Retrospective analysis shows comparable survival after short-term mechanical circulatory support in patients aged 70 or older, suggesting age alone should not preclude therapy.
BACKGROUND: Age over 70 years seems to confer poor prognosis for patients under mechanical circulatory support (MCS). Advanced age is usually a relative contraindication. Our objective was to assess the impact of age on survival of patients with short-term MCS. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of ≥70-year-old patients supported with veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) or Impella CP® due to cardiogenic shock and other situations of hemodynamic instability in a referral hospital (elderly group), compared with younger patients (<70 years). We analyze factors associated with survival in elderly group. RESULTS: Out of 164 short-term MCS implants from 2013 to October 2020, 45 (27.4%) correspond to ≥70-year-old patients (73.3% VA-ECMO; 26.7% Impella CP®), 80% as bridge to recovery and 15.6% for high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We found no significant differences in complications developed between both groups. Survivals at discharge (40% vs. 43.7%, p = 0.403) and at follow-up (median 13.6 [30] months) were similar in elderly and young patients (35.6% vs. 37.8%, log-rank p = 0.061). Predictive factors of mortality in elderly patients were peripheral artery disease (p = 0.037), higher lactate (p = 0.003) and creatinine (p = 0.035) at implant, longer cardiac arrest (p = 0.003), and worse post-implantation left ventricular ejection fraction (p = 0.003). Patients with indication of MCS for high-risk PCI had higher survival compared to other indications (p = 0.013). CONCLUSION: Short-term MCS with VA-ECMO or Impella CP® in elderly patients may be a reasonable option in hemodynamic compromise situations as bridge to recovery or elective high-risk PCI, without a significant increase in complications or mortality. Age should not be an absolute contraindication, but careful selection of candidate patients is necessary.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alonso-Fernández-Gatta et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: