National Trends for Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support Utilization in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock From Decompensated Chronic Heart Failure: Incidence, Predictors, Outcomes, and Cost

Abstract

BackgroundTrends in temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) use with associated outcomes and cost in cardiogenic shock secondary to decompensated chronic heart failure (HF-CS) remains poorly understood. We describe trends in tMCS use, associated outcomes, and cost in HF-CS. MethodsWe included adults enrolled in a national insurance claims dataset with HF-CS who received intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), Impella, or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) without acute coronary syndrome, or postcardiotomy shock. We identified predictors of device use, associated outcomes, and inflation-adjusted costs. ResultsWe studied 2722 HF-CS patients receiving tMCS: 1799 (66%) male, 1771 (65%) White, and 1836 (67%) with ischemic cardiomyopathy. Rate of tMCS use increased from 2010-2019. Impella use showed the largest increase (Δ+344%), followed by ECMO (Δ+112%). Patients receiving ECMO had a higher comorbidity burden, and patients receiving IABP were more likely to have valvular heart disease. Compared with IABP, 30-day mortality rate was no different for Impella (adjusted odds ratio, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.93-1.66) but was higher with ECMO (adjusted odds ratio, 3.08; 95% CI, 2.22-4.27). Adjusted hospitalization cost was highest for ECMO (median, $191,079 [IQR, $165,760-$239,373]), followed by Impella (median, $142,518 [IQR, $126,845-$179,938]), and IABP (median, $132,060 [IQR, $113,794-$160,244]). We observed a linear association between price standardized cost-quartile and complications, but not for 30-day mortality. ConclusionsThe use of Impella and ECMO is increasing with an associated cost increase. The use of ECMO coincided with higher 30-day mortality compared with IABP in HF-CS. These findings likely reflect increasing disease severity and evolving practice patterns rather than causation.