• M Kitamura, K Kodera, T Katsumata, S Aomi, M Hachida, H Nishida, M Endo, A Hashimoto, and H Koyanagi.
• Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Heart Institute of Japan, Tokyo Women's Medical College, Japan.
• J Cardiovasc Surg. 1995 Feb 1; 36 (1): 71-4.

AbstractThe purpose of this study is to assess the current strategy of mechanical circulatory support for profound heart failure. In the last 10 years, 37 patients with profound heart failure underwent mechanical circulatory support after open heart surgery and 9 patients with non-cardiotomy cardiogenic shock received emergency circulatory support. All patients showed severe cardiac failure and/or fatal ventricular arrhythmia and required circulatory support as a life-saving measure. After cardiovascular surgery, 12 of those patients underwent venoarterial bypass (VAB), 13 had biventricular bypass (BVB), 8 had left ventricular bypass (LVB) and the remaining 4 patients received left ventricular assist device (LVAD). And 9 patients with non-cardiotomy cardiogenic shock received percutaneous cardiopulmonary support (or PCPS) as an emergency assist system. Weaning and discharge rates of the patients by the type of circulatory supports were 41.7% and 25.0% with VAB, 69.3% and 46.2% with BVB, 87.5% and 37.5% with LVB, 75.0% and 50.0% with LVAD, and 44.4% and 11.1% with PCPS, respectively. Clinical results of post-cardiotomy circulatory support (64.9% of weaning and 37.8% of discharge) were acceptable, but the patients with non-cardiotomy cardiac failure needed early application of more advanced circulatory support.

24 keywords...

hide…