Variation in Hemodynamic Assessment and Interpretation: A Call to Standardize the Right Heart Catheterization.

BACKGROUND: Invasive hemodynamic measurement via right heart catheterization has shown divergent data in its role in the treatment of patients with heart failure (HF) and cardiogenic shock. We hypothesized that variation in data acquisition technique and interpretation might contribute to these observations. We sought to assess differences in hemodynamic acquisition and interpretation by operator subspecialty as well as level of experience. METHODS AND RESULTS: Individual-level responses to how physicians both collect and interpret hemodynamic data at the time of right heart catheterization was solicited via a survey distributed to international professional societies in HF and interventional cardiology. Data were stratified both by operator subspecialty (HF specialists or interventional cardiologists [IC]) and operator experience (early career [≤10 years from training] or late career [>10 years from training]) to determine variations in clinical practice. For the sensitivity analysis, we also look at differences in each subgroup. A total of 261 responses were received. There were 141 clinicians (52%) who self-identified as HF specialists, 99 (38%) identified as IC, and 20 (8%) identified as other. There were 142 early career providers (54%) and late career providers (119 [46%]). When recording hemodynamic values, there was considerable variation in practice patterns, regardless of subspecialty or level of experience for the majority of the intracardiac variables. There was no agreement or mild agreement among HF and IC as to when to record right atrial pressures or pulmonary capillary wedge pressures. HF cardiologists were more likely to routinely measure both Fick and thermodilution cardiac output compared with IC (51% vs 29%, P < .001), something mirrored in early career vs later career cardiologists. CONCLUSIONS: Significant variation exists between the acquisition and interpretation of right heart catheterization measurements between HF and IC, as well as those early and late in their careers. With the growth of the heart team approach to management of patients in cardiogenic shock, standardization of both assessment and management practices is needed.

Trends and predictors of intracranial hemorrhage in patients with advanced heart failure on left ventricular assist device from 2005 to 2014 in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: Left ventricular assist devices are known to extend survival in patients with advanced heart failure; however, their association with intracranial hemorrhage is also well-known. We aimed to explore the risk trend and predictors of intracranial hemorrhage in patients with left ventricular assist devices. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We included patients aged 18 years or older with left ventricular assist devices hospitalized in the US from 2005 to 2014 using the National Inpatient Sample. We computed the survey-weighted percentages with intracranial hemorrhage across the 10-year study period and assessed whether the proportions changed over time. Predictors of intracranial hemorrhage were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression model. RESULTS: Of 33,246 hospitalizations, 568 (1.7%) had intracranial hemorrhage. The number of left ventricular assist devices placements increased from 873 in 2005 to 5175 in 2014. However, the risk of intracranial hemorrhage remained largely unchanged (1.7% to 2.3%; linear trend, P = 0.604). The adjusted odds of intracranial hemorrhage were increased with the presence of one of the following variables: female sex (odds ratio [OR], 1.58; 95% CI, 1.03-2.43), history of ischemic stroke (OR, 3.13; 95% CI, 1.86-5.28), or Charlson Comorbidity Index score of 3 or more (OR, 77.40; 95% CI, 10.03-597.60). CONCLUSIONS: Over the last decade, the risk of intracranial hemorrhage has remained relatively unchanged despite an increase in the use of left ventricular assist devices in patients with advanced heart failure. Women, higher Charlson Comorbidity Index scores, and history of ischemic stroke were associated with higher odds of intracranial hemorrhage in patients with left ventricular assist devices.

Packing the donor heart: Is SherpaPak cold preservation technique safer compared to ice cold storage.

INTRODUCTION: The present study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of heart transplant patients whose donor hearts were preserved with the SherpaPak controlled cold organ system versus the conventional ice storage technique. METHODS: All patients undergoing heart transplantation at our center between January 2019 and April 2021 were divided into two groups according to the technique used during donor heart preservation and transport. The first group consisted of 34 SherpaPak controlled temperature preservation patients, and the second group consisted of 47 patients where the conventional three bags and ice technique was utilized during organ transportation. The two groups were compared based on demographics, operative details, and postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the groups regarding Vasoactive Inotropic Score (VIS), Primary Graft Dysfunction (PGD), and the need for a transient pacer. However, the VIS, PGD, and pacing trends were lower in the SherpaPak patients even though the total ischemic and cardiopulmonary bypass times were significantly longer. Furthermore, SherpaPak patients exhibited a shorter stay in the ICU with no severe PGD and mortality. CONCLUSION: The SherpaPak donor heart preservation provides safe outcomes in heart transplant patients. Further research is needed to utilize this method for longer durations of ischemic time and expand travel distances for organ transportation.

Controlled temperatures in cold preservation provides safe heart transplantation results.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to investigate the short-term outcomes of heart transplant patients who underwent SherpaPak™ donor organ preservation. METHOD: We prospectively collected the data of patients who underwent heart transplantation using SherpaPak™ system for donor organ transportation from February 2020 to March 2021. Donor and recipient demographic data, preoperative and postoperative echocardiographic and hemodynamic parameters, total ischemic time and SherpaPak temperatures, vasoactive inotropic scores (VIS), primary graft dysfunction (PGD) status, intensive care unit stay, complications, and mortality during follow-up were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 39 consecutive heart transplant patients with SherpaPak system were included in the study. The mean donor age was 32.2 ± 6.7 (range: 16-46). The mean recipient age was 57.5 ± 12 (range: 19-73). The mean preoperative ejection fraction (EF) was 23.7 ± 15.4 (range: 5-75). All recipients underwent a standard bicaval technique for orthotopic heart implantation. The mean total ischemic time was 230.1 ± 41 (range: 149-342) min. The mean Sherpa temperature was 5.6 ± 0.8°C (range: 3.7-7.5). The mean VIS was 10.2 ± 6.5 (range: 2-32). The number of mild PGD was 5 (14.7%), and moderate PGD was 4 (11.8%). There was no severe PGD. The postoperative EF was 64.3 ± 5.5 (range: 50-78). Mean intubation time was 47.4 ± 64 (range: 8-312, median: 22) h. The mean time of intensive care unit stay was 6.3 ± 5 (range: 2-31, median: 5) days. Two patients required chest revision (5.8%), two patients had lung infection (5.8%). Two patients had a stroke (5.8%). There was no mortality. CONCLUSION: Using the SherpaPak system during heart transplantation is safe and not associated with significant recipient morbidity. None of the recipients experienced significant PGD and mortality.

Kidney transplantation on extracorporeal life support for primary cardiac allograft dysfunction.

Patients undergoing heart-kidney transplants who have primary graft dysfunction (PGD) of the heart are at risk of losing both organs, which may cause reluctance on the part of the transplant team to proceed with transplanting the kidney while the transplanted heart is being supported by mechanical device. We describe a case series in which 2 patients received kidney transplants while on veno-arterial ECMO support for PGD after heart transplant. Both patients are alive more than 1 year following transplant, with good cardiac and renal function and no signs of cardiac rejection. Kidney transplant surgery is safe for patients on veno-arterial ECMO support for cardiac PGD. It allows the heart recipient to receive a kidney from the same donor with both immunologic and survival advantages.

Stiff right atrial syndrome? A complex clinical case report utilizing multimodality imaging and invasive hemodynamics.

Background: Stiff left atrial syndrome is a well-established cause of heart failure symptoms. A parallel entity involving the right atrium (RA) has not previously been described. We present a case of refractory right heart failure (RHF) 12 years following orthotopic heart transplantation. Case summary: Patient underwent annuloplasty ring placement for severe tricuspid regurgitation in 2018 and kidney transplantation in 2020. The use of multimodality imaging and a multidisciplinary approach suggested a stiff RA as a potential etiology to refractory symptoms. Redo-heart and kidney transplantation in March 2021 led to the resolution of symptoms without recurrence. Discussion: We propose stiff right atrial syndrome that may need to be considered in the setting of refractory RHF primarily suggested by significant right atrial enlargement and restrictive physiology.

PREDICT HF: Risk stratification in advanced heart failure using novel hemodynamic parameters.

BACKGROUND: Invasive hemodynamics are fundamental in assessing patients with advanced heart failure (HF). Several novel hemodynamic parameters have been studied; however, the relative prognostic potential remains ill-defined. HYPOTHESIS: Advanced hemodynamic parameters provide additional prognostication beyond the standard hemodynamic assessment. METHODS: Patients from the PRognostic Evaluation During Invasive CaTheterization for Heart Failure (PREDICT-HF) registry who underwent right heart catheterization (RHC) were included in the analysis. The primary endpoint was survival to orthotopic heart transplant (OHT) or durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD), or death within 6 months of RHC. RESULTS: Of 846 patients included, 176 (21%) met the primary endpoint. In a multivariate model that included traditional hemodynamic variables, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) (OR: 1.10, 1.04-1.15, p < .001), and cardiac index (CI) (OR: 0.86, 0.81-0.92, p < .001) were shown to be predictive of adverse outcomes. In a separate multivariate model that incorporated advanced hemodynamic parameters, cardiac power output (CPO) (OR: 0.76, 0.71-0.83, p < .001), aortic pulsatility index (API) (OR: 0.94, 0.91-0.96, p < .001), and pulmonary artery pulsatility index (OR: 1.02, 1.00-1.03, p .027) were all significantly associated with the primary outcome. Positively concordant API and CPO afforded the best freedom from the endpoint (94.7%), whilst negatively concordant API and CPO had the worst freedom from the endpoint (61.5%, p < .001). Those with discordant API and CPO had similar freedom from the endpoint. CONCLUSION: The advanced hemodynamic parameters API and CPO are independently associated with death or the need for OHT or LVAD within 6 months. Further prospective studies are needed to validate these parameters and elucidate their role in patients with advanced HF.

Donation after circulatory death: A transplant cardiologist's take on neuroprognostication.

Donation after circulatory death (DCD) is becoming increasingly utilized in heart transplantation and has the potential to further expand the donor pool. As transplant cardiologists gain more familiarity with DCD donor selection, there are many issues that lack consensus including how we incorporate the neurologic examination, how we measure functional warm ischemic time (fWIT), and what fWIT thresholds are acceptable. DCD donor selection calls for prognostication tools to help determine how quickly a donor may expire, and in current practice there is no standardization in how we make these predictions. Current scoring systems help to determine which donor may expire within a specified time window either require the temporary disconnection of ventilatory support or do not incorporate any neurologic examination or imaging. Moreover, the specified time windows differ from other DCD solid organ transplantation without standardization or strong scientific justification for these thresholds. In this perspective, we highlight the challenges faced by transplant cardiologists as they navigate the muddy waters of neuroprognostication in DCD cardiac donation. Given these difficulties, this is also a call to action for the creation of a more standardized approach to improve the DCD donor selection process for appropriate resource allocation and organ utilization.

One-year survival in recipients older than 50 bridged to heart transplant with Impella 5.5 via axillary approach.

BACKGROUND: Optimizing patients with advanced heart failure before orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT), especially in patients greater than 50 years old, is imperative to achieving successful post-transplant outcomes. Complications are well-described for patients bridged to transplant (BTT) with durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support. Given the lack of data available in older recipients after the recent increase in mechanical support use, we felt it crucial to report our center's one-year outcomes in older recipients after heart transplantation with percutaneously placed Impella 5.5 as a BTT. METHODS: Forty-nine OHT patients were supported with the Impella 5.5 intended as a bridge between December 2019 and October 2022 at Mayo Clinic in Florida. Data were extracted from the electronic health record at baseline and during their transplant episode of care after Institutional Review Boards approval as exempt for retrospective data collection. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients aged 50 or older were supported with Impella 5.5 as BTT. Ten patients underwent heart and kidney transplantation within this cohort. The median age at OHT was 63 (58-68) years, with 32 male (84%) and six female patients (16%). Etiology was divided into ischemic (63%) and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (37%). The baseline median ejection fraction was 19% (15-24). Most patients were in blood group O (60%), and 50% were diabetic. The average duration of support was 27 days (range 6-94). The median duration of follow-up is 488 days (185-693). For patients that have reached the 1-year follow-up timeframe (22 of 38, 58%), the 1-year post-transplant survival is 95%. CONCLUSION: Our single-center data provides awareness for using the Impella 5.5 percutaneously placed axillary support device in older heart failure patients in cardiogenic shock as a bridge to transplantation. One-year survival outcomes after heart transplantation are excellent despite the older recipient's age and prolonged pre-transplant support.

Axillary mechanical circulatory support improves renal function prior to heart transplantation in patients with chronic kidney disease.

Impaired kidney function is often associated with acute decompensation of chronic heart failure and portends a poor prognosis. Unfortunately, current data have demonstrated worse survival in patients with acute kidney injury than in patients with chronic kidney disease during durable LVAD placement as bridge therapy. Furthermore, end-stage heart failure patients undergoing combined heart-kidney transplantation have poorer short- and long-term survival than heart transplants alone. We evaluated the kidney function recovery in our heart failure population awaiting heart transplantation at our institution, supported by temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support (tMCS) with Impella 5.5. The protocol (#22004000) was approved by the Mayo Clinic institutional review board, after which we performed a retrospective review of all patients with acute on chronic heart failure and kidney disease in patients considered for only heart and kidney combined organ transplant and supported by tMCS between January 2020 and February 2021. Hemodynamic and kidney function trends were recorded and analyzed before and after tMCS placement and transplantation. After placement of tMCS, we observed a trend towards improvement in creatinine, Fick cardiac index, mixed venous saturation, and glomerular filtration rate (GFR), which persisted through transplantation and discharge. The average duration of support with tMCS was 16.5 days before organ transplantation. The median pre-tMCS creatinine was 2.1 mg/dL (IQR 1.75-2.3). Median hematocrit at the time of tMCS placement was 32% (IQR 32-34), and the median estimated glomerular filtration rate was 34 mL/min/BSA (34-40). The median GFR improved to 44 mL/min/BSA (IQR 45-51), and serum creatinine improved to 1.5 mg/dL (1.5-1.8) after tMCS. Median discharge creatinine was 1.1 mg/dL (1.19-1.25) with a GFR of 72 (65-74). None of these six patients supported with tMCS required renal replacement therapy after heart transplantation. Early adoption of Impella 5.5 in this patient population resulted in renal recovery without needing renal replacement therapies or dual organ transplantation and should be further evaluated.

Short-term outcomes of heart transplant patients bridged with Impella 5.5 ventricular assist device.

AIMS: We sought to investigate the outcomes of heart transplant patients supported with Impella 5.5 temporary mechanical circulatory support. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patient demographics, perioperative data, hospital timeline, and haemodynamic parameters were followed during initial admission, Impella support, and post-transplant period. Vasoactive-inotropic score, primary graft failure, and complications were recorded. Between March 2020 and March 2021, 16 advanced heart failure patients underwent Impella 5.5 temporary left ventricular assist device support through axillary approach. Subsequently, all these patients had heart transplantation. All patients were either ambulatory or chair bound during their temporary mechanical circulatory support until heart transplantation. Patients were kept on Impella support median of 19 days (3-31) with the median lactate dehydrogenase level of 220 (149-430). All Impella devices were removed during heart transplantation. During Impella support, patients had improved renal function with median creatinine serum level of 1.55 mg/dL decreased to 1.25 (P = 0.007), pulmonary artery pulsatility index scores increased from 2.56 (0.86-10) to 4.2 (1.3-10) (P = 0.048), and right ventricular function improved (P = 0.003). Patients maintained improved renal function and favourable haemodynamics after their heart transplantation as well. All patients survived without any significant morbidity after their heart transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: Impella 5.5 temporary left ventricular assist device optimizes care of heart transplant recipients providing superior haemodynamic support, mobility, improved renal function, pulmonary haemodynamics, and right ventricular function. Utilizing Impella 5.5 as a direct bridging strategy to heart transplantation resulted in excellent outcomes.

Non-invasive detection of cardiac allograft rejection among heart transplant recipients using an electrocardiogram based deep learning model.

Aims: Current non-invasive screening methods for cardiac allograft rejection have shown limited discrimination and are yet to be broadly integrated into heart transplant care. Given electrocardiogram (ECG) changes have been reported with severe cardiac allograft rejection, this study aimed to develop a deep-learning model, a form of artificial intelligence, to detect allograft rejection using the 12-lead ECG (AI-ECG). Methods and results: Heart transplant recipients were identified across three Mayo Clinic sites between 1998 and 2021. Twelve-lead digital ECG data and endomyocardial biopsy results were extracted from medical records. Allograft rejection was defined as moderate or severe acute cellular rejection (ACR) based on International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation guidelines. The extracted data (7590 unique ECG-biopsy pairs, belonging to 1427 patients) was partitioned into training (80%), validation (10%), and test sets (10%) such that each patient was included in only one partition. Model performance metrics were based on the test set (n = 140 patients; 758 ECG-biopsy pairs). The AI-ECG detected ACR with an area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) of 0.84 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.78-0.90] and 95% (19/20; 95% CI: 75-100%) sensitivity. A prospective proof-of-concept screening study (n = 56; 97 ECG-biopsy pairs) showed the AI-ECG detected ACR with AUC = 0.78 (95% CI: 0.61-0.96) and 100% (2/2; 95% CI: 16-100%) sensitivity. Conclusion: An AI-ECG model is effective for detection of moderate-to-severe ACR in heart transplant recipients. Our findings could improve transplant care by providing a rapid, non-invasive, and potentially remote screening option for cardiac allograft function.

Lateral-Apical Approach to Pericardiocentesis for Treatment of Cardiac Tamponade Immediately Post-orthotopic Liver Transplantation.

Cardiac tamponade is a rare complication following orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). The incidence and treatment specific to the immediate postoperative OLT patient have never been reported. Here, we describe a case of OLT complicated by coagulopathy and difficult intraoperative pulmonary artery catheter placement with subsequent postoperative hemopericardium resulting in tamponade. An emergent, ultrasound-guided, lateral-apical pericardiocentesis was successfully performed, suggesting a possible procedural technique for pericardiocentesis in the immediate postoperative period for liver transplant patients.

Impella flow pump reinsertion after axillary graft thrombectomy: Technical points in replacing axillary Impella.

Axillary Impella devices are increasingly employed for long-term support of patients with systolic heart failure and shock. Axillary access allows for awake support and ambulation, which carries an inherent risk of disconnection or malposition. We report a series of two cases where device replacement due to dysfunction and malposition can be completed safely through the original axillary graft using axillary graft thrombectomy, given that the clot burden could be a major source of morbidity to the patient.

A 3-Decade Analysis of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma After Solid Organ Transplant.

OBJECTIVE: Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients have moderately increased risk of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC). We evaluated the incidence and survival of PAC in 2 cohorts and aimed to identify potential risk factors. METHODS: This study performed a retrospective cohort analysis. Cohort A was extracted from the United Network of Organ Sharing data set and cohort B from SOT recipients evaluated at 3 Mayo Clinic transplant centers. The primary outcome was age-adjusted annual incidence of PAC. Descriptive statistics, hazard ratios, and survival rates were compared. RESULTS: Cohort A and cohort B included 617,042 and 29,472 SOT recipients, respectively. In cohort A, the annual incidence rate was 12.78 per 100,000 in kidney-pancreas, 13.34 in liver, and 21.87 in heart-lung transplant recipients. Receiving heart-lung transplant, 50 years or older, and history of cancer (in either recipient or donor) were independent factors associated with PAC. Fifty-two patients developed PAC in cohort B. Despite earlier diagnosis (21.15% with stage I-II), survival rates were similar to those reported for sporadic (non-SOT) patients. CONCLUSIONS: We report demographic and clinical risk factors for PAC after SOT, many of which were present before transplant and are common to sporadic pancreatic cancer. Despite the diagnosis at earlier stages, PAC in SOT portends a very poor survival.

Detecting cardiomyopathies in pregnancy and the postpartum period with an electrocardiogram-based deep learning model.

AIMS: Cardiovascular disease is a major threat to maternal health, with cardiomyopathy being among the most common acquired cardiovascular diseases during pregnancy and the postpartum period. The aim of our study was to evaluate the effectiveness of an electrocardiogram (ECG)-based deep learning model in identifying cardiomyopathy during pregnancy and the postpartum period. METHODS AND RESULTS: We used an ECG-based deep learning model to detect cardiomyopathy in a cohort of women who were pregnant or in the postpartum period seen at Mayo Clinic. Model performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. We compared the diagnostic probabilities of the deep learning model with natriuretic peptides and a multivariable model consisting of demographic and clinical parameters. The study cohort included 1807 women; 7%, 10%, and 13% had left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 35% or less, <45%, and <50%, respectively. The ECG-based deep learning model identified cardiomyopathy with AUCs of 0.92 (LVEF ≤ 35%), 0.89 (LVEF < 45%), and 0.87 (LVEF < 50%). For LVEF of 35% or less, AUC was higher in Black (0.95) and Hispanic (0.98) women compared to White (0.91). Natriuretic peptides and the multivariable model had AUCs of 0.85 to 0.86 and 0.72, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: An ECG-based deep learning model effectively identifies cardiomyopathy during pregnancy and the postpartum period and outperforms natriuretic peptides and traditional clinical parameters with the potential to become a powerful initial screening tool for cardiomyopathy in the obstetric care setting.

Left Ventricular Assist Device Therapy and Acute Pancreatitis: Higher Incidence and Worse Clinical Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to compare incidence and outcomes of acute pancreatitis among advanced heart failure therapies. METHODS: Two retrospective cohorts are as follows: A, patients with heart failure presenting to our hospitals and B, the US National Inpatient Sample. Three groups were compared: left ventricular assist device (LVAD) recipients, transplant recipients, and controls who did not qualify for advanced therapies. Primary outcomes were pancreatitis incidence and mortality. Secondary outcomes included kidney failure, multiorgan failure, shock, and health care utilization. RESULTS: Cohort A included 1344 heart failure patients, and cohort B included 677,905 patients with acute pancreatitis. In cohort A, annual pancreatitis incidence was 6.7 cases per 1000 LVAD recipients, 4.1 per 1000 LVAD bridge-to-transplant, 2.3 per 1000 transplant recipients, and 3.2 per 1000 heart failure controls (P = 0.03). Combined, the incidence was 5.6 per 1000 LVAD users and 2.7 in 1000 non-LVAD users (relative risk, 2.1; P = 0.009). In cohort B, increased mortality was seen in LVAD users, but not in transplant recipients. Left ventricular assist device patients had higher odds of kidney failure, multiorgan failure, shock, and intensive care. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with LVAD have double risk of pancreatitis, worse clinical outcomes, and increased healthcare utilization. Studies elucidating the mechanisms behind pancreatic injury in advanced heart failure are suggested.

Acute right ventricular failure after orthotopic liver transplantation.

The interdependence between the heart and liver in maintaining hemodynamic stability during the perioperative period of either orthotopic heart (OHT) or liver (OLT) transplantation is important. The pre-transplant hemodynamic changes that occur in patients with end-stage liver disease (ESLD) can include decreased systemic vascular resistance, poor ventricular response to stress and increased cardiac output (CO). Concomitant pulmonary disorders are often present in ESLD. Portopulmonary hypertension (PoPHTN) is an important marker for increased mortality in liver transplant patients. The pathophysiologic mechanisms specific to PoPHTN have been compared with other known forms of pulmonary hypertension, including primary pulmonary hypertension, and has been found to fall within a spectrum of disorders related to factors both due to intrinsic liver failure [with resultant portal hypertension and hepatopulmonary syndrome (HPS)] as well as pulmonary vascular remodeling. We present a 47-year-old Caucasian female with ESLD secondary to non-alcoholic steatohepatitis and HPS. Our current case demonstrates the difficulty in managing patients with acute pulmonary hypertension after OLT. Review of the contemporary literature demonstrated a total of eight case reports of post-transplant severe pulmonary hypertension thought to be due to a combination of either HPS or PoPHTN. This case highlights the complexities of patient management in the acute setting after OLT. Furthermore, it demonstrates the intricate role of careful preoperative evaluation and screening in patients undergoing workup for solid organ transplantation.