A 43-year-old woman presented to the emergency room for a 3-day history of oppressive chest pain and dyspnoea. Her past medical history was unremarkable. On admission, she had a temperature of 37.7°C, blood pressure 120/80 mmHg, and heart rate 79 b.p.m. Physical exam revealed decreased breath sounds at lung bases with ronchi. Because of oxygen desaturation (Sp_O2 89%), continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) was positioned.

There has been a significant increase in the use of short-term percutaneous ventricular assist devices (pVADs) as acute circulatory support in cardiogenic shock and to provide haemodynamic support during interventional procedures, including high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions. Although frequently considered together, pVADs differ in their haemodynamic effects, management, indications, insertion techniques, and monitoring requirements. This consensus document summarizes the views of an expert panel by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) and the Association for Acute Cardiovascular Care (ACVC) and appraises the value of short-term pVAD. It reviews the pathophysiological context and possible indications for pVAD in different clinical settings and provides guidance regarding the management of pVAD based on existing evidence and best current practice.

Trials on intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) use in cardiogenic shock related to acute myocardial infarction have shown disappointing results. The role of IABP in cardiogenic shock treatment remains unclear, and new (potentially more potent) mechanical circulatory supports with arguably larger device profile are emerging. A reappraisal of the physiological premises of intra-aortic counterpulsation may underpin the rationale to maintain IABP as a valuable therapeutic option for patients with acute decompensated heart failure and tissue hypoperfusion. Several pathophysiological features differ between myocardial infarction- and acute decompensated heart failure–related hypoperfusion, encompassing cardiogenic shock severity, filling status, systemic vascular resistances rise, and adaptation to chronic (if preexisting) left ventricular dysfunction. IABP combines a more substantial effect on left ventricular afterload with a modest increase in cardiac output and would therefore be most suitable in clinical scenarios characterized by a disproportionate increase in afterload without profound hemodynamic compromise. The acute decompensated heart failure syndrome is characterized by exquisite afterload-sensitivity of cardiac output and may be an ideal setting for counterpulsation. Several hemodynamic variables have been shown to predict response to IABP within this scenario, potentially guiding appropriate patient selection. Finally, acute decompensated heart failure with hypoperfusion may frequently represent an end stage in the heart failure history: IABP may provide sufficient hemodynamic support and prompt end-organ function recovery in view of more definitive heart replacement therapies while preserving ambulation when used with a transaxillary approach.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to a fast and radical transformation in social, economic, and healthcare networks. COVID-19 outbreak may thus have profound indirect consequences on clinical presentation and management of patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Aim of this study was to assess clinical features of patients with STEMI during COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This single-center, prospective study from a regional public service healthcare hub in Milan included all consecutive patients with STEMI admitted to our institute from February 21 to April 1, 2020 (during COVID-19 pandemic). These patients were compared with a historical cohort of patients admitted for STEMI during the analogous time period (February 21 to April 1) in 2018 and 2019, in terms of time from symptoms onset to hospital admission, clinical characteristics, and in-hospital outcomes. Results: A total of 26 patients were admitted for STEMI during the study period, and 7 (26.9%) of these patients tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. On admission, medical therapy, including angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers use, was similar between cohorts. Median (interquartile range) time from symptoms onset to hospital admission was significantly longer in 2020 as compared to the historical cohort (15.0 [2.0–48.0] versus 2.0 [1.0–3.0] hours; P <0.01). A higher proportion of patients presenting with late presentation STEMI was observed in 2020 compared with the historical cohort (50.0% versus 4.8%; P <0.01). Primary percutaneous coronary intervention resulted indicated in 80.8% of patients in 2020 compared with 100% in the historical cohort ( P =0.06). In-hospital death, thromboembolism, mechanical ventilation, or hemodynamic decompensation needing inotropic or mechanical support were similar between years. Conclusions: These preliminary results from a cardiovascular regional public service healthcare hub demonstrate a significantly longer time from symptoms onset to hospital admission among patients with STEMI during COVID-19 pandemic compared with the same time period in the previous 2 years.

BACKGROUND: Patients presenting with cardiogenic shock (CS) are at risk of developing mixed shock (MS), characterized by distributive-inflammatory phenotype. However, no objective definition exists for this clinical entity. METHODS: We assessed the frequency, predictors, and prognostic relevance of MS complicating CS, based on a newly proposed objective definition. MS complicating CS was defined as an objective shock state secondary to both an ongoing cardiogenic cause and a distributive-inflammatory phenotype arising at least 12 hours after the initial CS diagnosis, as substantiated by predefined longitudinal changes in hemodynamics, clinical, and laboratory parameters. RESULTS: Among 213 consecutive patients admitted at 2 cardiac intensive care units with CS, 13 with inflammatory-distributive features at initial presentation were excluded, leading to a cohort of 200 patients hospitalized with pure CS (67±13 years, 96% Society of Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions CS stage class C or higher). MS complicating CS occurred in 24.5% after 120 (29–216) hours from CS diagnosis. Lower systolic arterial pressure ( P =0.043), hepatic injury ( P =0.049), and suspected/definite infection ( P =0.013) at CS diagnosis were independent predictors of MS development. In-hospital mortality (53.1% versus 27.8%; P =0.002) and hospital stay (21 [13–48] versus 17 [9–27] days; P =0.018) were higher in the MS cohort. At logistic multivariable analysis, MS diagnosis (odds ratio [OR], 3.00 [95% CI, 1.39–6.63]; P _adj =0.006), age (OR, 1.06 [95% CI, 1.03–1.10] years; P _adj <0.001), admission systolic arterial pressure <100 mm Hg (OR, 2.41 [95% CI, 1.19–4.98]; P _adj =0.016), and admission serum creatinine (OR, 1.61 [95% CI, 1.19–2.26]; P _adj =0.003) conferred higher odds of in-hospital death, while early temporary mechanical circulatory support was associated with lower in-hospital death (OR, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.17–0.75]; P _adj =0.008). CONCLUSIONS: MS complicating CS, objectively defined leveraging on longitudinal changes in distributive and inflammatory features, occurs in one-fourth of patients with CS, is predicted by markers of CS severity and inflammation at CS diagnosis, and portends higher hospital mortality.

The use of percutaneous right ventricular assist devices (pRVADs) to support patients with right ventricular (RV)-predominant cardiogenic shock (CS) refractory to optimal medical therapy is increasing progressively, and the Impella RP is the first FDA-approved pRVAD in such a clinical scenario. The aim of the present study is to report the outcomes of patients treated with Impella RP in the IMP-IT (IMPella Mechanical Circulatory Support Device in Italy) registry, a multicenter registry that evaluated the trends in use and clinical outcomes of the Impella in the setting of CS and high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention in Italy. A total of 15 patients who received Impella RP were enrolled. In 40% of the patients, the main cause was ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. A total of 40% of patients required biventricular support with a left Impella. Device-related complications were reported in 46.7% of patients. Overall, the in-hospital mortality was 46.7%, whereas the one-year mortality was 53.3%. The composite rate of all-cause death, heart failure (HF) hospitalization, left ventricular assist device (LVAD) and heart transplant at one year was 60%. The Impella RP has favorable survival outcomes in RV-predominant cardiogenic shock. However, the device-related complications are frequent and should be carefully weighed when considering escalation to Impella RP.