Left Ventricular Assist Device Impella LP 2.5
DeviceLeft Ventricular Assist Device
NCT Number: NCT00417378
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a left ventricular assist device in comparison to a standard treatment with an intraaortic balloon pump (IABP) in patients with cardiogenic shock due to left ventricular failure following an acute coronary syndrome (myocardial infarction).
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me18 year and older
All sexes
Interventional
Phase 4
1. Medizinische Klinik, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
Cardiogenic shock due to a left ventricular failure after myocardial infarction (MI) is associated with a mortality rate of 50-70 % despite all efforts such as immediate PCI of the occluded vessel, positive inotropic drugs, and the use of intraaortic balloon counterpulsation (IABP). While urgent heart transplantation or the surgical implantation of high-volume left ventricular assist devices are possible treatment options, a widespread use of these techniques for this common complication of myocardial infarction is limited. Because of the easy, percutaneous use of an intraaortic balloon pump, IABP is the method of choice for mechanical assistance in these patients. Despite a lack of randomized data, the ACC/AHA guidelines recommend the use of an intraaortic balloon counterpulsation (Level of evidence IB) in patients with a cardiogenic shock after myocardial infarction. However, improvement of the hemodynamic state by the use of an IABP is limited and the lack of an active cardiac support remains the major limitation of this treatment. Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices may both overcome the limitation of a surgical approach and offer the potential benefit of an active cardiac support during recovery of the failing left ventricle after PCI.
Previous studies have demonstrated a significant improvement of hemodynamic parameters by the use of a catheter-based miniaturized rotary blood pump (Impella LP2.5, Abiomed-Impella CardioSystems GmbH, Aachen, Germany), that is placed retrogradely through the aortic valve. The microaxial pump aspirates blood from the left ventricle and expels it to the ascending aorta with a maximal flow of 2.5 L/min. Randomized data comparing the LVAD with IABP are missing. Therefore, this trial will primarily compare the hemodynamic improvement of the LVAD (Impella LP2.5) with the hemodynamic improvement of an intraaortic balloon counterpulsation (IABP), while secondarily feasibility, safety and mortality will be compared.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Left Ventricular Assist Device
Counterpulsation
Time frame: within 1 hour after device implantation
Time frame: until to hospital discharge
Time frame: within 30 and 180 days
Time frame: during hospitalization
Deutsches Herzzentrum Muenchen
Other
Left Ventricular Assist Device (Impella LP 2.5) vs. Intraaortic Balloon Counterpulsation (IABP) in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock and Acute Coronary Syndromes
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT00491036
Cardiovascular Diseases, Heart Diseases
Bad Berka, Germany
View Trial DetailsNCT00000552
Cardiovascular Diseases, Coronary Disease
View Trial DetailsNCT03714048
Arrhythmias, Cardiac, Blood Coagulation Disorders
Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
View Trial DetailsNCT03327493
Autonomic Nervous System Diseases, Cardiovascular Diseases
Nancy, France
View Trial Details