Extracorporeal life support in cardiogenic shock: Impact of acute versus chronic etiology on outcome

BackgroundThe role of extracorporeal life support (ECLS) in primary cardiogenic shock (PCS) is well established. In this study, we evaluated the impact of etiology on outcomes.MethodsBetween January 2009 and March 2013, we implanted a total of 249 patients with ECLS; we focused on 64 patients for whom peripheral ECLS was the treatment for PCS. Of these, 37 cases (58%) were “acute” (mostly acute myocardial infarction: 39%); 27 (42%) had an exacerbation of “chronic” heart failure (dilated cardiomyopathy: 30%; post-ischemic cardiomyopathy: 9%; and congenital: 3%).ResultsIn the group with chronic etiology, 23 patients were bridged to a left ventricular assist device (52%) or heart transplantation (33%). In the group with acute etiology, ECLS was used as a bridge-to-transplantation in 3 patients (8%), a bridge-to-bridge in 9 (24%), and a bridge-to-recovery in 18 (49%). One patient in each group was bridged to conventional surgery. Recovery of cardiac function was achieved in only the group with acute primary cardiogenic shock (18 vs 0 patients, P = .0001). A mean flow during support of ≤60% of the theoretic flow (body surface area × 2.4) was a predictor of successful weaning (P = .02). Median duration of ECLS support was 7 days (range: 2-11.5 days). Nine patients (14%) died during support; 30-day overall survival was 80% (51 of 64 patients); and 59% of patients were discharged, in whom survival at 48 months was 90%. Thirty-day survival was correlated with duration of ECLS support.ConclusionsIn “chronic” heart failure, ECLS represents a bridge to a ventricular assist device or heart transplantation, whereas in “acute” settings, it offers a considerable chance of recovery, and is often the only required therapy.