Intended for healthcare professionals

Impella® heart pumps

For high-risk patients with reduced cardiac function, hemodynamic instability increases the likelihood of serious complications.1,2 Early, timely intervention with Impella, a minimally invasive assist device indicated for high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention and cardiogenic shock in adult  and pediatric (weighing ≥30 kg) patients, can lead to ventricular recovery and improved outcomes.3,4 Impella has the unique ability to increase the systemic blood flow,5-8 supporting end-organs and myocardial recovery.5-9

Evidence

ACC/AHA Upgrades mAFP to Class 2a and Downgrades IABP and VA-ECMO to Class 3

The new Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) guidelines downgrade intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) and venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) to Class 3 due to no shown benefit, while microaxial intravascular flow pumps (mAFP), Impella, is now Class 2a in patients with STEMI and severe or refractory cardiogenic shock.16

Learn more

Innovative solutions

SmartAssist® Technology

SmartAssist Technology is a state-of-the-art integration with the Impella heart pump, designed to improve patient outcomes by using real-time intelligence.

SmartAssist provides greater hemodynamic support and ease of use, new sensor technology for confident positioning, and faster, simplified set-up.

Optical sensor and advanced metrics

  • Pump re-positioning without image guidance*
  • Clear and concise alarms
  • Assist in hemodynamic assessment and successful weaning guidance


* When “Position in Ventricle” alarm is triggered 

Browse products

References

  1. Metkus, T. S., et al. (2022). JACC: Case Reports, 4(3), 115–120.
  2. Maddox, T. M., Januzzi, J. L., et al. (2021). Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 77(6), 772–810.
  3. Ott, S., et al. (2022). Life, 12, 1931.
  4. Saito, S., et al. (2023). Journal of Cardiology. Advance online publication.
  5. Flaherty, M., et al. (2017). Circ Res, 120(4), 692–700.
  6. Rock, J. R., et al. (2022). Single-center first-year experience and outcomes with Impella 5.5 left ventricular assist device. Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery, 17, 24.
  7. Patel, M. R., et al. (2017). Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 69(17), 2212–2241.
  8. Saito, S., et al. (2023). Journal of Cardiology. Advance online publication.
  9. Pieri, M., et al. (2024). International Journal of Cardiology, 396, 131418.
  10. O’Neill, W. W., et al. (2012). A prospective, randomized clinical trial of hemodynamic support with Impella 2.5 versus intra-aortic balloon pump in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: The PROTECT II study. Circulation, 126(14), 1717–1727.
  11. Møller, J., et al. (2025). Long-term outcomes of the DanGer Shock trial. New England Journal of Medicine.
  12. Abraham, J. (2025, February 11–13). Impella 5.5 support for heart failure-related cardiogenic shock and 1-year survival insights from a multi-center registry. Technology and Heart Failure Therapeutics (THT) Conference, Boston, MA.
  13. Kwon, J. H., et al. (2024). Patient characteristics and early clinical outcomes with Impella 5.5: A systematic review and meta-analysis. ASAIO Journal, 70(7), 557–564. 
  14. Fried, J., et al. (2024). Clinical outcomes among cardiogenic shock patients supported with high-capacity Impella axial flow pumps: A report from the Cardiogenic Shock Working Group. The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, 43(9), 1478–1488.
  15. Basir, B., et al. (2019). Improved outcomes associated with the use of shock protocols: Updates from the National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions.
  16. Rao, S. V., et al. (2025). ACC/AHA/ACEP/NAEMSP/SCAI guideline for the management of patients with acute coronary syndromes: A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Journal of the American College of Cardiology.


IMP-6995