Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation is a promising treatment for refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Three recent randomized trials (ARREST trial, Prague OHCA study, and INCEPTION trial) that addressed the clinical benefit of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest yielded seemingly diverging results. The evidence for extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, derived from three recent randomized controlled trials, is not contradictory but rather complementary. Excellent results can be achieved with a very high level of dedication, provided that strict selection criteria are applied. However, pragmatic implementation of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation does not necessarily lead to improved outcome of refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Centres that are performing extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest or aspire to do so should critically evaluate whether they are able to meet the pre-requisites that are needed to conduct an effective extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation programme.

Aims: Fabry disease (FD) is often associated with heart failure (HF). However, data on HF prevalence, prognosis, and applicability of echocardiographic criteria for HF diagnosis in FD remain uncertain. Methods and results: We evaluated patients with genetically proven FD for symptoms and natriuretic peptides indicating HF. We then analysed the diagnostic utility of the currently recommended European Society of Cardiology (ESC) echocardiographic criteria for HF diagnosis and their relationship to natriuretic peptides. Finally, we examined the association between HF and echocardiographic criteria with mortality and cardiovascular events during follow-up. Of 116 patients with FD, 48 (41%) had symptomatic HF (mean age 58 ± 11 years, 62% male). HF with preserved ejection fraction (HF-pEF) was diagnosed in 43 (91%) patients, representing the dominant phenotype. Left ventricular mass index (LVMi) had the highest diagnostic utility (sensitivity 71% and specificity 83%) for HF diagnosis in FD, followed by E/e′ > 9 (sensitivity 76% and specificity 78%) and global longitudinal strain (GLS) <16% (sensitivity 54% and specificity 88%). Log N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide correlated significantly with LVMi (r = 0.60), E/e′ (r = 0.54), and GLS (r = 0.52) (all Ps < 0.001) but not with left ventricular ejection fraction (r = −0.034, P = 0.72). During follow-up (mean 1208 ± 444 days), patients diagnosed with HF had a higher rate of all-cause mortality and worsening HF (33% vs. 1.5%, P < 0.001). Abnormal LVMi, E/e′ > 9, and GLS < 16% were all associated with higher all-cause mortality and worsening HF. Conclusions: This study found a high prevalence of symptomatic HF in FD patients. HF-pEF was the dominant phenotype. LVMi, E/e′, and GLS yielded the highest diagnostic utility for HF diagnosis and were significantly correlated with natriuretic peptides levels. Echocardiographic criteria proposed by current ESC HF guidelines apply to Fabry patients and predict cardiovascular events. At follow-up, Fabry patients with HF diagnosis had high event rates and significantly worse prognosis than patients without HF.

Fabry disease (FD) is a multisystemic lysosomal storage disorder caused by a defect in the alpha-galactosidase A gene that manifests as a phenocopy of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. We assessed the echocardiographic 3D left ventricular (LV) strain of patients with FD in relation to heart failure severity using natriuretic peptides, the presence of a cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) late gadolinium enhancement scar, and long-term prognosis. 3D echocardiography was feasible in 75/99 patients with FD [aged 47 ± 14 years, 44% males, LV ejection fraction (EF) 65 ± 6% and 51% with hypertrophy or concentric remodelling of the LV]. Long-term prognosis (death, heart failure decompensation, or cardiovascular hospitalization) was assessed over a median follow-up of 3.1 years. A stronger correlation was observed for N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide levels with 3D LV global longitudinal strain (GLS, r = −0.49, P < 0.0001) than with 3D LV global circumferential strain (GCS, r = −0.38, P < 0.001) or 3D LVEF (r = −0.25, P = 0.036). Individuals with posterolateral scar on CMR had lower posterolateral 3D circumferential strain (CS; P = 0.009). 3D LV-GLS was associated with long-term prognosis [adjusted hazard ratio 0.85 (confidence interval 0.75–0.95), P = 0.004], while 3D LV-GCS and 3D LVEF were not (P = 0.284 and P = 0.324). 3D LV-GLS is associated with both heart failure severity measured by natriuretic peptide levels and long-term prognosis. Decreased posterolateral 3D CS reflects typical posterolateral scarring in FD. Where feasible, 3D-strain echocardiography can be used for a comprehensive mechanical assessment of the LV in patients with FD. CMR, cardiovascular magnetic resonance; CS, circumferential strain; CV, cardiovascular; GLS, global longitudinal strain; LV, left ventricle.

Impressively increasing availability of mechanical circulatory/cardiac support systems (MCSs) worldwide, together with the deepening of the knowledge of critical care medical practitioners, has inevitably led to the discussion about further improvements of intensive care associated to MCS. An appealing topic of the left ventricle (LV) overload related to VA ECMO support endangering myocardial recovery is being widely discussed within the scientific community. Unloading of LV leads to the reduction in LV end-diastolic pressure, reduction in pressure in the left atrium, and decrease in the LV thrombus formation risk. Consequently, better conditions for myocardial recovery, with comfortable filling pressures and a better oxygen delivery/demand ratio, are achieved. The combination of VA ECMO and Impella device, also called ECPELLA, seems to be a promising strategy that may bring the improvement of CS mortality rates. The series of presented trials and meta-analyses clearly showed the potential benefits of this strategy. However, the ongoing research has brought a series of new questions, such as whether Impella itself is the only appropriate unloading modality, or any other approach to unload LV would be beneficial in the same way. Benefits and potential risks of LV unloading and its timing are being discussed in this current review.