TY - JOUR
T1 - Position Statement on Vascular Access Safety for Percutaneous Devices in AMI Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock
AU - Damluji, Abdulla A.
AU - Tehrani, Behnam
AU - Sinha, Shashank S.
AU - Samsky, Marc D.
AU - Henry, Timothy D.
AU - Thiele, Holger
AU - West, Nick E.J.
AU - Senatore, Fortunato F.
AU - Truesdell, Alexander G.
AU - Dangas, George D.
AU - Smilowitz, Nathaniel R.
AU - Amin, Amit P.
AU - deVore, Adam D.
AU - Moazami, Nader
AU - Cigarroa, Joaquin E.
AU - Rao, Sunil V.
AU - Krucoff, Mitchell W.
AU - Morrow, David A.
AU - Gilchrist, Ian C.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 American College of Cardiology Foundation
PY - 2022/10/24
Y1 - 2022/10/24
N2 - In the United States, the frequency of using percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices for acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock is increasing. These devices require large-bore vascular access to provide left, right, or biventricular cardiac support, frequently under urgent/emergent circumstances. Significant technical and logistical variability exists in device insertion, care, and removal in the cardiac catheterization laboratory and in the cardiac intensive care unit. This variability in practice may contribute to adverse outcomes observed in centers that receive patients with cardiogenic shock, who are at higher risk for circulatory insufficiency, venous stasis, bleeding, and arterial hypoperfusion. In this position statement, we aim to: 1) describe the public health impact of bleeding and vascular complications in cardiogenic shock; 2) highlight knowledge gaps for vascular safety and provide a roadmap for a regulatory perspective necessary for advancing the field; 3) propose a minimum core set of process elements, or “vascular safety bundle”; and 4) develop a possible study design for a pragmatic trial platform to evaluate which structured approach to vascular access drives most benefit and prevents vascular and bleeding complications in practice.
AB - In the United States, the frequency of using percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices for acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock is increasing. These devices require large-bore vascular access to provide left, right, or biventricular cardiac support, frequently under urgent/emergent circumstances. Significant technical and logistical variability exists in device insertion, care, and removal in the cardiac catheterization laboratory and in the cardiac intensive care unit. This variability in practice may contribute to adverse outcomes observed in centers that receive patients with cardiogenic shock, who are at higher risk for circulatory insufficiency, venous stasis, bleeding, and arterial hypoperfusion. In this position statement, we aim to: 1) describe the public health impact of bleeding and vascular complications in cardiogenic shock; 2) highlight knowledge gaps for vascular safety and provide a roadmap for a regulatory perspective necessary for advancing the field; 3) propose a minimum core set of process elements, or “vascular safety bundle”; and 4) develop a possible study design for a pragmatic trial platform to evaluate which structured approach to vascular access drives most benefit and prevents vascular and bleeding complications in practice.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85139355529&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85139355529&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jcin.2022.08.041
DO - 10.1016/j.jcin.2022.08.041
M3 - Review article
C2 - 36265932
AN - SCOPUS:85139355529
SN - 1936-8798
VL - 15
SP - 2003
EP - 2019
JO - JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
JF - JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
IS - 20
ER -