CorrespondenceWe appreciate the comments by Dr Maini regarding our recent article on outcome of percutaneous left-ventricular support with the Impella-2.5 assist device in acute cardiogenic shock.1 In this article, we summarize the results of real-world Impella-2.5 use in Europe outside of randomized trials, where the device is frequently used as last resort option in patients unresponsive to vasopressors, revascularization, and intra-aortic balloon pump support.We agree with Dr Maini in emphasizing the fact that the disappointing data of the EUROSHOCK Registry likely reflects the selection of the most severely ill patients who have failed first-line treatment of cardiogenic shock. The lack of a control group in this registry hampers definite conclusions on efficacy of Impella-2.5 support at this point. However, decrease in plasma lactate after the beginning of Impella support suggests at least partial reversal of hypoperfusion and supports the hemodynamic efficacy of the device. As suggested in the article, earlier institution of support and rapid escalation to more powerful assist devices could be a recommended strategy in patients failing to improve, which, however, is currently rather based on experience than actual data. 1,2 DisclosuresDr Henriques has received an unrestricted research grant from Abiomed Europe GmbH, Aachen, Germany. The other authors report no conflict. Alexander Lauten, MD

Background-Acute cardiogenic shock after myocardial infarction is associated with high in-hospital mortality attributable to persisting low-cardiac output. The Impella-EUROSHOCK-registry evaluates the safety and efficacy of the Impella-2.5-percutaneous left-ventricular assist device in patients with cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction. Methods and Results-This multicenter registry retrospectively included 120 patients (63.6±12.2 years; 81.7% male) with cardiogenic shock from acute myocardial infarction receiving temporary circulatory support with the Impella-2.5-percutaneous left-ventricular assist device. The primary end point evaluated mortality at 30 days. The secondary end point analyzed the change of plasma lactate after the institution of hemodynamic support, and the rate of early major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events as well as long-term survival. Thirty-day mortality was 64.2% in the study population. After Impella-2.5-percutaneous left-ventricular assist device implantation, lactate levels decreased from 5.8±5.0 mmol/L to 4.7±5.4 mmol/L (P=0.28) and 2.5±2.6 mmol/L (P=0.023) at 24 and 48 hours, respectively. Early major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events were reported in 18 (15%) patients. Major bleeding at the vascular access site, hemolysis, and pericardial tamponade occurred in 34 (28.6%), 9 (7.5%), and 2 (1.7%) patients, respectively. The parameters of age >65 and lactate level >3.8 mmol/L at admission were identified as predictors of 30-day mortality. After 317±526 days of follow-up, survival was 28.3%. Conclusions-In patients with acute cardiogenic shock from acute myocardial infarction, Impella 2.5-treatment is feasible and results in a reduction of lactate levels, suggesting improved organ perfusion. However, 30-day mortality remains high in these patients. This likely reflects the last-resort character of Impella-2.5-application in selected patients with a poor hemodynamic profile and a greater imminent risk of death. Carefully conducted randomized controlled trials are necessary to evaluate the efficacy of Impella-2.5-support in this high-risk patient group. (Circ Heart Fail. 2013;6:23-30.)Key Words: cardiogenic shock ■ Impella-2.5-device ■ mechanical circulatory support ■ percutaneous left-ventricular assist device

The objective of this study was to identify and evaluate predictors of postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) in a large coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) cohort. This was a single centre study of 7115 consecutive patients with preoperative sinus rhythm who underwent isolated CABG between January 1996 and December 2009. Independent risk factors for POAF were identified with multiple logistic regression. The predictive quality of the final model was evaluated by comparing predicted and observed events of POAF, in an effort to find patients at high risk of developing POAF. After CABG, 2270 patients (32%) developed POAF during hospital stay. Independent risk factors of POAF included advancing age (odds ratio, OR 2.0-7.3), preoperative S-creatinine ≥ 150 µmol/l (OR 1.6), male gender (OR 1.2), New York Heart Association class III/IV (OR, 1.2), smoking (OR 1.1), prior myocardial infarction (OR 1.1) and absence of hyperlipidemia (OR 0.9). The final prediction model was moderate (area under curve, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.64). Patients with POAF had more postoperative complications, including a higher incidence of stroke and increased length of hospital stay. In conclusion, several risk factors for POAF were identified, but the moderate value of the prediction model confirms the difficulty of identifying patients at high risk of developing POAF after CABG.