Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) has been used for refractory cardiogenic shock; however, it is associated with increased left ventricular afterload. Outcomes associated with the combination of a percutaneous left ventricular assist device (Impella) and VA-ECMO remains largely unknown. We retrospectively reviewed patients treated for refractory cardiogenic shock with VA-ECMO (2014-2016). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality within 30 days of VA-ECMO implantation. Secondary outcomes included duration of support, stroke, major bleeding, hemolysis, inotropic score, and cardiac recovery. Outcomes were compared between the VA-ECMO cohort and VA-ECMO + Impella (ECPELLA cohort). Sixty-six patients were identified: 30 ECPELLA and 36 VA-ECMO. Fifty-eight percentage of VA-ECMO patients (n = 21) had surgical venting, as compared with 100% of the ECPELLA cohort (n = 30) which had Impella (±surgical vent). Both cohorts demonstrated relatively similar baseline characteristics except for higher incidence of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the ECPELLA cohort. Thirty-day all-cause mortality was significantly lower in the ECPELLA cohort (57% vs. 78%; hazard ratio [HR] 0.51 [0.28-0.94], log rank p = 0.02), and this difference remained intact after correcting for STEMI and PCI. No difference between secondary outcomes was observed, except for the inotrope score which was greater in VA-ECMO group by day 2 (11 vs. 0; p = 0.001). In the largest US-based retrospective study, the addition of Impella to VA-ECMO for patients with refractory cardiogenic shock was associated with lower all-cause 30 day mortality, lower inotrope use, and comparable safety profiles as compared with VA-ECMO alone.
Background
Magnet wireless charging is being utilized increasingly in current generation smartphones. Apple's MagSafe is a proprietary wireless charging technology with an array of magnets that has the capacity to generate magnet fieldstrength >50 gauss (G). We hypothesize that there is clinically significant magnet interference caused by Apple's MagSafe technology on cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED).
Methods and Results
This study has an in vivo and an ex vivo component. The in vivo component consists of consecutive patients who presented to the electrophysiology laboratory with previously implanted CIEDs. The iPhone 12 Pro Max was directly placed on the skin over the pocket of these patients and the effect was studied by device interrogation. For the ex vivo component of the study, CIEDs from major device companies were tested for magnetic interference caused by iPhone 12 Pro Max through unopened packages. We found that iPhone 12 Pro Max resulted in clinically identifiable magnet interference in 3/3 (100%) participants in vivo and in 8/11 (72.7%) devices ex vivo.
Conclusions
Apple's iPhone 12 Pro Max MagSafe technology can cause magnet interference on CIEDs and has the potential to inhibit lifesaving therapy.
Objectives
This study reports on the clinical effects of complete vs incompletely revascularized coronary artery disease on transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).
Background
There is a high prevalence of active coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients undergoing TAVR but preemptive revascularization remains controversial.
Methods
Patients were categorized into three cohorts: complete revascularization (CR), incomplete revascularization of a major epicardial artery (IR Major), and incomplete revascularization of a minor epicardial artery only (IR Minor). When feasible, SYNTAX scoring was performed for exploratory analysis. Analyses were performed using Cox proportional hazard models and Kaplan–Meier method.
Results
A total of 323 patients with active CAD were included. Adjusted outcomes showed that patients with IR Major had increased incidence of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) or revascularization compared with those in the CR cohort (HR 3.72, P = 0.048). No difference was noted in all‐cause mortality or all‐cause readmission rates. Exploratory secondary analysis with residual SYNTAX scores showed a significant interaction between disease burden and AMI/revascularization, as well as all‐cause readmission. All‐cause mortality remained unaffected based on residual SYNTAX scores.
Conclusions
This is a retrospective single‐center study reporting on pre‐TAVR revascularization outcomes in patients with active CAD. In this analysis, we found that patients undergoing TAVR benefited from achieving complete revascularization to abate future incidence of AMI/revascularization. Despite this finding, all‐cause mortality remained unaffected. Future efforts should focus on the role of functional assessment of the coronaries, as well as the long‐term effects of complete revascularization in a larger patient cohort.
Purpose of Review
The risk of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) interference from cell phones was previously thought to be low based on older studies. Current generation of smartphones have incorporated more magnets for optimization of wireless charging, attachment of accessories, and convenience functionalities. These magnets have the potential to cause CIEDs to inadvertently revert into magnet mode. The purpose of this review is to summarize recent findings on smartphones and their accessories causing interference on CIEDs.
Recent Findings
Recent reports have demonstrated that the iPhone 12 series and accessories have the capability to cause CIED magnetic interference.
Summary
Current generation of smartphones, smartwatches, wireless headphones, and accessories have the potential to cause CIEDs to revert into magnet mode in both in vivo and ex vivo experiments. The risk of a clinically significant event is unlikely as long as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommendations are followed; keeping smartphones and accessories at least six inches away from CIEDs.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.