Search

Temporary mechanical circulatory support is increasingly used, particularly in patients with cardiogenic shock or during high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions. In the last five years there have been numerous developments in this field. Experience has been gained from usage of temporary heart pumps, and new pumps have arrived on the market. Until recently, the intra-aortal balloon pump was the standard treatment for patients with cardiogenic shock; however, results from the latest research into the effectiveness of this pump have rendered it less popular. An alternative modality is the Impella system. Since 2012, usage of a heart pump in cardiogenic shock treatment is reimbursed by healthcare insurers in the Netherlands. Recently, the FDA approved the Impella system for said indication

Mechanical circulatory support has become an increasingly important therapeutic option in the field of cardiology, both with regard to treatment of patients in cardiogenic shock and protection against haemodynamic instability during high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) is the current standard treatment for mechanical circulatory support. However, its efficacy seems limited, both in acute and elective settings. The Impella system is a new technique which may be a suitable alternative to IABP treatment. The Impella is a small micro-axial, catheter-mounted cardiac pump, which is inserted through the femoral artery. Safety and efficacy of Impella treatment have been demonstrated during elective high-risk PCI. In the setting of cardiogenic shock, mechanical support with the Impella may lead to partial recovery of left ventricular function, especially when Impella treatment is applied according to a carefully designed pre-specified protocol.

This study was financially supported by the Netherlands Heart Foundation, grant numbers 93-119 and 97-088. Dr. Niessen is a recipient of the Dr. E. Dekker programme of the Netherlands Heart Foundation (D99025).

BACKGROUND: Circulating levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) may constitute an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease. How CRP as a risk factor is involved in cardiovascular disease is still unclear.METHODS AND RESULTS: By reviewing available studies, we discuss explanations for the associations between CRP and cardiovascular disease. CRP levels within the upper quartile/quintile of the normal range constitute an increased risk for cardiovascular events, both in apparently healthy persons and in persons with preexisting angina pectoris. High CRP responses after acute myocardial infarction indicate an unfavorable outcome, even after correction for other risk factors. This link between CRP and cardiovascular disease has been considered to reflect the response of the body to the inflammatory reactions in the atherosclerotic (coronary) vessels and adjacent myocardium. However, because CRP localizes in infarcted myocardium (with colocalization of activated complement), we hypothesize that CRP may directly interact with atherosclerotic vessels or ischemic myocardium by activation of the complement system, thereby promoting inflammation and thrombosis.CONCLUSIONS: CRP constitutes an independent cardiovascular risk factor. Unraveling the molecular background of this association may provide new directions for prevention of cardiovascular events.

BACKGROUND: Circulating levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) may constitute an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease. How CRP as a risk factor is involved in cardiovascular disease is still unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS: By reviewing available studies, we discuss explanations for the associations between CRP and cardiovascular disease. CRP levels within the upper quartile/quintile of the normal range constitute an increased risk for cardiovascular events, both in apparently healthy persons and in persons with preexisting angina pectoris. High CRP responses after acute myocardial infarction indicate an unfavorable outcome, even after correction for other risk factors. This link between CRP and cardiovascular disease has been considered to reflect the response of the body to the inflammatory reactions in the atherosclerotic (coronary) vessels and adjacent myocardium. However, because CRP localizes in infarcted myocardium (with colocalization of activated complement), we hypothesize that CRP may directly interact with atherosclerotic vessels or ischemic myocardium by activation of the complement system, thereby promoting inflammation and thrombosis. CONCLUSIONS: CRP constitutes an independent cardiovascular risk factor. Unraveling the molecular background of this association may provide new directions for prevention of cardiovascular events

The efficacy of flurbiprofen was studied by means of a double-blind randomized clinical trial involving 50 patients with an acute lateral ankle distortion (grade I). It could not be demonstrated that the NSAID shortened the duration of convalescence after this injury. Neither the pain nor the swelling showed a statistically significant decrease. Side effects were more frequent in patients treated with flurbiprofen. In view of these findings use of flurbiprofen in the treatment of acute ankle distortions is to be regarded as inadvisable

Postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock (PCCS) is associated with high mortality rates, despite full conventional treatment. Although the results of treatment with surgically implantable ventricular assist devices have been encouraging, the invasiveness of this treatment limits its applicability. Several less invasive devices have been developed, including the Impella system. The objective of this study was to describe our three-center experience with the Impella 5.0 device in the setting of PCCS. From January 2004 through December 2010, a total of 46 patients were diagnosed with treatment-refractory PCCS and treated with the Impella 5.0 percutaneous left ventricular assist device at three european heart centers. Baseline and follow-up characteristics were collected retrospectively and entered into a dedicated database. Within the study cohort of 46 patients, mean logistic and additive EuroSCORES were 24 ± 19 and 10 ± 4. The majority of patients underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (48%) or combined surgery (33%). Half of all patients had been treated with an intra-aortic balloon pump before 5.0-implantation, 1 patient had been treated with an Impella 2.5 device. All patients were on mechanical ventilation and intravenous inotropes. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of overall 30-day survival was 39.5%. Thirty-day survival rates for patients with PCCS, refractory to aggressive conventional treatment and treated with the Impella 5.0 device, are comparable to those reported in studies evaluating surgically implantable VADs, whereas the Impella system is much less invasive. Therefore, mechanical circulatory support with the Impella 5.0 device is a suitable treatment modality for patients with severe PCCS