{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019583843329253364, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009791921664626682, 'mean_word_length': 5.544, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Removal of Impella® 2.5 while maintaining vascular access: A solution to a vascular quandary

Cardiogenic shock (CS) in the setting of acute myocardial infarction is associated with high in‐hospital mortality rates. Society guidelines provide a Class Ib recommendation for the use of hemodynamic support devices in patients with CS following ST‐elevation myocardial infarction. Exchanging of hemodynamic support devices is often complicated by inability to maintain percutaneous vascular access upon device removal in the setting of anticoagulation. This report highlights one potential solution to the dilemma of maintaining vascular access following removal of an Impella® 2.5 mechanical support device to allow safe transition to a TandemHeart system in a patient with refractory CS. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.