et al.  2015 SCAI/ACC/HFSA/STS Clinical Expert Consensus Statement on the Use of Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices in Cardiovascular Care: Endorsed by the American Heart Assocation, the Cardiological Society of India, and Sociedad Latino Americana de Cardiologia Intervencion; Affirmation o , 2015, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[7]  P. Erne,et al.  Functional mitral stenosis: a rare complication of the Impella assist device. , 2008, European journal of echocardiography : the journal of the Working Group on Echocardiography of the European Society of Cardiology.

[8]  R. Smalling,et al.  Improved regional myocardial blood flow, left ventricular unloading, and infarct salvage using an axial-flow, transvalvular left ventricular assist device. A comparison with intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation and reperfusion alone in a canine infarction model. , 1992, Circulation.