When all Else Fails, Try This: The HeartMate III Left Ventricle Assist Device.

Heart failure (HF) is a progressive disease. It is estimated that more than 250,000 patients suffer from advanced HF with reduced ejection fraction refractory to medical therapy. With limited donor pool for heart transplant, continue flow left ventricle assist device (LVAD) is a lifesaving treatment option for patients with advanced HF. This review will provide an update on indications, contraindications, and associated adverse events for LVAD support with a summary of the current outcomes data.

Traumatic ischaemic cardiomyopathy in a 27-year-old: a case report.

Background: Coronary injury after blunt chest trauma is rare. This case illustrates the importance of evaluating for coronary injury after any episode of blunt chest wall trauma. Case summary: We review the case of a 27-year-old male who presented with acutely decompensated heart failure several months after a motor vehicle accident with chest wall impact from the steering wheel. Coronary angiography demonstrated an occluded left anterior descending artery, and he was found to have a severe ischaemic cardiomyopathy. After multiple hospital and intensive care unit admissions due to multi-organ dysfunction and debility, he was unable to tolerate any guideline-directed medical therapy. He was unable to be listed for heart transplantation due to his co-morbidities, multi-system sequelae of his heart failure, deconditioning, and recent substance use. He was ultimately discharged home with hospice. Conclusion: Coronary or other cardiac injuries should be considered in the evaluation of all patients after blunt chest wall trauma, regardless of prior risk factors for ischaemia.

Gastrointestinal bleeding following Heartmate 3 left ventricular assist device implantation: The Michigan Bleeding Risk Model.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) results in frequent hospitalizations and impairs quality of life in durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) recipients. Anticipation of these events before implantation could have important implications for patient selection and management. METHODS: The study population included all adult HeartMate 3 (HM3) primary LVAD recipients enrolled in the STS Intermacs registry from January 2017 to December 2020. Using multivariable modeling methodologies, we investigated the relationships between preimplantation characteristics and postimplant bleeding, bleeding and death, and additional bleeding episodes on subsequent bleeding episodes and created a risk score to predict the likelihood of post-LVAD GIB based solely on preimplantation factors. RESULTS: Of 6,425 patients who received an HM3 LVAD, 1,010 (15.7%) patients experienced GIB. Thirteen preimplantation factors were independent predictors of post-LVAD GIB. A risk score was created from these factors and calculated for each patient. By 3 years postimplant, GIB occurred in 11%, 26%, and 43% of low-, medium- and high-risk patients, respectively. Experiencing 1 post-LVAD GIB event was associated with an increased risk for further GIB events, with 33.9% of patients experiencing at least 1 recurrence. While post-LVAD GIB was associated with mortality, there was no relationship between number of GIB events and death. CONCLUSIONS: The Michigan Bleeding Risk Model is a simple tool, which facilitates the prediction of post-LVAD GIB in HM3 recipients using 13 preimplant variables. The implementation of this tool may help in the risk stratification process and may have therapeutic and clinical implications in HM3 LVAD recipients.

Aspirin and Hemocompatibility Events With a Left Ventricular Assist Device in Advanced Heart Failure: The ARIES-HM3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

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.

When all Else Fails, Try This: The HeartMate III Left Ventricle Assist Device.

Heart failure (HF) is a progressive disease. It is estimated that more than 250,000 patients suffer from advanced HF with reduced ejection fraction refractory to medical therapy. With limited donor pool for heart transplant, continue flow left ventricle assist device (LVAD) is a lifesaving treatment option for patients with advanced HF. This review will provide an update on indications, contraindications, and associated adverse events for LVAD support with a summary of the current outcomes data.

Gastrointestinal bleeding on continuous-flow left ventricular assist device therapy.

While technological advances in the field of continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD) are constantly being made, CF-LVAD recipients are still subjected to a relatively high rate of LVAD-related adverse events, with post-LVAD gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) being the most common one. GIB is associated with a significant impairment in quality of life, multiple hospital admissions, blood transfusion requirements and possibly death. Furthermore, of those patients who bled once, many will experience recurrent GIB events, which further aggravates their discomfort. While some medical and endoscopic treatment options are available, evidence regarding their benefit remains largely equivocal, with all related studies based on data from registries rather than clinical trials. Although having a major impact on LVAD recipients, an effective and validated pre-implant screening options to predict GIB events post-implant are scarce. This review focuses on the aetiology, incidence, risk factors, treatment options and the effect of new generation devices on post-LVAD GIB.

Tacrolimus time in therapeutic range and long-term outcomes in heart transplant recipients.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Little is known about the association between tacrolimus time in therapeutic range (TTR) within the guideline-recommended targets and heart transplant (HT) patient outcomes. This study evaluated the association of early tacrolimus TTR with rejection and other clinical outcomes during an extended follow-up after HT. DESIGN: This was a single-center retrospective cohort study. SETTING: The study was conducted at Michigan Medicine (1/1/2006-12/31/2017). PATIENTS: HT recipients ≥18 years of age were included. MEASUREMENT: The primary end point was the effect of tacrolimus TTR on time to rejection over the entire follow-up period. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 137 patients were included with a median follow-up of 53 months. Based on the median TTR of 58%, the patients were divided into the low tacrolimus TTR (n = 68) and high tacrolimus TTR (n = 69) cohort. The high tacrolimus TTR was associated with a significantly lower risk of rejection compared to the low tacrolimus TTR cohort (hazard ratio [HR] 0.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.41-0.98; p = 0.04). A post hoc analysis revealed associations between rejection and TTR when high and low TTR groups were created at different levels. TTR <30% was associated with a 7-fold higher risk of rejection (HR 7.56; 95% CI 1.76-37.6; p < 0.01) and TTR >75% was associated with a 77% lower risk of rejection (HR 0.23; 95% CI 0.08-0.627; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Patients in the higher tacrolimus TTR cohort had a lower risk of rejection. We observed correlations between higher risk of rejection with TTR <30% and lower risk of rejection with TTR >75%. Future studies should focus on validating the optimal TTR cutoff while also exploring a cutoff to delineate high-risk patients for which early interventions to improve tacrolimus TTR may be beneficial.

Late HeartMate 3 Thrombosis.

There are few reports of HeartMate 3 pump thrombosis, with existing reports relating to outflow occlusion or early perioperative thrombosis. We present a case of late pump thrombosis requiring pump exchange.

Differences in Inflammation, Treatment, and Outcomes Between Black and Non-Black Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19: A Prospective Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: Racial disparities in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes have been described. We sought to determine whether differences in inflammatory markers, use of COVID-19 therapies, enrollment in clinical trials, and in-hospital outcomes contribute to racial disparities between Black and non-Black patients hospitalized for COVID-19. METHODS: We leveraged a prospective cohort study that enrolled 1325 consecutive patients hospitalized for COVID-19, of whom 341 (25.7%) were Black. We measured biomarkers of inflammation and collected data on the use COVID-19-directed therapies, enrollment in COVID-19 clinical trials, mortality, need for renal replacement therapy, and need for mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: Compared to non-Black patients, Black patients had a higher prevalence of COVID-19 risk factors including obesity, hypertension, and diabetes mellitus and were more likely to require renal replacement therapy (15.8% vs 7.1%, P < .001) and mechanical ventilation (37.2% vs 26.6%, P < .001) during their hospitalization. Mortality was similar between both groups (15.5% for Blacks vs 14.0% for non-Blacks, P = .49). Black patients were less likely to receive corticosteroids (44.9% vs 63.8%, P< .001) or remdesivir (23.8% vs 57.8%, P < .001) and were less likely to be enrolled in COVID-19 clinical trials (15.3% vs 28.2%, P < .001). In adjusted analyses, Black race was associated with lower levels of C-reactive protein and soluble urokinase receptor and higher odds of death, mechanical ventilation, and renal replacement therapy. Differences in outcomes were not significant after adjusting for use of remdesivir and corticosteroids. CONCLUSIONS: Racial differences in outcomes of patients with COVID-19 may be related to differences in inflammatory response and differential use of therapies.

Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors, Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers, and Outcomes in Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19.

Background Use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ACEi/ARB) is thought to affect COVID-19 through modulating levels of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2, the cell entry receptor for SARS-CoV2. We sought to assess the association between ACEi/ARB, biomarkers of inflammation, and outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Methods and Results We leveraged the ISIC (International Study of Inflammation in COVID-19), identified patients admitted for symptomatic COVID-19 between February 1, 2020 and June 1, 2021 for COVID-19, and examined the association between in-hospital ACEi/ARB use and all-cause death, need for ventilation, and need for dialysis. We estimated the causal effect of ACEi/ARB on the composite outcomes using marginal structural models accounting for serial blood pressure and serum creatinine measures. Of 2044 patients in ISIC, 1686 patients met inclusion criteria, of whom 398 (23.6%) patients who were previously on ACEi/ARB received at least 1 dose during their hospitalization for COVID-19. There were 215 deaths, 407 patients requiring mechanical ventilation, and 124 patients who required dialysis during their hospitalization. Prior ACEi/ARB use was associated with lower levels of soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor and C-reactive protein. In multivariable analysis, in-hospital ACEi/ARB use was associated with a lower risk of the composite outcome of in-hospital death, mechanical ventilation, or dialysis (adjusted hazard ratio 0.49, 95% CI [0.36-0.65]). Conclusions In patients hospitalized for COVID-19, ACEi/ARB use was associated with lower levels of inflammation and lower risk of in-hospital outcomes. Clinical trials will define the role of ACEi/ARB in the treatment of COVID-19. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04818866.

In-hospital cardiac arrest in critically ill patients with covid-19: multicenter cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the incidence, risk factors, and outcomes associated with in-hospital cardiac arrest and cardiopulmonary resuscitation in critically ill adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19). DESIGN: Multicenter cohort study. SETTING: Intensive care units at 68 geographically diverse hospitals across the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Critically ill adults (age ≥18 years) with laboratory confirmed covid-19. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: In-hospital cardiac arrest within 14 days of admission to an intensive care unit and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Among 5019 critically ill patients with covid-19, 14.0% (701/5019) had in-hospital cardiac arrest, 57.1% (400/701) of whom received cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Patients who had in-hospital cardiac arrest were older (mean age 63 (standard deviation 14) v 60 (15) years), had more comorbidities, and were more likely to be admitted to a hospital with a smaller number of intensive care unit beds compared with those who did not have in-hospital cardiac arrest. Patients who received cardiopulmonary resuscitation were younger than those who did not (mean age 61 (standard deviation 14) v 67 (14) years). The most common rhythms at the time of cardiopulmonary resuscitation were pulseless electrical activity (49.8%, 199/400) and asystole (23.8%, 95/400). 48 of the 400 patients (12.0%) who received cardiopulmonary resuscitation survived to hospital discharge, and only 7.0% (28/400) survived to hospital discharge with normal or mildly impaired neurological status. Survival to hospital discharge differed by age, with 21.2% (11/52) of patients younger than 45 years surviving compared with 2.9% (1/34) of those aged 80 or older. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiac arrest is common in critically ill patients with covid-19 and is associated with poor survival, particularly among older patients.

Coronavirus Disease-2019 in Heart Transplant Recipients in Southeastern Michigan: A Case Series.

BACKGROUND: Since coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was first identified in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, the number of cases has risen exponentially. Clinical characteristics and outcomes among patients with orthotopic heart transplant (OHT) with COVID-19 remain poorly described. METHODS: We performed a retrospective case series of patients with OHT with COVID-19 admitted to 1 of 2 hospitals in Southeastern Michigan between March 21 and April 22, 2020. Clinical data were obtained through review of the electronic medical record. Final date of follow-up was May 7, 2020. Demographic, clinical, laboratory, radiologic, treatment, and mortality data were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: We identified 13 patients with OHT admitted with COVID-19. The mean age of patients was 61 ± 12 years, 100% were black males, and symptoms began 6 ± 4 days before admission. The most common symptoms included subjective fever (92%), shortness of breath (85%), and cough (77%). Six patients (46%) required admission to the intensive care unit. Two patients (15%) died during hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: Black men may be at increased risk for COVID-19 among patients with OHT. Presenting signs and symptoms in this cohort are similar to those in the general population. Elevated inflammatory markers on presentation appear to be associated with more severe illness.

Right ventricular function and residual mitral regurgitation after left ventricular assist device implantation determines the incidence of right heart failure.

BACKGROUND: The effect of significant mitral regurgitation (MR) on outcomes after continuous flow left ventricular assist device (cfLVAD) implantation remains unclear. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of prospectively collected data from 159 patients with preoperative severe MR who underwent cfLVAD implantation (2003-2017). Two-step cluster analysis using the log-likelihood distance for post-cfLVAD implantation parameters, which included right ventricular (RV) dysfunction, MR severity, and tricuspid regurgitation (TR) severity. Post-cfLVAD implantation echocardiographic parameters were obtained within the first month. RESULTS: Cluster analysis resulted in 3 groups. Group 1 (n = 67) had mild or less MR with moderate-severe RV dysfunction (RVD). Group 2 (n = 43) had moderate-severe MR with moderate-severe RVD. Group 3 (n = 49) had moderate MR with mild RVD. Group 2 had the largest proportion with Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support score of 1 (30.2%) and 2 (41.9%). They were more likely to undergo temporary mechanical circulatory support (18.6%) and tricuspid valve procedure (62.8%). Group 2 had the highest rate of stroke (30.2%; P = .02), hemolysis (39.5%; P = .01), device thrombosis (30%; P = .01), and worst survival (46.5%; P = .01). Survival at 5 years for groups 1, 2, and 3 were 56.0%, 17.6%, and 55.8%. Regression analysis of the entire population showed that greater MR severity after cfLVAD was associated with RV failure (P < .05; odds ratio, 1.6) and RV assist device use (P = .09; odds ratio, 1.6). After excluding tricuspid valve repairs, MR severity had a positive correlation with TR severity (R = 0.33; P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: After cfLVAD implantation, moderate-severe MR and RVD predicted RV failure. Patients with preoperative moderate-severe MR and TR coupled with moderate-severe RVD might benefit the most from mitral and tricuspid valve intervention.

Right ventricular failure following left ventricular assist device implantation is associated with a preoperative pro-inflammatory response.

BACKGROUND: Systemic inflammation during implant of a durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) may contribute to adverse outcomes. We investigated the association of the preoperative inflammatory markers with subsequent right ventricular failure (RVF). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective data was collected on 489 patients from 2003 through 2017 who underwent implantation of a durable LVAD. Uni- and multivariable correlation with leukocytosis was determined using linear and binary logistic regression. The population was also separated into low (< 10.5 K/ul, n = 362) and high (> 10.5 K/ul, n = 127) white blood cell count (WBC) groups. Mantel-Cox statistics was used to analyze survival data. RESULTS: Postop RVF was associated with a higher preop WBC (11.3 + 5.7 vs 8.7 + 3.1) and C-reactive protein (CRP, 5.6 + 4.4 vs 3.3 + 4.7) levels. Multivariable analysis identified an independent association between increased WBC preoperatively with increased lactate dehydrogenase (LDH, P < 0.001), heart rate (P < 0.001), CRP (P = 0.006), creatinine (P = 0.048), and INR (P = 0.049). The high WBC group was more likely to be on preoperative temporary circulatory support (17.3% vs 6.4%, P < 0.001) with a trend towards greater use of an intra-aortic balloon pump (55.9% vs 47.2%, P = 0.093). The high WBC group had poorer mid-term survival (P = 0.042). CONCLUSIONS: Postop RVF is associated with a preoperative pro-inflammatory environment. This may be secondary to the increased systemic stress of decompensated heart failure. Systemic inflammation in the decompensated heart failure may contribute to RVF after LVAD implant.

Cluster analysis of preoperative echocardiographic findings and outcomes following left ventricular device implantation.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether preoperative echocardiography findings determine postoperative continuous-flow left ventricular assist device outcomes. METHODS: From January 2003 to June 2017, 490 patients received a durable, continuous-flow left ventricular assist device. Two-step clustering of parameters including heart rate and preoperative echocardiographic findings (ie, left ventricular [LV] ejection fraction, right ventricular [RV] function, aortic insufficiency, mitral regurgitation [MR], tricuspid regurgitation [TR]) was performed and identified 5 distinct clusters associated with LV failure: group 1: moderate right ventricular dysfunction (RVD), severe MR and mild TR (n = 110); group 2: severe RVD, severe MR and TR (n = 64); group 3: moderate RVD and severe aortic insufficiency (n = 16); group 4: mild RVD and mild valvular pathology (n = 163); and group 5: moderate-severe RVD and mild valvular pathology (n = 137). Silhouette measure of cohesion and separation demonstrated satisfactory separation at 0.6. RESULTS: Group 2 had the greatest Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support Level 1 (25%, P = .010), preoperative right atrial pressure (11 ± 5 mm Hg, P < .001), incidence of postoperative right ventricular failure (RVF; 20%, P = .001), delayed closure of the sternum (61%, P = .002), postoperative permanent dialysis (6%, P = .04), rate of tricuspid valve repair (n = 52; 81%, P < .001), and lowest RV stroke work index (489 ± 228 cc mm Hg/m2/beat, P < .001). RVF in groups 1, 3, 4, and 5 was 6%, 0%, 4%, and 9%, respectively. No differences in incidence of heart transplantation (P = .400) or survival (P = .535) were found. Severe TR predicted RVF in those with moderate-severe preoperative RVD (P = .001, odds ratio 3.9). CONCLUSIONS: Clustering demonstrated the importance of preoperative TR in predicting RVF. Combined severe LV and RV failure with severe MR and TR portends the worse prognosis.

The Use of Eptifibatide Alone or in Combination With Heparin or Argatroban for Suspected Thrombosis in Patients With Left Ventricular Assist Devices.

Pump thrombosis and hemolysis in patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Intensification of anticoagulation has been suggested as potential therapy, with mixed results. The aim of this study is to assess the safety and efficacy of adding eptifibatide with or without an anticoagulation agent in managing patients with LVAD presenting with hemolysis and suspected pump thrombosis. This retrospective single center study included all patients who presented with their first episode of suspected pump thrombosis and were treated with eptifibatide with or without an anticoagulant between March 1, 2011 and July 30, 2015. A total of 27 patients (23 HeartMate II, 4 HeartWare) were identified. The average age was 55 years (range 19-75) and time from implant to event averaged 513 days (range 35-1760). The average lactate dehydrogenase on presentation was 1111 and 63% of patients had power elevations. The average international normalized ratio (INR) on admission was 2.4, with INR of ≥2 in 21/27 patients. All patients received eptifibatide: 10 received eptifibatide only, 9 received eptifibatide and argatroban, and 8 received eptifibatide and heparin. Warfarin was continued in 25/27 patients. Overall, 21 patients (77.8%) were successfully treated medically, 5 (18.5%) underwent pump exchange, and 1 (3.7%) died. There were no differences in outcomes or complications between the three treatment groups. Despite initial success, 12/21 patients developed repeat episodes of hemolysis at 1 year. The 1-year survival in the patients treated medically was 90% and surgically was 60%. Our experience indicates that medical therapy for hemolysis and suspected LVAD thrombosis with warfarin and eptifibatide alone or in combination with argatroban or heparin appears safe and may be effective, although the episodes of recurrent hemolysis after medical management remain high.