Elective or Emergency Use of Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the use of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices in high-risk patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). BACKGROUND: The use of MCS devices in elderly patients with multiple comorbidities undergoing TAVR is underexplored. METHODS: All patients undergoing TAVR at a single tertiary academic center who required MCS during index procedure between 2008 and 2015 were included in a prospective database. RESULTS: MCS was used in 9.4% (54/577) of all TAVRs (n = 52 Edwards Sapien and n = 2 CoreValves) of which 68.5% (n = 37) were used as part of a planned strategy, and 31.5% (n = 17) were used in emergency "bail-out" situations. IABP was the most commonly used device (87%) followed by Impella and ECMO (6% each). Among the MCS group, 22% required cardiopulmonary resuscitation during the procedure (n = 4 elective [11%] vs. n = 8 emergent [47%]) and 15% upgrade to a second device (Impella or CPB after IABP; n = 5 elective [14%] vs. n = 3 emergent [18%]). Median duration of support was 1-day. Device related complications were low (4%). In-hospital mortality in this extremely high-risk population was 24% (13/54) (11% [4/37] for elective cases and 53% [9/17] for emergency cases). Cardiogenic shock (50%) was the most common cause of in-hospital death. Cumulative all-cause 1-year mortality was 35% (19/54) (19% 97/370 for elective and 71% [12/17] for emergency cases). CONCLUSION: Emergent use of MCS during TAVR in extremely high-risk population is associated with high short and long-term mortality rates. Early identification of patients at risk for hemodynamic compromise may rationalize elective utilization of MCS during TAVR.