Minimally Invasive Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation: A Comparative Study.

Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is now a routine therapy for advanced heart failure. Minimally invasive approach via thoracotomy for LVAD implantation is getting popular due to its potential advantage over the conventional sternotomy approach in terms of reduced risk at re-operation due to sternal sparing. We compared the approaches (thoracotomy and sternotomy) to determine the superiority. Minimally invasive approach involved fitting of the LVAD inflow cannula into left ventricle apex via left anterior thoracotomy and anastomosis of outflow graft to ascending aorta via right anterior thoracotomy. In the sternotomy approach, both the procedures were performed via sternotomy. Outcomes in patients after LVAD implantation were compared depending on these approaches for the surgery. Two hundred and five continuous flow LVAD implantations performed between July 2006 and June 2015 at a single center were divided based on surgical approach, that is, sternotomy (n = 180) and thoracotomy (n = 25) groups. There was no significant difference between the groups in relation to patient demographics, preoperative hemodynamic parameters, laboratory markers, or risk factors. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of postoperative hemodynamic parameters, laboratory markers, bleeding and requirement of blood products, intensive care unit, and hospital stay or complications of LVAD surgery. There were no significant differences in terms of long-term survival (Log-Rank P = 0.953), however, thoracotomy, compared to sternotomy approach, incurred significantly less requirement of temporary right ventricular assist (4 vs. 19.4%, P = 0.041). Minimally invasive bilateral thoracotomy approach for LVAD implantation in addition to benefits of sternal sparing avoids dilatation of right ventricle and reduces chances of right ventricular failure requiring temporary right ventricular assist.

Algorithms to guide ambulance clinicians in the management of emergencies in patients with implanted rotary left ventricular assist devices.

Advances in left ventricular assist device (LVAD) therapy have resulted in increasing numbers of adult LVAD recipients in the community. However, device failure, stroke, bleeding, LVAD thrombosis and systemic infection can be life-threatening emergencies. Currently, four LVAD systems are implanted in six UK transplant centres, each of which provides device-specific information to local emergency services. This has resulted in inconsistent availability and content of information with the risks of delayed or inappropriate decision-making. In order to improve patient safety, a consortium of UK healthcare professionals with expertise in LVADs developed universally applicable prehospital emergency algorithms. Guidance was framed as closely as possible on the standard ABCDE approach to the assessment of critically ill patients.

International Analysis of LVAD Point-of-Care Versus Plasma INR: A Multicenter Study.

International normalized ratio (INR) measurements manage risks of bleeding and clotting sequelae in the population with left ventricular assist device (LVAD). Studies suggest that point-of-care (POC) INR does not significantly differ from plasma INR (P-INR) values in other patient populations, although this has not been validated in a multicenter LVAD study. We sought to determine whether POC-INR and P-INR values differ significantly in the LVAD population and reviewed patients with permanent LVAD implantation at seven institutions internationally. Our cohort comprised of 279 paired POC-INR and P-INR checks in patients supported on average 630 ± 598 days postimplant with predominately HeartWare, HeartMate II, and HeartMate III devices. The population averaged 57.9 years of age, and there were 86.7% male. We found no statistically significant difference between POC-INR and P-INR values. International normalized ratio accuracy correlated weakly with the time between INR measurements (p < 0.001). When the time difference was less than 4 hours, the difference between INR pairs was significantly lower than measurements greater than 8 hours (p = 0.006). There was no statistically significant difference when comparing paired INR values and time after implant to INR check (p = 0.43), age (p = 0.12), known coagulopathy (p = 0.12), bleeding history (p = 0.22), or thrombosis history (p = 0.34). This is the first large multicenter international study comparing POC-INR and P-INR measurements in patients with LVAD and found no statistically significant difference between either methods, particularly when measured within less than 4 hours of each other.

Does postoperative blood pressure influence development of aortic regurgitation following continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implantation?†.

OBJECTIVES: The true impact of postoperative blood pressure (BP) control on development of aortic regurgitation (AR) following continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD) implantation remains uncertain. This study examines the influence of BP in patients with de novo AR following CF-LVAD implantation. METHODS: All patients with no or

Preoperative predictors and outcomes of right ventricular assist device implantation after continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implantation.

OBJECTIVE: The outcomes of ventricular assist device therapy remain limited by right ventricular failure. We sought to define the predictors and evaluate the outcomes of right ventricular failure requiring right ventricular assist device support after long-term continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implantation. METHODS: Records of all continuous-flow left ventricular assist device recipients for the last 10 years were analyzed, including patients on preoperative intra-aortic balloon pump, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and short-term ventricular assist device support. Perioperative clinical, echocardiographic, hemodynamic, and laboratory data of continuous-flow left ventricular assist device recipients requiring right ventricular assist device support (right ventricular assist device group) were compared with the rest of the patient cohort (control group). RESULTS: Between July 2003 and June 2013, 152 patients underwent continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implantation as a bridge to transplantation. The overall postoperative incidence of right ventricular assist device support was 23.02% (n = 35). Right ventricular assist device implantation did not significantly affect eventual transplantation (P = .784) or longer-term survival (P = .870). Preoperative right ventricular diameter (P < .001), tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (P < .001), previous sternotomy (P = .002), preoperative short-term mechanical support (P = .005), left atrial diameter (P = .014), female gender (P = .020), age (P = .027), and preoperative bilirubin levels (P = .031) were univariate predictors of right ventricular assist device implantation. Multivariate analysis revealed lesser tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (P = .013; odds ratio, 0.613; 95% confidence interval, 0.417-0.901) and smaller left atrial diameter (P = .007; odds ratio, 0.818; 95% confidence interval, 0.707-0.947) as independent predictors of right ventricular assist device implantation. Receiver operating characteristic curve of tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion yielded an area under the curve of 0.85 (95% confidence interval, 0.781-0.923), with cutoff tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion less than 12.5 mm having 84% sensitivity and 75% specificity. CONCLUSIONS: Lesser tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion and smaller left atrial diameter are independent predictors of the need for right ventricular assist device support after continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implantation. Right ventricular assist device implantation does not adversely affect eventual transplantation or survival after continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implantation.

Outcomes after implantation of partial-support left ventricular assist devices in inotropic-dependent patients: Do we still need full-support assist devices?

OBJECTIVES: Partial-support left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) represent a novel strategy for heart failure treatment. The Synergy Pocket Micro-pump (HeartWare Inc, Framingham, Mass), the smallest surgically implanted long-term LVAD, provides partial flow up to 4.25 L/min and was primarily designed for "less sick" patients with severe heart failure. This device is implanted minimally invasively without sternotomy or cardiopulmonary bypass. Early implantation in patients with Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support class 4 and higher was shown to be feasible and associated with significantly improved hemodynamics and quality of life. The aim of this study was to present our experience with implementation of long-term partial circulatory support as a bridge to transplantation in patients with more advanced heart failure who were dependent preoperatively on inotropic support or intra-aortic balloon pump. METHODS: In this observational study, only inotropic or intra-aortic balloon pump-dependent patients with end-stage heart failure were included (n = 12). These patients underwent Synergy device implantation between February 2012 and August 2013. RESULTS: The mean preoperative Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support class was 2.17 ± 0.84 (class 1, 25%; class 2, 33%; class 3, 42%). The mean age was 46 ± 15 years, and 33% were female. Preoperatively, 4 patients (33%) had at least 1 previous sternotomy, 3 patients (25%) were supported with a balloon pump, 1 patient (8%) had a previous full-support LVAD, and 4 patients (33%) had cerebrovascular events in the past. After device implantation, there were no right ventricular failures, device-related infections, hemorrhagic strokes, arterial or venous thromboembolisms, or worsenings of aortic and mitral regurgitation observed over the follow-up. The mean follow up was 174 ± 171 days (range, 5-764 days; cumulative, 3199 days). One patient (8%) died, 3 patients (25%) successfully underwent transplantation, 1 device (8%) was explanted after myocardial recovery, and 5 patients (42%) are still on ongoing support. Two patients (17%) were upgraded to a full-support LVAD after 65 days of mean support. A total of 11 of 12 patients (92%) were discharged from the hospital and are presently alive. Left ventricular end-diastolic diameter was significantly reduced 3 months after device implantation. CONCLUSIONS: Partial LVAD support may be clinically efficacious in inotropic and intra-aortic balloon pump-dependent patients. On the basis of our experience and evidence of previous research, such patients may benefit from minimally invasive access, no need for sternotomy and cardiopulmonary bypass, a short implantation time, an easy exchange if necessary, and a lower risk of subsequent heart transplantation. Because the implantation is performed without sternotomy, device upgrade is feasible with a comparatively low operative risk and good clinical outcome. Our preliminary results show that partial-support devices may have the potential to replace full-support LVADs in the near future.

Outcomes and predictors of early mortality after continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implantation as a bridge to transplantation.

Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are fast becoming standard of care for patients with advanced heart failure. However, despite continuous improvement in VAD technology, there remains a significant early postoperative morbidity and mortality in this extreme patient group. The aim of the current study was to explore the short-term outcomes and predictors for 90 day mortality in the patients after implantation of continuous-flow LVAD. Perioperative clinical, echocardiographic, hemodynamic, and laboratory data of 90 day survivors and nonsurvivors were collected and compared retrospectively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed on univariate predictors for 90 day mortality with an entry criterion of p < 0.1. Between July 2006 and May 2012, 117 patients underwent implantation of a continuous-flow LVAD as a bridge to transplantation: 71 (60.7%) HeartMate II (Thoratec Corp, Pleasanton, CA) and 46 (39.3%) HVAD (HeartWare International, Framingham, MA). All-cause 90 day mortality was 17.1%. Multivariate analysis revealed higher preoperative central venous pressure (odds ratio [OR], 1.18; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.014-1.378; p = 0.033) and higher age (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.01-1.38; p = 0.045) as the only independent predictors for 90 day mortality. Optimization of preoperative volume status, preload, and right heart function as well as age-based selection of candidates for LVAD support are the critical factors influencing early outcome after continuous-flow LVAD implantation.

Evaluation of the organ care system in heart transplantation with an adverse donor/recipient profile.

BACKGROUND: A severe shortage of available donor organs has created an impetus to use extended criteria organs for heart transplantation. Although such attempts increase donor organ availability, they may result in an adverse donor-recipient risk profile. The TransMedics Organ Care System (OCS) (TransMedics, Inc, Boston) allows preservation of the donor heart by perfusing the organ at 34°C in a beating state, potentially reducing the detrimental effect of cold storage and providing additional assessment options. We describe a single-center experience with the OCS in high-risk heart transplant procedures. METHODS: Thirty hearts were preserved using the OCS between February 2013 and January 2014, 26 of which (86.7%) were transplanted. Procedures were classified as high risk based on (1) donor factors, ie, transport time more than 2.5 hours with estimated ischemic time longer than 4 hours, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) less than 50%, left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), donor cardiac arrest, alcohol/drug abuse, coronary artery disease or (2) recipient factors, ie, mechanical circulatory support or elevated pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR), or both. RESULTS: Donor and recipient age was 37 ± 12 years and 43 ± 13 years, respectively. Allograft cold ischemia time was 85 ± 17 minutes and OCS perfusion time was 284 ± 90 minutes. The median intensive care unit stay was 6 days. One death (3.8%) was observed over the follow-up: 257 ± 116 (109-445 days). There was preserved allograft function in 92% of patients, with a mean LVEF of 64% ± 5%. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the OCS is associated with markedly improved short-term outcomes and transplant activity by allowing use of organs previously not considered suitable for transplantation or selection of higher risk recipients, or both.

De novo aortic regurgitation after continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implantation.

BACKGROUND: Significant aortic regurgitation (AR) after continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (cf-LVAD) placement affects device performance and patient outcomes. This study examined the development of AR and long-term results after implantation of cf-LVADs. METHODS: The study included all patients with no or less than mild AR who underwent HeartMate II (58 [62%]; Thoratec Corp, Pleasanton, CA) or HeartWare (35 [38%]; HeartWare International, Framingham, MA) implantation at our institute from July 2006 to July 2012. Serial echocardiograms were obtained preoperatively, at 1, 3 and 6 months postoperatively, and then at a minimum of 4-month intervals in patients with longer-term support. Kaplan-Meier estimates for freedom from moderate or greater AR were generated. Logistic regression analysis was used to define independent predictors of AR after cf-LVAD implantation. RESULTS: Median duration of LVAD support was 527 days (25(th), 75(th): 289, 907; range, 60 to 2,433 days). Mild AR developed in 48 patients (51.6%) over a median duration of 126 days, with progression to moderate AR in 13 (14%) over 493 days and to severe AR in 2 (2.1%) over 1,231 days. The incidence of mild or greater AR was 43.1% in HeartMate II vs 65.7% in HeartWare recipients (p = 0.035). Overall freedom from moderate or greater AR was 94.7% ± 2.6% at 1 year, 86.9% ± 4.5% at 2 years, 82.8% ± 5.9% at 3 years, and 31% ± 16.9% at 4 years. Independent predictors of AR were duration of support (odds ratio, 1.002; 95% confidence interval, 1.000 to 1.004; p = 0.017) and a persistently closed aortic valve (odds ratio, 0.193; 95% confidence interval, 0.097 to 0.382; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: AR is associated with longer cf-LVAD support duration and persistent aortic valve closure. Incidence of moderate or greater AR after cf-LVAD implantation increases significantly after 3 years. The clinical implications of these data may warrant consideration of prophylactic aortic valve replacement at the time of cf-LVAD implantation, particularly with expected longer duration of support and in patients with preexisting AR that is more than mild.

Minimally invasive access for off-pump HeartWare left ventricular assist device explantation.

The implantation of a left ventricular assist device as a bridge to transplantation is a well-established treatment of end-stage heart failure in selected patients. Device-related infection is a well-known complication that may require the removal of the device. We describe a minimally invasive explantation approach with complete removal of all components of a HeartWare left ventricular assist device in a patient with persistent infection related to the device.

Clinical experience with HeartWare left ventricular assist device in patients with end-stage heart failure.

BACKGROUND: The gold standard treatment for end-stage heart failure is cardiac transplantation. Because of the increasing number of heart failure patients and the limited supply of donor hearts, a ventricular assist device (VAD) is used as a bridge to transplantation, recovery, or decision. Newer generation VADs have lower risk of fatal adverse events and are also smaller in size. We present our experience with the intrapericardial HeartWare VAD (HeartWare, Framingham, MA) and its clinical outcome. METHODS: The clinical outcome of HeartWare VAD implantations for end-stage heart failure patients performed at Harefield Hospital from March 2007 to June 2011 was studied. The study design was a retrospective review of the prospectively collected data. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients with a mean age of 51±10 years were included in this study. Twenty-nine patients were male (85%). The mean duration of mechanical support was 261±64 days. Five patients (15%) were successfully bridged to heart transplantation. The overall mortality was 24% (8 patients). There were 1 case of mechanical device failure (2%) and 3 cases of device failure due to thrombus formation (8%). Postoperative complications included 5 reoperations for bleeding (15%), 12 acute renal failures (36%), 7 respiratory failures (21%), 2 hepatic dysfunctions (6%), 3 neurologic dysfunctions (9%), 7 right-side heart failures (21%), and 5 driveline infections (15%). CONCLUSIONS: Although cardiac transplantation remains the gold standard for treatment of end-stage heart failure patients, the HeartWare VAD can be used as a safe alternative with a satisfactory clinical outcome.

Ventricular assist device outflow graft in congenitally corrected transposition of great arteries - a surgical challenge.

Congenitally corrected transposition of the great arteries is a complex congenital cardiac anomaly with a wide spectrum of morphologic features and clinical profiles. Most patients are diagnosed late in their life, undergoes surgical repairs, eventually leading to systemic ventricular failure needing heart transplant or mechanical circulatory assistance. As, aorta is located anterior to and left of the PA (Transposition of great arteries), the outflow graft of ventricular assist device traverse across pulmonary artery to reach aorta which poses challenge during further surgical explorations.