Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 6, 2025

Utilizing Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Devices in Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock
Published on: June 12, 2021
Impella RP Versus Pharmacologic Vasoactive Treatment in Profound Cardiogenic Shock due to Right Ventricular Failure
Jakob Josiassen1, Ole K L Helgestad2, Nanna L J Udesen2
1Department of Cardiology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark. Jakob.josiassen@regionh.dk.
Abstract:
The aim was to translationally compare a pharmacologic strategy versus treatment with the Impella RP in profound RV cardiogenic shock (CS). The pigs were allocated to either vasoactive therapy with norepinephrine (0.10 μg/kg/min) for the first 30 min, supplemented by an infusion of milrinone (0.4 μg/kg/min) for additional 150 min, or treatment with the Impella RP device for 180 min. Total RV workload (Pressure-volume-area × heart rate*103(mmHg/min)) remained unaffected upon treatment with the Impella RP and increased in the vasoactive group (CS 179[147;228] to norepinephrine 268[247;306](p = 0.002 compared to Impella RP) and norepinephrine + milrinone 366[329;422] (p = 0.002 compared to Impella RP). A trend towards higher venous cerebral oxygen saturation was observed with norepinephrine than Impella RP (Impella RP 51[47;61]% vs norepinephrine 62[57;71]%; p = 0.07), which became significantly higher with the addition of milrinone (Impella RP 45[32;63]% vs norepinephrine + milrinone 73[66;81]%; p = 0.002). The Impella RP unloaded the failing RV. In contrast, vasoactive treatment led to enhanced cerebral venous oxygen saturation.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation IV: Pharmacological Management
Heart Failure VI: Adjunct Therapies
Cardiomyopathy V: Interprofessional Care
Heart Failure V: Medical Management
Cardiomyopathy II: Dilated Cardiomyopathy

