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.

Subclavian vein to right atrial appendage bypass without sternotomy to maintain arteriovenous access in patients with complete central vein occlusion, a new approach.

Given the increasing numbers of patients requiring long-term hemodialysis, there is an inevitably increasing population of patients with occluded central venous inflow (subclavian, innominate, and caval) despite access or access possibilities in the arm. In an effort to avoid sternotomy, we have attempted to treat these patients with a substernally tunneled subclavian to right atrial bypass. Patients treated in this fashion have an existing fistula with symptomatic venous hypertension or good fistula options but complete central vein obstruction, a patent subclavian/axillary vein to the costoclavicular junction, and no other options in the contralateral arm. Claviculectomy is performed and the subclavian vein isolated. Through a third intercostal space "minipericardiotomy," the right atrial appendage is exposed. A retrosternal tunnel is fashioned, and bypass is performed from the subclavian vein to atrial appendage. Eleven patients aged 20-70 (mean 46) years underwent surgery at our institution between February 2004 and March 2007. Three bypasses were performed with autogenous vein (two femoral and one saphenous), while eight were performed with polytetrafluoroethylene in an effort to preserve the superficial femoral vein for later leg bypass. There was one early mortality due to sepsis, and early morbidity was limited to one patient with a symptomatic pericardial effusion. Mean follow-up was 16 (range 3-43) months. Sixty-seven percent and 33% of arteriovenous fistulas remained functional at 6 and 10 months, respectively; and one patient's fistula remained functional at 21 months. Four patients (36%) developed central bypass stenosis or occlusion, one requiring a redo bypass and three angioplasty. Infection occurred in two patients (18%), with removal of autogenous vein graft in one. While a significant number of these bypasses fail, upper extremity access is maintained in a reasonable number of patients (67% at 6 months) who are not candidates for local repair or stenting and would thus have no other upper extremity access options. This technique offers an alternative to sternotomy and brachiocephalic vein reconstruction, although the superiority of one method over the other will require direct comparison.

Racial variations in the choice of on-pump versus off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting.

OBJECTIVE: To examine explanations of differences in utilization rates of a newly reintroduced technique - off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) - between racial minorities and Whites. METHOD: The study was based on 15,313 CABG patients in the New York State Cardiac Surgery Reporting System covering all cardiac surgeons providing off-pump CABG in New York State. We estimated cross sectional, random effect regression models predicting the probability of off-pump versus on-pump surgery. RESULTS: Thirty one percent of Blacks, 20.7% of other races, and 23% of Whites underwent off-pump CABG (P <0.0001). The higher rates for Blacks arose mostly from being treated by surgeons performing only a few off-pump procedures rather than from surgeons performing many off-pump surgeries. After adjusting for clinical characteristics and coronary anatomy, Blacks treated by surgeons with low volume off-pump procedures were 1.9 times (P <0.01) more likely to have off-pump surgery compared with Whites treated by the same surgeons. There were no significant differences between Blacks and Whites treated by high volume surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that surgeons who are inexperienced with the off-pump techniques are more likely to perform this surgery on Black patients. Further research should examine potential explanations and the agenda addressing racial disparities should be expanded to address issues of treatment decisions.

Surgical Technique for Ventricular Device Exchange: From HeartMate II to HVAD.

Implantable continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have improved the survival of end-stage heart failure patients. Recent studies have shown an increased occurrence of device replacement in the axial flow pumps particularly for thrombosis. In some patients, to try and avoid recurrent pump thrombosis, it might be advantageous to switch from the axial flow LVAD to a newer generation centrifugal flow LVAD. Technically, this requires some adaption of the LVAD inflow and outflow connections. We describe our technique and outcomes in patients who underwent the conversion from an axial flow LVAD to a centrifugal flow LVAD.

Modification of a biventricular assist device to facilitate preservative infusion and organ recovery in a nonheart-beating donor.

A 46-year-old patient supported by a biventricular assist device (BiVAD) was transferred to our institution for evaluation for heart transplant. The patient was found to have a large intracranial hemorrhage with profound deterioration of neurologic status. The poor prognosis prompted the decision to withdraw care and pursue organ donation. Because the patient did not meet brain death criteria, nonheart-beating donor organ donation was pursued. After the termination of care, the BiVAD was modified: the left side to provide organ preservative solution and the right side to allow drainage. Eight liters of cold University of Wisconsin solution were pumped systemically over 10 minutes, the donor was drained, and the liver was harvested. This technique expedited donor perfusion by eliminating the need to cannulate, minimizing ischemic time for the liver. Although the recipient outcome was poor, and retransplantation was eventually necessary, we believe it was most likely not attributable to the quality of organ preservation. This report discusses the technical aspects of this potentially beneficial procedure.

Right ventricular failure in patients with the HeartMate II continuous-flow left ventricular assist device: incidence, risk factors, and effect on outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence, risk factors, and effect on outcomes of right ventricular failure in a large population of patients implanted with continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices. METHODS: Patients (n = 484) enrolled in the HeartMate II left ventricular assist device (Thoratec, Pleasanton, Calif) bridge-to-transplantation clinical trial were examined for the occurrence of right ventricular failure. Right ventricular failure was defined as requiring a right ventricular assist device, 14 or more days of inotropic support after implantation, and/or inotropic support starting more than 14 days after implantation. Demographics, along with clinical, laboratory, and hemodynamic data, were compared between patients with and without right ventricular failure, and risk factors were identified. RESULTS: Overall, 30 (6%) patients receiving left ventricular assist devices required a right ventricular assist device, 35 (7%) required extended inotropes, and 33 (7%) required late inotropes. A significantly greater percentage of patients without right ventricular failure survived to transplantation, recovery, or ongoing device support at 180 days compared with patients with right ventricular failure (89% vs 71%, P < .001). Multivariate analysis revealed that a central venous pressure/pulmonary capillary wedge pressure ratio of greater than 0.63 (odds ratio, 2.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-4.3; P = .009), need for preoperative ventilator support (odds ratio, 5.5; 95% confidence interval, 2.3-13.2; P < .001), and blood urea nitrogen level of greater than 39 mg/dL (odds ratio, 2.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-4.1; P = .02) were independent predictors of right ventricular failure after left ventricular assist device implantation. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of right ventricular failure in patients with a HeartMate II ventricular assist device is comparable or less than that of patients with pulsatile-flow devices. Its occurrence is associated with worse outcomes than seen in patients without right ventricular failure. Patients at risk for right ventricular failure might benefit from preoperative optimization of right heart function or planned biventricular support.