Anti-factor Xa and activated partial thromboplastin time strategies for unfractionated heparin dosing after HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device implantation.

BACKGROUND: No clear guidelines exist for perioperative anticoagulation management after durable left ventricular assist device insertion. In this study, we sought to compare outcomes between anti-factor Xa (FXa) and activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) in monitoring unfractionated heparin (UFH) dosing after HeartMate 3 (HM3) insertion. METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective review of patients who received UFH after HM3 insertion between 01/2020-12/2022. Post-operative UFH dose was titrated by aPTT goal 45-60 sec (n = 53) or FXa goal 0.1-0.2 U/mL (n = 59). Baseline differences between cohorts were balanced by inverse probability treatment weighting. RESULTS: At baseline, unadjusted FXa patients were more likely to be white (47.5% vs. 35.8%, p < 0.001), INTERMACS 1-2 (69.5% vs. 47.2%, p = 0.013), have history of coronary artery disease (66.1% vs. 43.4%, p = 0.026), and lower eGFR (54.1 vs. 63.7 mL/min/1.73 m2, p = 0.029) compared to the aPTT group. After adjusting for several bleeding/thrombosis risk factors, 97.5% of FXa and 91.0% of aPTT patients reached therapeutic levels with comparable UFH duration and maximum dose. Moreover, in-hospital mortality (2.5% vs. 3.1%, p = 0.842), major bleeding events (4.2% vs. 9.2%, p = 0.360), and thromboembolic events (21.8% vs. 10.1%, p = 0.151) remained without significant differences between FXa and aPTT cohorts. There was a high degree of variability in FXa (r2 = 0.20) and aPTT (r2 = 0.22) values for any given UFH dose. CONCLUSIONS: No differences in frequency of bleeding or thromboembolic events were observed in this study between FXa versus aPTT cohorts after HM3 implantation. More longitudinal studies are warranted to determine whether or not one assay is superior to the other.

CAV Trajectories Among Patients With No or Mild CAV at 10 Years Posttransplant.

Cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality following heart transplantation (HT). Prior studies identified distinct CAV trajectories in the early post-HT period with unique predictors, but the evolution of CAV in later periods is not well-described. This study assessed the prevalence of late CAV progression and associated risk factors in HT recipients with ISHLT CAV 0/1 at 10 years post-HT. Consecutive adult patients who underwent HT from January 2000 to December 2008 were evaluated and grouped by CAV trajectories into progressors (developed ISHLT CAV 2/3) or nonprogressors (remained ISHLT CAV 0/1). A total of 130 patients were included with a median age at angiography of 61.7 years and a median follow-up time of 4.8 years. 8.5% progressed to CAV 2/3, while the remaining 91.5% were nonprogressors. Progression was not associated with death or retransplantation (27.3% [progressor] vs. 21.0% [nonprogressor], p = 0.70). These data may inform shared decision-making about late CAV screening.

Early outcomes in heart transplantation using donation after circulatory death donors in patients bridged with durable left ventricular assist devices.

OBJECTIVE: Donation after circulatory death heart transplantation potentially increases donor allografts, especially for patients with lower listing status. We assessed the outcomes of donation after circulatory death heart transplantation in patients bridged with durable left ventricular assist devices. METHODS: The United Network for Organ Sharing database was queried for adult heart transplants using donation after circulatory death donors from 2019 to 2022. Patients were stratified between those with durable left ventricular assist devices and those with intra-aortic balloon pump, inotropic, or no bridging support (control group). Primary outcome was 1-year mortality. Secondary end points were hospital length of stay, stroke, pacemaker implantation, dialysis, and acute rejection before discharge. RESULTS: A total of 160 left ventricular assist device recipients and 311 control recipients met study inclusion criteria. Recipients bridged with left ventricular assist devices were younger (55 vs 58 years, P < .001) with lower body mass index (28.3 vs 30.3, P < .001), longer waitlist times (112 vs 34 days, P < .001), longer out of body times (5.7 vs 4.6 hours, P < .001), and less frequent normothermic regional perfusion (31% vs 40%, P = .049). Patients with left ventricular assist devices commonly underwent transplantation at United Network for Organ Sharing status 3 and 4 (92%), whereas control patients underwent transplantation at status 2 (27%), status 3 (10%), status 4 (30%), or status 6 (30%). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no difference in 1-year mortality between groups (P = .34). However, acute rejection was higher in the unadjusted left ventricular assist device cohort (26% vs 13%, P < .001). On multivariable logistic regression, left ventricular assist device was an independent predictor of acute rejection (odds ratio, 2.21, 95% CI, 1.32-3.69, P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Durable left ventricular assist devices may be associated with a higher risk of developing an early inflammatory response in donation after circulatory death heart transplantation; however, 1-year survival was similar between groups.

Durable left ventricular assist devices as a bridge to transplantation: what to expect along the way?

INTRODUCTION: The scarcity of donors coupled with the improvements in left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) technology has led to the use of LVAD as a bridge to transplantation (BTT). AREAS COVERED: The authors provide an overview of the current status of LVAD BTT implantation with special focus ranging from patient selection and pre-implantation optimization to post-transplant outcomes. EXPERT OPINION: The United Network for Organ Sharing 2018 policy amendment resulted in a significant reduction in the number of LVADs used for BTT in the US. To overcome this issue, modifications in the US allocation policy to consider factors such as days on device support, age, and type of complications may be necessary to potentially increase implantation rates.

Pre-operative pectoralis muscle area index is associated with biomarkers of inflammation and endotoxemia and predicts clinical outcomes after left ventricular assist device implantation: A cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Pre-left ventricular assist device (LVAD) pectoralis muscle assessment, an estimate of sarcopenia, has been associated with postoperative mortality and gastrointestinal bleeding, though its association with inflammation, endotoxemia, length-of-stay (LOS), and readmissions remains underexplored. METHODS: This was a single-center cohort study of LVAD patients implanted 1/2015-10/2018. Preoperative pectoralis muscle area was measured on chest computed tomography (CT), adjusted for height squared to derive pectoralis muscle area index (PMI). Those with PMI in the lowest quintile were defined as low-PMI cohort; all others constituted the reference cohort. Biomarkers of inflammation (interleukin-6, adiponectin, tumor necrosis factor-α [TNFα]) and endotoxemia (soluble (s)CD14) were measured in a subset of patients. RESULTS: Of the 254 LVAD patients, 95 had a preoperative chest CT (median days pre-LVAD: 7 [IQR 3-13]), of whom 19 (20.0%) were in the low-PMI cohort and the remainder were in the reference cohort. Compared with the reference cohort, the low-PMI cohort had higher levels of sCD14 (2594 vs. 1850 ng/mL; p = 0.04) and TNFα (2.9 vs. 1.9 pg/mL; p = 0.03). In adjusted analyses, the low-PMI cohort had longer LOS (incidence rate ratio 1.56 [95% confidence interval 1.16-2.10], p = 0.004) and higher risk of 90-day and 1-year readmissions (subhazard ratio 5.48 [1.88-16.0], p = 0.002; hazard ratio 1.73 [1.02-2.94]; p = 0.04, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Pre-LVAD PMI is associated with inflammation, endotoxemia, and increased LOS and readmissions.

Clinical Utility of the Molecular Microscope Diagnostic System in a Real-World Transplant Cohort: Moving Towards a New Paradigm.

Objectives: To evaluate the clinical implications of adjunctive molecular gene expression analysis (MMDx ) of biopsy specimens in heart transplant (HT ) recipients with suspected rejection. Introduction: Histopathological evaluation remains the standard method for rejection diagnosis in HT. However, the wide interobserver variability combined with a relatively common incidence of "biopsy-negative" rejection has raised concerns about the likelihood of false-negative results. MMDx, which uses gene expression to detect early signs of rejection, is a promising test to further refine the assessment of HT rejection. Methods: Single-center prospective study of 418 consecutive for-cause endomyocardial biopsies performed between November 2022 and May 2024. Each biopsy was graded based on histology and assessed for rejection patterns using MMDx. MMDx results were deemed positive if borderline or definitive rejection was present. The impact of MMDx results on clinical management was evaluated. Primary outcomes were 1-year survival and graft dysfunction following MMDx-guided clinical management. Secondary outcomes included changes in donor-specific antibodies, MMDx gene transcripts, and donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA) levels. Results: We analyzed 418 molecular samples from 237 unique patients. Histology identified rejection in 32 cases (7.7%), while MMDx identified rejection in 95 cases (22.7%). Notably, in 79 of the 95 cases where MMDx identified rejection, histology results were negative, with the majority of these cases being antibody-mediated rejection (62.1%). Samples with rejection on MMDx were more likely to show a combined elevation of dd-cfDNA and peripheral blood gene expression profiling than those with borderline or negative MMDx results (36.7% vs 28.0% vs 10.3%; p<0.001). MMDx results led to the implementation of specific antirejection protocols or changes in immunosuppression in 20.4% of cases, and in 73.4% of cases where histology was negative and MMDx showed rejection. 1-year survival was better in the positive MMDx group where clinical management was guided by MMDx results (87.0% vs 78.6%; log rank p=0.0017). Conclusions: In our cohort, MMDx results more frequently indicated rejection than histology, often leading to the initiation of antirejection treatment. Intervention guided by positive MMDx results was associated with improved outcomes.

Validation of the HeartMate 3 survival risk score in a large left ventricular assist device center.

OBJECTIVE: The HeartMate 3 survival risk score was recently validated in the Multicenter study Of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy with HeartMate 3 to predict patient-specific survival in HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device candidates. The HeartMate 3 survival risk score stratifies individuals into tertiles according to survival probability. METHODS: We performed a single-center retrospective review of all HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device recipients between September 2017 and August 2022. Baseline characteristics were collected from the electronic medical records. HeartMate 3 survival risk scores were calculated for all eligible patients. One- and 2-year Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were conducted. A univariate and multivariable Cox regression model was used to identify predictors. RESULTS: A total of 181 patients were included in this final analysis. The median age was 62 years, 83% were male, and 26% were Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support Profile 1. The mean HeartMate 3 survival risk score for the entire cohort was 2.66 ± 0.66. Two-year survivals in the high, average, and low survival groups were 93.5% ± 3.2%, 81.6% ± 7.4%, and 82.0% ± 6.6%, respectively. As a continuous variable, the unadjusted HeartMate 3 survival risk score was a significant predictor of mortality (hazard ratio, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.08-4.45; P = .029). The areas under the curve were 0.70 and 0.66 at 1 and 2 years, respectively. We were unable to demonstrate the discriminatory ability of the HeartMate 3 survival risk score using the original stratification, but we found significantly increased survival in the high survival group using a binary cutoff (hazard ratio, 4.8; 95% CI, 1.01-20.9; P = .038). CONCLUSIONS: The unadjusted HeartMate 3 survival risk score was associated with postimplant survival in patients outside of the Multicenter study Of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy with HeartMate 3 but did not remain an independent predictor after adjusting for ischemic etiology and severe diabetes. The HeartMate 3 survival risk score was able to identify patients at high survival using a binary cutoff, but we were unable to demonstrate its discriminatory ability among the previously published risk tertiles.

Kidney function assessment using cystatin C and serum creatinine in heart transplantation recipients: Implications for valganciclovir dosing.

BACKGROUND: Among heart transplantation (HT) recipients, the accuracy of serum creatinine (sCr)-based estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) may be limited by fluctuations in muscle mass. Cystatin C (cysC) is less influenced by muscle mass, but its levels may increase with obesity and steroid use. Herein, we (1) longitudinally compared eGFRcysC and eGFRsCr among HT recipients; (2) investigated the association of body mass index (BMI), steroid use, and muscle mass with discrepancies between eGFRs; and (3) explored the implications of eGFRcysC use on valganciclovir (VGC) dosing. METHODS: cysC and sCr were measured in 294 blood samples obtained from 80 subjects. Intraindividual differences between eGFRs (eGFRdiffcysC-sCr) were calculated with negative values corresponding to eGFRsCr > eGFRcysC and positive values to eGFRcysC > eGFRsCr. In a patient subset (n = 21), pectoralis muscle measures were obtained. RESULTS: Marked differences between eGFRcysC and eGFRsCr were observed, particularly early post-HT (1-week post-HT, median eGFRdiffcysC-sCr -28 ml/min/1.73 m2). eGFRcysC demonstrated stability following a transient postoperative decline, while eGFRsCr decreased in the first year post-HT. Lower BMI and higher prednisone dose displayed a modest association with more negative eGFRdiffcysC-sCr values. Pectoralis muscle measures indicative of greater muscle mass and better tissue quality exhibited a stronger association with more positive eGFRdiffcysC-sCr values. The use of eGFRcysC would have led to VGC dose adjustment in 46% of samples, predominantly resulting in dose reduction. CONCLUSIONS: Among HT recipients, eGFRcysC and eGFRsCr markedly differ with implications for VGC dosing. The observed discrepancies may reflect changes in body composition and steroid use.

Unplanned hospital readmissions following HeartMate 3 implantation: Readmission rates, causes, and impact on survival.

BACKGROUND: Hospital readmissions following left ventricular assist device (LVAD) remain a frequent comorbidity, associated with decreased quality of life and increased resources utilization. This study sought to determine causes, predictors, and impact on survival of hospitalizations during HeartMate 3 (HM3) support. METHODS: All patients implanted with HM3 between November 2014 to December 2019 at Columbia University Irving Medical Center were consecutively enrolled in the study. Demographics and clinical characteristics from the index admission and the first outpatient visit were collected and used to estimate 1-year and 900-day readmission-free survival and overall survival. Multivariable analysis was performed for subsequent readmissions. RESULTS: Of 182 patients who received a HM3 LVAD, 167 (92%) were discharged after index admission and experienced 407 unplanned readmissions over the median follow up of 727 (interquartile range (IQR): 410.5, 1124.5) days. One-year and 900-day mean cumulative number of all-cause unplanned readmissions was 0.43 (95%CI, 0.36, 0.51) and 1.13 (95%CI, 0.99, 1.29). The most frequent causes of rehospitalizations included major infections (29.3%), bleeding (13.2%), device-related (12.5%), volume overload (7.1%), and other (28%). One-year and 900-day survival free from all-cause readmission was 38% (95%CI, 31-46%) and 16.6% (95%CI, 10.3-24.4%). One-year and 900-day freedom from 2, 3, and ≥4 readmissions were 60.7%, 74%, 74.5% and 26.2%, 33.3%, 41.3%. One-year and 900-day survival were unaffected by the number of readmissions and remained >90%. Male sex, ischemic etiology, diabetes, lower serum creatinine, longer duration of index hospitalization, and a history of readmission between discharge and the first outpatient visit were associated with subsequent readmissions. CONCLUSIONS: Unplanned hospital readmissions after HM3 are common, with infections and bleeding accounting for the majority of readmissions. Irrespective of the number of readmissions, one-year survival remained unaffected.

Medium-Term Outcomes of Concomitant Aortic Valve Repair in Patients with Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to analyze the development of aortic insufficiency in patients who received central aortic valve repair when undergoing continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implantation. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of patients who underwent HeartMate II or 3 (Abbott Lab) implantation between 2004 and 2022. Ninety-four patients were excluded from analysis for history of aortic valve procedures, a bicuspid aortic valve, baseline trace aortic insufficiency, or other concomitant aortic valve procedure. Patients who had ≥ mild aortic insufficiency had concomitant aortic valve repair. Clinical characteristics, serial echocardiograms, and outcomes were determined. RESULTS: Of the 656 patients who underwent HeartMate II or 3 implantation, 105 patients (59 HeartMate II and 46 HeartMate 3) met study criteria. Median age was 68 years [60-74 years], 91.4% [n=96] were male, 54.4% [n=56] were white, and 68.6% [n=72] received support as destination therapy. Preoperative aortic insufficiency degree was 54.3% (n=57) mild, 23.8% (n=25) mild-to-moderate, 20.0% (n=21) moderate, 1.0% (n=1) moderate-to-severe, 1.0% (n=1) severe. In hospital mortality was 5.7% [n=6]. Freedom from ≥ moderate aortic insufficiency was 96.4% (95%CI: 92.5%-100%), 93.3% (95%CI: 87.6%-99.2%), and 91.0% (95%CI: 84.1%-98.5%) at 1-year, 2-year, and 3-year post-implantation, respectively. One HeartMate II patient experienced severe aortic insufficiency and was treated with a heart transplant. Three-year survival was 63.4% [95%CI: 52.9%-75.9%]. CONCLUSIONS: Central aortic valve repair may be an effective technique to mitigate aortic insufficiency in HeartMate II and 3. A larger cohort study with longer duration of follow up is warranted to further investigate the clinical impact.

Alterations in the sarcopenia index are associated with inflammation, gut, and oral microbiota among heart failure, left ventricular assist device, and heart transplant patients.

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia, characterized by loss of muscle mass and function, is prevalent in heart failure (HF) and predicts poor outcomes. We investigated alterations in sarcopenia index (SI), a surrogate for skeletal muscle mass, in HF, left ventricular assist device (LVAD), and heart transplant (HT), and assessed its relationship with inflammation and digestive tract (gut and oral) microbiota. METHODS: We enrolled 460 HF, LVAD, and HT patients. Repeated measures pre/post-procedures were obtained prospectively in a subset of LVAD and HT patients. SI (serum creatinine/cystatin C) and inflammatory biomarkers (C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor-alpha) were measured in 271 and 622 blood samples, respectively. Gut and saliva microbiota were assessed via 16S ribosomal ribonucleic acid sequencing among 335 stool and 341 saliva samples. Multivariable regression assessed the relationship between SI and (1) New York Heart Association class; (2) pre- versus post-LVAD or HT; and (3) biomarkers of inflammation and microbial diversity. RESULTS: Median (interquartile range) natural logarithm (ln)-SI was -0.13 (-0.32, 0.05). Ln-SI decreased across worsening HF class, further declined at 1 month after LVAD and HT, and rebounded over time. Ln-SI was correlated with inflammation (r = -0.28, p < 0.01), gut (r = 0.28, p < 0.01), and oral microbial diversity (r = 0.24, p < 0.01). These associations remained significant after multivariable adjustment in the combined cohort but not for all individual cohorts. The presence of the gut taxa Roseburia inulinivorans was associated with increased SI. CONCLUSIONS: SI levels decreased in symptomatic HF and remained decreased long-term after LVAD and HT. In the combined cohort, SI levels covaried with inflammation in a similar fashion and were significantly related to overall microbial (gut and oral) diversity, including specific taxa compositional changes.

"Durable left ventricular assist devices as a bridge to transplantation in The Old and The New World".

Heart transplantation remains the gold standard treatment for end-stage heart failure patients without contraindications. However, limited donor availability and long wait times have created a need for left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) to be used as a bridge to transplantation in appropriately selected patients. Improvements in LVAD technology have resulted in improved short- and long-term outcomes, further supporting the use of these devices for a bridge-to-transplant (BTT) indication. LVAD utilization as BTT exhibits notable disparities worldwide, mainly due to variations in organ availability, allocation policies, and financial constraints. Although Europe has experienced a consistent increase in the use of LVAD for this purpose, the United Network for Organ Sharing 2018 policy amendment resulted in a significant reduction in the number of LVADs used for BTT in the US. To overcome this issue, modifications in the US allocation policy to consider factors such as days on device support, age, and type of complications may be necessary to potentially increase implantation rates.The authors provide an overview comparing the current state of heart transplantation in the US and Europe, with a particular focus on how distinct allocation policies and organ availability impact medical practices. Additionally, the review will examine critical aspects ranging from patient selection and pre-implantation optimization to post-transplant outcomes.

Hemodynamic Optimization by Invasive Ramp Test in Patients Supported With HeartMate 3 Left Ventricular Assist Device.

In patients supported by the HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device (HM3 LVAD), pump speed adjustments may improve hemodynamics. We investigated the hemodynamic implications of speed adjustments in HM3 recipients undergoing hemodynamic ramp tests. Clinically stable HM3 recipients who underwent routine invasive hemodynamic ramp tests between 2015 and 2022 at our center were included. Filling pressure optimization, defined as central venous pressure (CVP) <12 mm Hg and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) <18 mm Hg, was assessed at baseline and final pump speeds. Patients with optimized pressures were compared to nonoptimized patients. Overall 60 HM3 recipients with a median age of 62 years (56, 71) and time from LVAD implantation of 187 days (124, 476) were included. Optimized filling pressures were found in 35 patients (58%) at baseline speed. Speed was adjusted in 84% of the nonoptimized patients. Consequently, 39 patients (65%) had optimized pressures at final speed. There were no significant differences in hemodynamic findings between baseline and final speeds ( p > 0.05 for all). Six and 12 month readmission-free rates were higher in optimized compared with nonoptimized patients ( p = 0.03 for both), predominantly due to lower cardiac readmission-free rates ( p = 0.052). In stable outpatients supported with HM3 who underwent routine ramp tests, optimized hemodynamics were achieved in only 2 of 3 of the patients. Patients with optimized pressures had lower all-cause readmission rates, primarily driven by fewer cardiac-related hospitalizations.

Evolution of Mechanical Circulatory Support for advanced heart failure.

This comprehensive review highlights the significant advancements in Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD) therapy, emphasizing its evolution from the early pulsatile flow systems to the cutting-edge continuous-flow devices, particularly the HeartMate 3 (HM3) LVAD. These advancements have notably improved survival rates, reduced complications, and enhanced the quality of life (QoL) for patients with advanced heart failure. The dual role of LVADs, as a bridge-to-transplantation and destination therapy is discussed, highlighting the changing trends and policies in their application. The marked reduction in hemocompatibility-related adverse events (HRAE) with the HM3 LVAD, compared to previous models signifies ongoing progress in the field. Challenges such as managing major infections are discussed, including innovative solutions like energy transfer systems aimed at eliminating external drivelines. It explores various LVAD-associated complications, including HRAE, infections, hemodynamic-related adverse events, and cardiac arrhythmias, and underscores emerging strategies for predicting post-implantation outcomes, fostering a more individualized patient care approach. Tools such as the HM3 risk score are introduced for predicting survival based on pre-implant factors, along with advanced imaging techniques for improved complication prediction. Additionally, the review highlights potential new technologies and therapies in LVAD management, such as hemodynamic ramp tests for optimal speed adjustment and advanced remote monitoring systems. The goal is to automate LVAD speed adjustments based on real-time hemodynamic measurements, indicating a shift towards more effective, patient-centered therapy. The review concludes optimistically that ongoing research and potential future innovations hold the promise of revolutionizing heart failure management, paving the way for more effective and personalized treatment modalities.

Myocardial Recovery With HeartMate 3 Left Ventricular Assist Device: An Attainable Goal That Needs Better Precision.

Despite advances in our understanding of myocardial recovery among left ventricular assist device (LVAD) patients, with 10-30% of patients achieving substantial myocardial improvement, the rates of LVAD support cessation remain extremely low (1-2%). These numbers are in stark contrast to clinical trial data where successful LVAD cessation is reported in up to 47% of patients. The majority of LVAD programs lack structured recovery programs and targeted protocols, likely underscoring the heterogeneity that exists among LVAD patients with myocardial recovery. This perspective summarizes the current medical and surgical challenges with respect to 1) identifying the appropriate candidates for LVAD cessation; 2) methods to wean LVAD support; 3) reviewing surgical techniques for cessation of current generation HeartMate 3 LVAD; and 4) approaching shared decision making for LVAD cessation between patients and providers given the uncertainties that remain in the field.

The Hemodynamic Effects of Aortic Regurgitation in Patients Supported by a HeartMate 3 Left Ventricular Assist Device.

BACKGROUND: Aortic regurgitation (AR) is a common complication following left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. We evaluated the hemodynamic implications of AR in patients with HeartMate 3 (HM3) LVAD at baseline and in response to speed changes. METHODS AND RESULTS: Clinically stable outpatients supported by HM3 who underwent a routine hemodynamic ramp test were retrospectively enrolled in this analysis. Patients were stratified based on the presence of at least mild AR at baseline speed. Hemodynamic and echocardiographic parameters were compared between the AR and non-AR groups. Sixty-two patients were identified. At the baseline LVAD speed, 29 patients (47%) had AR, while 33 patients (53%) did not. Patients with AR were older and supported on HM3 for a longer duration. At baseline speed, all hemodynamic parameters were similar between the groups including central venous pressure, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, pulmonary arterial pressures, cardiac output and index, and pulmonary artery pulsatility index (p > 0.05 for all). During the subacute assessment, AR worsened in some, but not all, patients, with increases in LVAD speed. There were no significant differences in 1-year mortality or hospitalization rates between the groups, however, at 1-year, ≥ moderate AR and right ventricular failure (RVF) were detected in higher rates among the AR group compared to the non-AR group (45% vs. 0%; p < 0.01, and 75% vs. 36.8%; p = 0.02, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of stable outpatients supported with HM3 who underwent a routine hemodynamic ramp test, the presence of mild or greater AR did not impact the ability of HM3 LVADs to effectively unload the left ventricle during early subacute assessment. Although the presence of AR did not affect mortality and hospitalization rates, it resulted in higher rates of late hemodynamic-related events in the form of progressive AR and RVF.

Acute right ventricular geometric change predicts outcomes in HeartMate 3 patients.

BACKGROUND: The physiological response of the right ventricle (RV) following left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation is difficult to predict. We aimed to investigate RV geometric and functional changes after LVAD insertion and their effects on clinical outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 188 patients who underwent HeartMate 3 implantation at our center between November 2014 and September 2021. The RV end-diastolic diameter (RVEDD) and RV end-diastolic area (RVEDA) were measured on preoperative and predischarge transthoracic echocardiography. The nonadapted group included patients with increased RVEDD and RVEDA at discharge. The composite outcome was defined as death or readmission due to worsening right heart failure. RESULTS: There were 82 patients (44%) who had a nonadapted and 106 patients (56%) who had an adapted RV. Preoperatively, the nonadapted group had smaller RVEDD (46 vs 49 mm, p < 0.001) and RVEDA (27 vs 31 cm2, p < 0.001). At discharge, the nonadapted group had larger RVEDD (51 vs 43 mm, p < 0.001) and RVEDA (33 vs 27 cm2, p < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated worse 3-year survival (77% vs 91%, p = 0.006) and freedom from composite outcome (58% vs 85%, p < 0.001) in the nonadapted group. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards model showed that nonadaption (hazard ratio [HR] 3.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.29-7.40, p = 0.01) and age (HR 3.73, 95% CI 1.42-9.77, p = 0.007) were independent predictors of composite outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Acute RV dimensional changes after LVAD insertion may represent intrinsic RV function and may be a useful prognostic marker.

Does lateral approach preserve the right ventricular function after HeartMate 3 insertion?

OBJECTIVES: Lateral thoracotomy (LT) approach may preserve the right ventricular (RV) function after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. This study evaluated the short- and long-term RV function using echocardiography after LVAD implantation via LT or median sternotomy (sternotomy). METHODS: The patients who underwent HeartMate 3 implantation were retrospectively reviewed. The RV function was assessed before and 1 month and 1 year after LVAD implantation. The primary and secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality and a composite of death or readmission due to RV failure, respectively. RESULTS: Of the 195 patients, 55 (28%) underwent LT and 140 (72%) underwent sternotomy. There were no significant differences in the preoperative RV geometry or function. One month after the LVAD implantation, the LT group had a smaller RV end-diastolic dimension [42 (29-48) vs 47 (42-52) mm; P = 0.003] and RV end-diastolic area [25 (21-28) vs 29 (24-36) cm2; P < 0.001] and a greater RV fractional area change [30 (25-34)% vs 28 (23-31)%; P = 0.04] and peak systolic tissue velocity [8 (7-9) vs 7 (6-8) cm/s; P = 0.01]. Twenty-four patients died and 46 met the composite end point. Kaplan-Meier curve analysis did not reveal significant differences between LT and sternotomy in the 2-year survival (93% vs 83%; log-rank test, P = 0.28) and adverse event rate (76% vs 71%; log-rank test, P = 0.65). CONCLUSIONS: LT approach yielded a better-preserved RV function at 1 month; however, there were no significant differences in the 2-year survival and adverse event rates.