HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Author home page(s): Gilles D. Dreyfus Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Dreyfus, G. D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Dreyfus, G. D.

Ann Thorac Surg 1996;61:323-328
© 1996 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons

---

Experience With Devices With Limited Availability

Hemopump 31, the Sternotomy Hemopump: Clinical Experience

Department of Cardio-Vascular Surgery, Hôpital Foch, Paris, France

Abstract

Background. Postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock remains a challenging situation. Many devices can be used although none of them directly unload the left ventricle except for the Hemopump. We report our clinical experience with the Hemopump 31 or sternotomy Hemopump.

Methods. From 1992 to 1994, 15 patients received a Hemopump 31. All suffered postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock either after coronary artery bypass grafting (n = 14) or after heart transplantation (n = 1). Patients enrolled had refractory heart failure despite the use of optimal inotropic support. Three groups can be identified: group 1 (n = 2 patients), double Hemopump right and left; group 2 (n = 4), patients with delayed insertion after intraaortic balloon pump failure; and group 3 (n = 9 patients), immediate insertion. The average support of duration for the survivors was 5 days.

Results. No mechanical failure or device-related complication was noticed. There were striking differences between groups 1 and 2 as opposed to group 3, as only 1 patient survived in group 2 and none in group 1, as opposed to 5 patients in group 3. Overall survival is 40%. All patients were discharged from the hospital.

Conclusions. Factors showing adverse effect are biventricular failure, vasoconstrictor requirement, and delayed insertion. We believe the Hemopump is a more efficient device than the intraaortic balloon pump, and that early use after onset of heart failure achieves better results.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. A. Pitsis, A. N. Visouli, D. Burkhoff, P. Dardas, N. Mezilis, G. Bougioukas, and G. Filippatos Feasibility Study of a Temporary Percutaneous Left Ventricular Assist Device in Cardiac Surgery Ann. Thorac. Surg., December 1, 2007; 84(6): 1993 - 1999. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. J. Jurmann, H. Siniawski, M. Erb, T. Drews, and R. Hetzer Initial experience with miniature axial flow ventricular assist devices for postcardiotomy heart failure Ann. Thorac. Surg., May 1, 2004; 77(5): 1642 - 1647. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. B.Y. Hoy, D. K. Mueller, D. M. Geiss, J. R. Munns, L. M. Bond, C. E. Linett, and R. C. Gomez Bridge to recovery for postcardiotomy failure: is there still a role for centrifugal pumps? Ann. Thorac. Surg., October 1, 2000; 70(4): 1259 - 1263. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. Meyns, P. Sergeant, P. Wouters, F. Casselman, P. Herijgers, W. Daenen, K. Bogaerts, and W. Flameng Mechanical support with microaxial blood pumps for postcardiotomy left ventricular failure: Can outcome be predicted? J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., August 1, 2000; 120(2): 393 - 400. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]