RESUMEN
While notable improvements in survival, the incidence of hemocompatibility-related adverse events, hospitalizations, and cost have been demonstrated with the only commercially available durable left ventricular assist device, a category of pump malfunctions characterized by outflow graft obstruction has been noted with broader use and clinical follow-up of recipients of this technology. Of particular concern is the accumulation of acellular biodebris between the outflow graft and bend relief covering the outflow graft at its origin with the pump (which we term extrinsic outflow graft obstruction at the bend relief). This process tends to be insidious, occurs late in the postoperative course, can be challenging to diagnose, and can result in significant morbidity and mortality. Herein, we provide a review of this complication and outline diagnostic, treatment, and preventive strategies.
RESUMEN
Orthotopic heart transplant is the gold standard therapeutic intervention for patients with end-stage heart failure. Conventionally, heart transplant has relied on donation after brain death for organ recovery. Donation after circulatory death (DCD) is the donation of the heart after confirming that circulatory function has irreversibly ceased. DCD-orthotopic heart transplant differs from donation after brain death-orthotopic heart transplant in ways that carry implications for widespread adoption, including differences in organ recovery, storage and ethical considerations surrounding normothermic regional perfusion with DCD. Despite these differences, DCD has shown promising early outcomes, augmenting the donor pool and allowing more individuals to benefit from orthotopic heart transplant. This review aims to present the current state and future trajectory of DCD-heart transplant, examine key differences between DCD and donation after brain death, including clinical experiences and innovations in methodologies, and address the ongoing ethical challenges surrounding the new frontier in heart transplant with DCD donors.
Asunto(s)
Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Trasplante de Corazón , Donantes de Tejidos , Obtención de Tejidos y Órganos , Humanos , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/cirugía , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/fisiopatología , Obtención de Tejidos y Órganos/ética , Muerte Encefálica , Preservación de Órganos/métodosRESUMEN
Primary graft dysfunction (PGD) after cardiac transplantation is a devastating complication with increasing frequency lately in the setting of donation after circulatory death (DCD). Severe PGD is commonly treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) using central or peripheral cannulation. We retrospectively reviewed the outcomes of PGD after cardiac transplantation requiring ECMO support at our center from 2015 to 2020, focused on our now preferential approach using peripheral cannulation without a priori venting. During the study period, 255 patients underwent heart transplantation at our center and 26 (10.2%) of them required ECMO for PGD. Of 24 patients cannulated peripherally 19 (79%) were alive at 30 days and 17 (71%) 1 year after transplant; two additional patients underwent central ECMO cannulation due to unfavorable size of femoral vessels and concern for limb ischemia. Successful decannulation with full graft function recovery occurred in 22 of 24 (92%) patients cannulated peripherally. Six of them had an indwelling intra-aortic balloon pump placed before the transplantation. None of the other 18 patients received a ventricular vent. In conclusion, the use of an a priori peripheral and ventless ECMO approach in patients with PGD after heart transplant is an effective strategy associated with high rates of graft recovery and survival.
Asunto(s)
Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea , Trasplante de Corazón , Disfunción Primaria del Injerto , Humanos , Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea/efectos adversos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Disfunción Primaria del Injerto/etiología , Disfunción Primaria del Injerto/terapia , Trasplante de Corazón/efectos adversos , Contrapulsador Intraaórtico/efectos adversosRESUMEN
IMPORTANCE: Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) enhance quality and duration of life in advanced heart failure. The burden of nonsurgical bleeding events is a leading morbidity. Aspirin as an antiplatelet agent is mandated along with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) with continuous-flow LVADs without conclusive evidence of efficacy and safety. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether excluding aspirin as part of the antithrombotic regimen with a fully magnetically levitated LVAD is safe and decreases bleeding. DESIGN, SETTING, and PARTICIPANTS: This international, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of aspirin (100 mg/d) vs placebo with VKA therapy in patients with advanced heart failure with an LVAD was conducted across 51 centers with expertise in treating patients with advanced heart failure across 9 countries. The randomized population included 628 patients with advanced heart failure implanted with a fully magnetically levitated LVAD (314 in the placebo group and 314 in the aspirin group), of whom 296 patients in the placebo group and 293 in the aspirin group were in the primary analysis population, which informed the primary end point analysis. The study enrolled patients from July 2020 to September 2022; median follow-up was 14 months. Intervention: Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive aspirin (100 mg/d) or placebo in addition to an antithrombotic regimen. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The composite primary end point, assessed for noninferiority (-10% margin) of placebo, was survival free of a major nonsurgical (>14 days after implant) hemocompatibility-related adverse events (including stroke, pump thrombosis, major bleeding, or arterial peripheral thromboembolism) at 12 months. The principal secondary end point was nonsurgical bleeding events. RESULTS: Of the 589 analyzed patients, 77% were men; one-third were Black and 61% were White. More patients were alive and free of hemocompatibility events at 12 months in the placebo group (74%) vs those taking aspirin (68%). Noninferiority of placebo was demonstrated (absolute between-group difference, 6.0% improvement in event-free survival with placebo [lower 1-sided 97.5% CI, -1.6%]; P < .001). Aspirin avoidance was associated with reduced nonsurgical bleeding events (relative risk, 0.66 [95% confidence limit, 0.51-0.85]; P = .002) with no increase in stroke or other thromboembolic events, a finding consistent among diverse subgroups of patient characteristics. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In patients with advanced heart failure treated with a fully magnetically levitated LVAD, avoidance of aspirin as part of an antithrombotic regimen, which includes VKA, is not inferior to a regimen containing aspirin, does not increase thromboembolism risk, and is associated with a reduction in bleeding events. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04069156.
Asunto(s)
Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Corazón Auxiliar , Accidente Cerebrovascular , Tromboembolia , Masculino , Humanos , Femenino , Aspirina/efectos adversos , Corazón Auxiliar/efectos adversos , Fibrinolíticos/efectos adversos , Método Doble Ciego , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/fisiopatología , Accidente Cerebrovascular/etiología , Accidente Cerebrovascular/prevención & control , Accidente Cerebrovascular/tratamiento farmacológico , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria/efectos adversos , Hemorragia/etiología , Tromboembolia/etiología , Tromboembolia/prevención & controlRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In advanced heart failure patients implanted with a fully magnetically levitated HeartMate 3 (HM3, Abbott) left ventricular assist device (LVAD), it is unknown how preimplant factors and postimplant index hospitalization events influence 5-year mortality in those able to be discharged. OBJECTIVES: The goal was to identify risk predictors of mortality through 5 years among HM3 LVAD recipients conditional on discharge from index hospitalization in the MOMENTUM 3 pivotal trial. METHODS: This analysis evaluated 485 of 515 (94%) patients discharged after implantation of the HM3 LVAD. Preimplant (baseline), implant surgery, and index hospitalization characteristics were analyzed individually, and as multivariable predictors for mortality risk through 5 years. RESULTS: Cumulative 5-year mortality in the cohort (median age: 62 years, 80% male, 65% White, 61% destination therapy due to transplant ineligibility) was 38%. Two preimplant characteristics (elevated blood urea nitrogen and prior coronary artery bypass graft or valve procedure) and 3 postimplant characteristics (hemocompatibility-related adverse events, ventricular arrhythmias, and estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 at discharge) were predictors of 5-year mortality. In 171 of 485 patients (35.3%) without any risk predictors, 5-year mortality was reduced to 22.6% (95% CI: 15.4%-32.7%). Even among those with 1 or more predictors, mortality was <50% at 5 years (45.7% [95% CI: 39.0%-52.8%]). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term survival in successfully discharged HM3 LVAD recipients is largely influenced by clinical events experienced during the index surgical hospitalization in tandem with baseline factors, with mortality of <50% at 5 years. In patients without identified predictors of risk, long-term 5-year mortality is low and rivals that achieved with heart transplantation, even though most were implanted with destination therapy intent. (MOMENTUM 3 IDE Clinical Study Protocol, NCT02224755; MOMENTUM 3 Pivotal Cohort Extended Follow-up PAS, NCT03982979).
Asunto(s)
Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Corazón Auxiliar , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Puente de Arteria Coronaria , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/terapia , Hospitalización , Alta del PacienteRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Data showing the efficacy and safety of the transplantation of hearts obtained from donors after circulatory death as compared with hearts obtained from donors after brain death are limited. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, noninferiority trial in which adult candidates for heart transplantation were assigned in a 3:1 ratio to receive a heart after the circulatory death of the donor or a heart from a donor after brain death if that heart was available first (circulatory-death group) or to receive only a heart that had been preserved with the use of traditional cold storage after the brain death of the donor (brain-death group). The primary end point was the risk-adjusted survival at 6 months in the as-treated circulatory-death group as compared with the brain-death group. The primary safety end point was serious adverse events associated with the heart graft at 30 days after transplantation. RESULTS: A total of 180 patients underwent transplantation; 90 (assigned to the circulatory-death group) received a heart donated after circulatory death and 90 (regardless of group assignment) received a heart donated after brain death. A total of 166 transplant recipients were included in the as-treated primary analysis (80 who received a heart from a circulatory-death donor and 86 who received a heart from a brain-death donor). The risk-adjusted 6-month survival in the as-treated population was 94% (95% confidence interval [CI], 88 to 99) among recipients of a heart from a circulatory-death donor, as compared with 90% (95% CI, 84 to 97) among recipients of a heart from a brain-death donor (least-squares mean difference, -3 percentage points; 90% CI, -10 to 3; P<0.001 for noninferiority [margin, 20 percentage points]). There were no substantial between-group differences in the mean per-patient number of serious adverse events associated with the heart graft at 30 days after transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, risk-adjusted survival at 6 months after transplantation with a donor heart that had been reanimated and assessed with the use of extracorporeal nonischemic perfusion after circulatory death was not inferior to that after standard-care transplantation with a donor heart that had been preserved with the use of cold storage after brain death. (Funded by TransMedics; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03831048.).
Asunto(s)
Muerte Encefálica , Trasplante de Corazón , Obtención de Tejidos y Órganos , Adulto , Humanos , Supervivencia de Injerto , Preservación de Órganos , Donantes de Tejidos , Muerte , Seguridad del PacienteRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data on heart transplantation (HT) using COVID-19 donors. OBJECTIVES: This study investigated COVID-19 donor use, donor and recipient characteristics, and early post-HT outcomes. METHODS: Between May 2020 and June 2022, study investigators identified 27,862 donors in the United Network for Organ Sharing, with 60,699 COVID-19 nucleic acid amplification testing (NAT) performed before procurement and with available organ disposition. Donors were considered "COVID-19 donors" if they were NAT positive at any time during terminal hospitalization. These donors were subclassified as "active COVID-19" (aCOV) donors if they were NAT positive within 2 days of organ procurement, or "recently resolved COVID-19" (rrCOV) donors if they were NAT positive initially but became NAT negative before procurement. Donors with NAT-positive status >2 days before procurement were considered aCOV unless there was evidence of a subsequent NAT-negative result ≥48 hours after the last NAT-positive result. HT outcomes were compared. RESULTS: During the study period, 1,445 "COVID-19 donors" (COVID-19 NAT positive) were identified; 1,017 of these were aCOV, and 428 were rrCOV. Overall, 309 HTs used COVID-19 donors, and 239 adult HTs from COVID-19 donors (150 aCOV, 89 rrCOV) met study criteria. Compared with non-COV, COVID-19 donors used for adult HT were younger and mostly male (â¼80%). Compared with HTs from non-COV donors, recipients of HTs from aCOV donors had increased mortality at 6 months (Cox HR: 1.74; 95% CI: 1.02-2.96; P = 0.043) and 1 year (Cox HR: 1.98; 95% CI: 1.22-3.22; P = 0.006). Recipients of HTs from rrCOV and non-COV donors had similar 6-month and 1-year mortality. Results were similar in propensity-matched cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: In this early analysis, although HTs from aCOV donors had increased mortality at 6 months and 1 year, HTs from rrCOV donors had survival similar to that seen in recipients of HTs from non-COV donors. Continued evaluation and a more nuanced approach to this donor pool are needed.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Trasplante de Corazón , Obtención de Tejidos y Órganos , Adulto , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Donantes de TejidosRESUMEN
Cystic tumors of the atrioventricular node are rare primary cardiac neoplasms, frequently reported as a postmortem diagnosis during autopsy. Despite their small size, they can present with complete heart block or sudden cardiac death. Herein, we present a case of rapidly progressing high-grade atrioventricular block that improved after surgery. (Level of Difficulty: Intermediate.).
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Clinical trials inform on average efficacy, but individualized risk assessments for outcome prediction are important in guiding treatment implementation. OBJECTIVES: The authors developed and validated a patient-specific risk score to predict survival at 1 and 2 years after HeartMate 3 (HM3) left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. METHODS: The MOMENTUM 3 (Multicenter Study of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy with HeartMate 3) trial includes 2,200 HM3 LVAD patients in the pivotal trial and Continued Access Protocol study (2014-2018). The authors randomly assigned all patients to a derivation cohort (n = 1,540) or validation cohort (n = 660). Univariate mortality predictors were screened for potential model inclusion, stepwise selection was used to build the multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model, and performance (discrimination and calibration) was evaluated. RESULTS: Age, prior cardiac surgery (coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG] or valve procedure), lower serum sodium, higher blood urea nitrogen (BUN), small left ventricular size, and right atrial pressure-to-pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (RAP/PCWP) ratio >0.6 were significant risk factors for mortality. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis in the validation cohort demonstrated an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.76 (95% CI: 0.70-0.81) at 1 year and 0.71 (95% CI: 0.66-0.77) at 2 years. Calibration between predicted and observed survival of the risk quintiles was high, with Pearson correlation coefficients of 0.986 and 0.994 at 1 and 2 years, respectively. Patients were successfully stratified into tertiles with higher-than-average, average, and lower-than-average survival, and observed mortality risk increased by 2-fold from one tertile to the next. CONCLUSIONS: A practical, easy-to-use HM3 Survival Risk Score with 6 components was developed to accurately predict 1- and 2-year survival after HM3 LVAD implantation. The survival risk score can be used to provide individual survival estimates to facilitate shared decision making when considering HM3 LVAD therapy. (MOMENTUM 3 Trial Portfolio; NCT02224755, NCT02892955).
Asunto(s)
Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Corazón Auxiliar , Humanos , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/terapia , Factores de Riesgo , Presión Esfenoidal Pulmonar , Medición de RiesgoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The HeartMate 3 (HM 3; Abbott) left ventricular assist device (LVAD) has improved hemocompatibility-related adverse outcomes. In sporadic cases, external compression of the outflow graft causing obstruction (eOGO) can result from substance accumulation between the outflow graft and its bend relief. We sought to evaluate the prevalence, course, and clinical implications of eOGO in an international study. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective analysis of HM 3 LVADs implanted between November 2014 and April 2021 (n = 2108) was conducted across 17 cardiac centers in 8 countries. We defined eOGO as obstruction >25% in the cross-sectional area in imaging (percutaneous angiography, computed tomography, or intravascular ultrasound). The prevalence and annual incidence were calculated. Serious adverse events and outcomes (death, transplantation, or device exchange) were analyzed for eOGO cases. RESULTS: Of 2108 patients, 62 were diagnosed with eOGO at a median LVAD support duration of 953 (interquartile range, 600-1267) days. The prevalence of eOGO was 3.0% and the incidence at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 years of support was 0.6%, 2.8%, 4.0%, 5.2%, and 9.1%, respectively. Of 62 patients, 9 were observed, 27 underwent surgical revision, 15 underwent percutaneous stent implantation, 8 received a heart transplant, and 2 died before intervention. One patient underwent surgical revision and later stent implantation. The mortality with therapeutic intervention was 9/53 (17.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Although uncommon, HM 3 LVAD-supported patients might develop eOGO with an increasing incidence after 1 year of support. Although engineering efforts to reduce this complication are under way, clinicians must maintain a focus on early detection and remain vigilant.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Diffuse intimal hyperplasia and graft irregularity adversely affect the long-term patency of saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) and clinical outcomes of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The VEST trial evaluated the efficacy of external graft support in limiting the development of intimal hyperplasia (IH) at 1 year postsurgery. In the present secondary analysis, we explored the associations between graft disease and IH and clinical events. We also examined risk factors for early graft occlusion. METHODS: VEST is a within-patient randomized, multicenter trial that enrolled 224 patients with multivessel coronary disease undergoing CABG surgery, of whom 203 were evaluated by 1 year postsurgery. Intimal hyperplasia, lumen uniformity, graft stenosis, and graft perfusion were measured by intravascular ultrasound and angiography. Major cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE; including death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and revascularization) were recorded over a median follow-up of 3 years. RESULTS: Worse lumen uniformity, greater stenosis, and worse graft perfusion were associated with higher IH values and an increased incidence of clinical events. Consistent with previous findings, we identified endoscopic vein harvesting, female sex, and transit time flow measurement of pulsatility index and flow as risk factors for SVG occlusion during the first year postsurgery. CONCLUSIONS: In this secondary analysis of the VEST trial, we observed an association between intimal hyperplasia area and clinical measures of SVG disease at 1 year postsurgery. More severe SVG disease and larger areas of IH were associated with a higher incidence of 3-year MACCE. Ongoing follow-up to 5 years will further elucidate the impact of SVG disease on long-term clinical outcomes of CABG.
RESUMEN
Importance: Although durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) therapy has emerged as an important treatment option for patients with advanced heart failure refractory to pharmacological support, outcomes, including survival, beyond 2 years remain poorly characterized. Objective: To report the composite end point of survival to transplant, recovery, or LVAD support free of debilitating stroke (Modified Rankin Scale score >3) or reoperation to replace the pump 5 years after the implant in participants who received the fully magnetically levitated centrifugal-flow HeartMate 3 or axial-flow HeartMate II LVAD in the MOMENTUM 3 randomized trial and were still receiving LVAD therapy at the 2-year follow-up. Design, Setting, and Participants: This observational study was a 5-year follow-up of the MOMENTUM 3 trial, conducted in 69 US centers, that demonstrated superiority of the centrifugal-flow LVAD to the axial-flow pump with respect to survival to transplant, recovery, or LVAD support free of debilitating stroke or reoperation to replace the pump at 2 years. A total of 295 patients were enrolled between June 2019 to April 2021 in the extended-phase study, with 5-year follow-up completed in September 2021. Exposures: Of 1020 patients in the investigational device exemption per-protocol population, 536 were still receiving LVAD support at 2 years, of whom 289 received the centrifugal-flow pump and 247 received the axial-flow pump. Main Outcomes and Measures: There were 10 end points evaluated at 5 years in the per-protocol population, including a composite of survival to transplant, recovery, or LVAD support free of debilitating stroke or reoperation to replace the pump between the centrifugal-flow and axial-flow pump groups and overall survival between the 2 groups. Results: A total of 477 patients (295 enrolled and 182 provided limited data) of 536 patients still receiving LVAD support at 2 years contributed to the extended-phase analysis (median age, 62 y; 86 [18%] women). The 5-year Kaplan-Meier estimate of survival to transplant, recovery, or LVAD support free of debilitating stroke or reoperation to replace the pump in the centrifugal-flow vs axial-flow group was 54.0% vs 29.7% (hazard ratio, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.45-0.67]; P < .001). Overall Kaplan-Meier survival was 58.4% in the centrifugal-flow group vs 43.7% in the axial-flow group (hazard ratio, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.58-0.89]; P = .003). Serious adverse events of stroke, bleeding, and pump thrombosis were less frequent in the centrifugal-flow pump group. Conclusions and Relevance: In this observational follow-up study of patients from the MOMENTUM 3 randomized trial, per-protocol analyses found that receipt of a fully magnetically levitated centrifugal-flow LVAD vs axial-flow LVAD was associated with a better composite outcome and higher likelihood of overall survival at 5 years. These findings support the use of the fully magnetically levitated LVAD. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02224755 and NCT03982979.
Asunto(s)
Insuficiencia Cardíaca/cirugía , Corazón Auxiliar , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Corazón Auxiliar/efectos adversos , Humanos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Accidente Cerebrovascular/etiología , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In the MOMENTUM 3 (Multicenter Study of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy with HeartMate 3) pivotal trial, the HeartMate 3 (HM3) fully magnetically levitated left ventricular assist device (LVAD) demonstrated superiority over the axial-flow HeartMate II (HMII) LVAD. The patterns and predictors of hospitalizations with the HM3 LVAD have not been characterized. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine causes, predictors, and impact of hospitalizations during LVAD support. METHODS: Patients discharged after LVAD implantation were analyzed. In the pivotal trial, 485 recipients of HM3 were compared with 471 recipients of HMII. The pivotal trial HM3 group was also compared to 949 recipients of HM3 in the postapproval phase within the trial portfolio. Predictors of cause-specific rehospitalization were analyzed. RESULTS: The rates of rehospitalization were lower with HM3 LVAD than with HMII LVAD in the pivotal trial (225.7 vs 246.4 events per 100 patient-years; P < 0.05). Overall, rehospitalization rates and duration were similar in the HM3 postapproval phase and pivotal trial but prolonged hospitalizations (>7 days) were less frequent (rate ratio: 0.90 [95% CI: 0.80-0.98]; P < 0.05). In HM3 recipients, the most frequent causes of rehospitalization included infection, heart failure (HF)-related events, and bleeding. First rehospitalization caused by HF-related event versus other causes was associated with reduced survival (HR: 2.2 [95% CI: 1.3-3.9]; P = 0.0014). Male sex, non-White race, presence of cardiac resynchronization therapy/implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, obesity, higher right atrial pressure, smaller LV size, longer duration of index hospitalization, and lower estimated glomerular filtration rate at index discharge predicted HF hospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS: Contemporary support with the HM3 fully magnetically levitated LVAD is associated with a lower hospitalization burden than with prior pumps; however, rehospitalizations for infection, HF, and bleeding remain important challenges for progress in the patient journey. (MOMENTUM 3 IDE Clinical Study, NCT02224755; MOMENTUM 3 Continued Access Protocol [MOMENTUM 3 CAP], NCT02892955).
Asunto(s)
Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Corazón Auxiliar , Corazón Auxiliar/efectos adversos , Hospitalización , Humanos , Masculino , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Importance: Intimal hyperplasia and subsequent saphenous vein graft failure may have significant adverse clinical effects in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery. External support of saphenous vein grafts has the potential to prevent vein graft dilation and hence slow the rate of intimal hyperplasia and increase long-term vein patency. Objective: To determine efficacy, as measured by intimal hyperplasia, and safety of an external saphenous vein graft support device in patients undergoing a coronary bypass graft procedure. Design, Setting, and Participants: This within-patient randomized, open-label, multicenter study was conducted at 17 Cardiothoracic Surgical Trials Network centers in North America. Between January 2018 and February 2019, 224 patients with multivessel coronary artery disease undergoing isolated bypass surgery were enrolled. For each patient, 1 of 2 vein grafts was randomized to receive external support or no support. Interventions: External vein graft support or no support. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary efficacy end point was intimal hyperplasia area assessed by intravascular ultrasound at 12 months postrandomization for each study graft. Secondary confirmatory end points were lumen diameter uniformity assessed by angiography and graft failure (≥50% stenosis) by quantitative coronary angiography. Major cardiac and cerebrovascular events were collected through month 12. Results: Among 224 patients (mean [SD] age, 65.8 [8.3] years; 178 [79.5%] male), 203 (90.6%) were eligible for intravascular ultrasound, of which 85 (41.9%) had at least 1 study graft occluded or severely diseased at 12 months (55 supported, 56 unsupported). After imputation of data missing because of graft occlusion or severe disease, the estimated mean (SE) intimal hyperplasia area was 5.11 (0.16) mm2 in supported grafts and 5.79 (0.20) mm2 in unsupported grafts (P = .07). In a sensitivity analysis of 113 patients with both grafts imaged, the mean intimal hyperplasia area was 4.58 (0.18) mm2 and 5.12 (0.23) mm2 in supported and unsupported grafts, respectively (P = .04). By 12 months, 5 patients (2.2%) died and 16 patients (7.1%) experienced a major cardiac or cerebrovascular event. Conclusions and Relevance: The 12-month difference in intimal hyperplasia area between supported and unsupported grafts did not achieve statistical significance. Cumulative mortality and major cardiac or cerebrovascular events rates were similar to those in other randomized coronary artery bypass trials. Further investigation to assess the effect of external graft support devices on long-term graft patency and clinical outcomes is warranted. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03209609.
Asunto(s)
Oclusión de Injerto Vascular , Vena Safena , Anciano , Puente de Arteria Coronaria/métodos , Femenino , Oclusión de Injerto Vascular/etiología , Oclusión de Injerto Vascular/patología , Oclusión de Injerto Vascular/prevención & control , Humanos , Hiperplasia/etiología , Hiperplasia/patología , Masculino , Vena Safena/trasplante , Grado de Desobstrucción VascularRESUMEN
Anticoagulation during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for Coronovirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) can be performed by direct or indirect thrombin inhibitors but differences in outcomes with these agents are uncertain. A retrospective, multicenter study was conducted. All consecutive adult patients with COVID-19 placed on ECMO between March 1, 2020 and April 30, 2021 in participating centers, were included. Patients were divided in groups receiving either a direct thrombin inhibitor (DTI) or an indirect thrombin inhibitor such as unfractionated heparin (UFH). Overall, 455 patients with COVID-19 from 17 centers were placed on ECMO during the study period. Forty-four patients did not receive anticoagulation. Of the remaining 411 patients, DTI was used in 160 (39%) whereas 251 (61%) received UFH. At 90-days, in-hospital mortality was 50% (DTI) and 61% (UFH), adjusted hazard ratio: 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.49-1.32. Deep vein thrombosis [adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 2.60, 95% CI: 0.90-6.65], ischemic (aOR: 1.58, 95% CI: 0.18-14.0), and hemorrhagic (aOR:1.22, 95% CI: 0.39-3.87) stroke were similar with DTI in comparison to UFH. Bleeding requiring transfusion was lower in patients receiving DTI (aOR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.18-0.87). Anticoagulants that directly inhibit thrombin are associated with similar in-hospital mortality, stroke, and venous thrombosis and do not confer a higher risk of clinical bleeding in comparison to conventional heparin during ECMO for COVID-19.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea , Accidente Cerebrovascular , Adulto , Humanos , Heparina/uso terapéutico , Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea/efectos adversos , Trombina , Estudios Retrospectivos , COVID-19/terapia , Anticoagulantes/uso terapéutico , Hemorragia/etiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: As left ventricular assist device (LVAD) survival rates continue to improve, evaluating site-specific variability in outcomes can facilitate identifying targets for quality-improvement initiative opportunities in the field. METHODS: Deidentified center-specific outcomes were analyzed for HeartMate 3 (HM3) patients enrolled in the MOMENTUM 3 pivotal and continued access protocol trials. Centers < 25th percentile for HM3 volumes were excluded. Variability in risk-adjusted center mortality was assessed at 90 days and 2 years (conditional upon 90-day survival). Adverse event (AE) rates were compared across centers. RESULTS: In the 48 included centers (1958 patients), study-implant volumes ranged between 17 and 106 HM3s. Despite similar trial-inclusion criteria, patient demographics varied across sites, including age quartile ((Q)1-Q3:57-62 years), sex (73%-85% male), destination therapy intent (60%-84%), and INTERMACS profile 1-2 (16%-48%). Center mortality was highly variable, nadiring at ≤ 3.6% (≤ 25th percentile) and peaking at ≥ 10.4% (≥ 75th percentile) at 90 days and ≤ 10.2% and ≥ 18.7%, respectively, at 2 years. Centers with low mortality rates tended to have lower 2-year AE rates, but no center was a top performer for all AEs studied. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality and AEs were highly variable across MOMENTUM 3 centers. Studies are needed to improve our understanding of the drivers of outcome variability and to ascertain best practices associated with high-performing centers across the continuum of intraoperative to chronic stages of LVAD support.
Asunto(s)
Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Corazón Auxiliar , Femenino , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/cirugía , Corazón Auxiliar/efectos adversos , Humanos , Masculino , Tasa de Supervivencia , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Outcomes in patients with smaller body size after HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device (HM3) implantation are not well characterized. We sought to evaluate outcomes in smaller vs larger body surface area (BSA) patients in the MOMENTUM 3 pivotal trial and its Continued Access Protocol cohort. METHODS: The analysis cohort included 1015 HM3 patients divided into 2 groups: BSA ≤1.70 m2 (small patients, n = 82) and BSA >1.70 m2 (large patients, n = 933). The composite primary end point was survival at 2 years free of disabling stroke or reoperation to replace or to remove a malfunctioning device. Adverse events were compared between groups. RESULTS: Smaller patients were more frequently women (56.1% vs 17.7%; P < .001) and had lower prevalence of diabetes (28.1% vs 43.9%; P = .005) and hypertension (51.2% vs 71.9%; P < .001), larger median indexed LVEDD (normalized by BSA, 40 vs 33 mm/m2; P < .001), and lower median serum creatinine concentration (1.1 vs 1.3 mg/dL; P < .001). The proportion of patients achieving the composite end point at 2 years was 77% in both groups (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.68-1.91; P = .62). Two-year adverse event rates were also similar between groups except for sepsis (6.1% vs 14.9%; P = .029) and cardiac arrhythmias (24.4% vs 35.3%; P = .005), which were higher in the larger patients. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes after HM3 implantation were comparable between small and large patients. Smaller body size should not be used to deny HM3 implantation in patients who are otherwise suitable candidates for durable mechanical circulatory support.