Abstract
Background Impella and intra-aortic balloon pumps (IABP) are commonly utilized in patients with cardiogenic shock. However, the effect on mortality remains controversial. The goal of this study was to evaluate the effect of Impella and IABP on mortality and complications in patients with cardiogenic shock.
Method The large Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database was utilized to study any association between the use of IABP or Impella on mortality and complications in adults with a diagnosis of cardiogenic shocks.
Results ICD-10 codes for Impella, IABP, and cardiogenic shock for available years 2016-2020 were utilized. A total of 844,020 patients had a diagnosis of cardiogenic shock. 101,870 were treated with IABP and 39,645 with an Impella. Total inpatient mortality without any device was 34.2% vs only 25.1% with IABP use (OR=0.65, CI 0.62-0.67) but was highest at 40.7% with Impella utilization (OR=1.32, CI 1.26-1.39). Using multivariate analysis adjusting for 47 variables such as age, gender, race, lactose acidosis, three-vessel intervention, left main myocardial infarction, cardiomyopathy, systolic heart failure, acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction, peripheral vascular disease, chronic renal disease, etc., Impella utilization remained associated with the highest mortality (OR: 1.33, CI 1.25-1.41, p<0.001) whereas IABP remained associated with the lowest mortality (OR: 0.69, CI 0.66-0.72, p<0.001). Separating rural vs teaching hospitals revealed similar findings.
Conclusion In patients with cardiogenic shock, the use of Impella was associated with the highest whereas the utilization of IABP was associated with the lowest in hospital mortality regardless of comorbid condition, high-risk futures, or type of hospital.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Nis publically available data base exempt from IRB
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
The authors report no financial relationships or conflicts of interest regarding the content herein
Data Availability
Data publically available NIS database
