Logo

American Heart Association

  40
  0


Final ID: MP1813

Comparable Outcomes in Direct Impella Use Versus Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump-to-Impella Escalation Strategy in Cardiogenic Shock

Abstract Body (Do not enter title and authors here): Introduction:
Impella and IABP are widely used temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) devices in cardiogenic shock (CS). While Impella can be used as the initial support device or after IABP as an escalation strategy, comparative data on these two strategies remain limited.
Hypothesis:
We hypothesized that in-hospital mortality would be similar between direct Impella use and stepwise escalation from IABP to Impella.
Methods:
Using ICD-10 codes in the 2016–2022 National Inpatient Sample database, we identified patients with a primary diagnosis of CS who received Impella support. Patients were divided into two groups: direct Impella use and escalation from IABP to Impella. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for patient and hospital demographics, comorbidities, and complications. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, with secondary outcomes including length of stay (LOS) and total hospital charges. A sensitivity analysis compared outcomes in patients receiving Impella 5.0/LD/5.5 directly versus after IABP escalation.
Results:
Among 107,007 patients requiring Impella support, 700 patients (0.65%) underwent IABP-to-Impella escalation. Before matching, mortality was similar between groups (39.0% vs. 39.4%, p=0.86), while the direct Impella group had significantly shorter LOS (11.4±13.97 vs 19.28±20.70 days, p<.001) and lower total hospital charges ($441,236 vs $726,021, p<.001). After propensity score matching, these differences persisted: the direct Impella group had shorter LOS (13.17±17.21 vs. 19.22±20.70 days, p<0.001) and lower total charges ($478,526 vs. $725,276, p<0.001) with no significant difference in mortality. Sensitivity analysis of Impella 5.0/LD/5.5 showed similar trends, with shorter LOS (39.01±28.32 vs. 47.16±29.65 days, p) and lower total charges ($1,331,529 vs. $1,661,216, p=.047) in the direct Impella group after matching.
Conclusion:
In this national real-world cohort, direct Impella use and IABP-to-Impella escalation had comparable in-hospital mortality among CS patients. However, direct Impella use was linked to shorter hospital stays and lower total costs, highlighting potential benefits in resource efficiency and utilization.
  • Patel, Aditi  ( Virginia Commonwealth University , Richmond , Virginia , United States )
  • Shah, Keyur  ( Virginia Commonwealth University , Richmond , Virginia , United States )
  • Li, Pengyang  ( Virginia Commonwealth University , Richmond , Virginia , United States )
  • Wahba, Romani  ( Virginia Commonwealth University , Richmond , Virginia , United States )
  • Cai, Peng  ( Worcester Polytechnic Institute , Worcester , Massachusetts , United States )
  • Khalil, Omar  ( Virginia Commonwealth University , Richmond , Virginia , United States )
  • Ghoussaini, Racha  ( Virginia Commonwealth University , Richmond , Virginia , United States )
  • Gabrah, Kirollos  ( Virginia Commonwealth University , Richmond , Virginia , United States )
  • Tchoukina, Inna  ( Virginia Commonwealth University , Richmond , Virginia , United States )
  • Smallfield, Melissa  ( Virginia Commonwealth University , Richmond , Virginia , United States )
  • Kontos, Michael  ( Virginia Commonwealth University , Richmond , Virginia , United States )
  • Author Disclosures:
    Aditi Patel: DO NOT have relevant financial relationships | Keyur Shah: DO have relevant financial relationships ; Consultant:AstraZeneca :Active (exists now) ; Consultant:BridgeBio :Past (completed) | Pengyang Li: No Answer | Romani Wahba: No Answer | Peng Cai: No Answer | Omar Khalil: DO NOT have relevant financial relationships | Racha Ghoussaini: DO NOT have relevant financial relationships | Kirollos gabrah: No Answer | Inna Tchoukina: DO NOT have relevant financial relationships | Melissa Smallfield: No Answer | Michael Kontos: DO NOT have relevant financial relationships
Meeting Info:

Scientific Sessions 2025

2025

New Orleans, Louisiana

Session Info:

It's Shocking: Cardiogenic Shock Research

Sunday, 11/09/2025 , 11:50AM - 01:05PM

Moderated Digital Poster Session

More abstracts on this topic:
Adverse Events and Outcomes Among Patients with Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices Placed at Referring Versus Hub Cardiogenic Shock Centers

Patel Zachary, Silkowski Molly, Dodson Kaylen, Bull Lindsey, Gregoski Mathew, Tedford Ryan, Mcmurray Jeffrey, Witer Lucas, Kilic Arman, Houston Brian, Carnicelli Anthony, Ospina Meg, Mittelstaedt Roxanne, Peller Jacob, Samani Stephanie, Marchell Charlotte, Ohlrich Kelly, Gunn Brady, Varrone Michael

A Novel Classification of Heart Failure Derived from the Nationwide JROADHF Cohort Using Unsupervised Machine Learning

Kyodo Atsushi, Tsutsui Hiroyuki, Hikoso Shungo, Nakada Yasuki, Nogi Kazutaka, Ishihara Satomi, Ueda Tomoya, Tohyama Takeshi, Enzan Nobuyuki, Matsushima Shouji, Ide Tomomi

More abstracts from these authors:
Phenotypic Evolution of Early to Late Cardiac Amyloidosis with Serial Cardiac Magnetic Resonance

Kamani Yash, Li Pengyang, Shah Keyur, Trankle Cory

Comparative Outcomes of Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump Versus Impella in Non-Myocardial Infarction Cardiogenic Shock: A National Inpatient Sample Database Analysis

Khalil Omar, White Amirah, Liu Qi, Kontos Michael, Shah Keyur, Li Pengyang, Saed Aldien Arwa, Patel Aditi, Cai Peng, Krayem Hussein, Ghoussaini Racha, Roberts Charlotte, Rao Krishnasree, Cooke Richard

You have to be authorized to contact abstract author. Please, Login
Not Available