Key result
Impella support during elective high-risk PCI was associated with a lower incidence of major adverse kidney events at 90 days compared to intra-aortic balloon pump support.
Why the study?
Percutaneous coronary intervention is associated with kidney injury despite cardiac benefits, and previous smaller studies suggested nephroprotective effects of Impella during PCI.
Does Impella reduce major adverse kidney events in patients undergoing elective high-risk PCI compared to intra-aortic balloon pump support?
Cohort (n=4,666)
Yes
Does Impella reduce major adverse kidney events in patients undergoing elective high-risk PCI compared to intra-aortic balloon pump support?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In patients undergoing elective high-risk PCI, Impella support is associated with a lower 90-day risk of major adverse kidney events compared to IABP support, without increasing bleeding or stroke risk.
Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with kidney injury despite long-term cardiac benefits. Previous smaller studies suggested nephroprotective effects of Impella during PCI. This study aimed to compare renal outcomes of high-risk PCI with Impella vs intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) support.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zweck et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Elective high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (n=4,666). Impella vs. Intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) was evaluated on Major adverse kidney events (MAKE, composite of all-cause mortality, renal replacement therapy, and acute kidney injury) at 90 days (p=<0.001). Impella support during elective high-risk PCI was associated with a lower incidence of major adverse kidney events at 90 days compared to intra-aortic balloon pump support.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: