Impella 5.5 use in women: A multicenter study

Impella 5.5 use in women: A multicenter study

Background: We sought to compare the outcomes of Impella 5.5 use between sexes. Methods: All adult patients who underwent Impella 5.5 implantation at the University of Pennsylvania and Columbia University between June 2020 and May 2024 were retrospectively reviewed. Demographics, baseline status, co...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Michaela Asher, MPhil, David Rekhtman, MD, Amit Iyengar, MD, MSE, John DePaolo, MD, PhD, Cindy Song, MD, Iris Feng, MD, Emma Morganroth, BS, Gabriel Dardik, MD, Max Shin, MD, Noah Weingarten, MD, Alyson Brown, BS, Joyce Wald, DO, Mauer Biscotti, MD, Koji Takeda, MD, PhD, Marisa Cevasco, MD, MPH
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2025-08-01
Series:JHLT Open
Subjects:
mechanical circulatory support
heart failure
Impella
transplant
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950133425001363
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background: We sought to compare the outcomes of Impella 5.5 use between sexes. Methods: All adult patients who underwent Impella 5.5 implantation at the University of Pennsylvania and Columbia University between June 2020 and May 2024 were retrospectively reviewed. Demographics, baseline status, complications, and outcomes were compared between sexes. Laboratory values were examined with a linear mixed model, and a parsimonious multivariable logistic regression was developed to assess factors predictive of in-hospital mortality. Results: Of 254 patients, 41 (16%) were female and 213 (84%) were male. Before implant, females had lower hemoglobin levels (9.6 vs 11.2 g/dl, p < 0.05), but similar cardiac risk factors (all p > 0.05). The smaller size of females did not preclude device implantation (height: 1.7 vs 1.8 m; weight: 74.8 vs 88.0 kg, all p < 0.05), and only 1 out of 41 (2.4%) females required direct aortic placement due to prohibitive anatomy. Preimplant mechanical circulatory support, duration of support, and postimplant rates of stroke, infection, and bleeding were similar (all p > 0.05). In addition, laboratory biocompatability markers did not differ between sexes, nor did rates of successful bridging to durable therapies (all p > 0.05). Finally, in-hospital and 1-year mortality were similar (all p > 0.05), and female sex was not identified as a risk factor for in-hospital mortality (odds ratio 0.91, p > 0.05). Conclusions: Females do not experience increased complications from the Impella 5.5, nor reduced device biocompatibility. Our data support greater consideration of device use in females.
ISSN:2950-1334

Similar Items