Less invasive surgical implant strategy and right heart failure after LVAD implantation.

BACKGROUND: Conventional median sternotomy (CMS) is still the standard technique utilized to implant left ventricular assist devices (LVADs). Recent studies suggest that less invasive surgery (LIS) may be beneficial; however, robust data on differences in right heart failure (RHF) are lacking. This study aimed to determine the impact of LIS compared with that of CMS on RHF outcomes after LVAD implantation. METHODS: An international multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted across 5 centers. Patients were grouped according to their implantation technique (LIS vs CMS). Only centrifugal devices were included. RHF was defined as severe or severe acute RHF according to the 2013 Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) definition. Logistic multivariate regression and propensity score‒matched analyses were performed to account for confounding. RESULTS: Overall, 427 implantations occurred during the study period, with 305 patients implanted using CMS and 122 using LIS. Pre-operative extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) use was more common in the CMS group; off-pump implantation was more common in the LIS group. Other pre-implant variables, including age, creatinine, hemodynamics, and tricuspid regurgitation, did not differ between the 2 groups. Post-operative RHF was less common in the patients who underwent LIS than in those who underwent CMS as was post-operative right ventricular assist device (RVAD) use. LIS remained associated with less RHF in the multivariate analysis. After propensity score matching conditional for age, sex, INTERMACS profile, ECMO, and IABP use in a ratio of 2:1 (CMS to LIS), RHF (29.9% vs 18.6%, p = 0.001) and the need for post-operative RVAD (18.6% vs 8.2%; p = 0.009) remained more common in the CMS group than in the LIS group. There were no significant differences in survival up to 1 year between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: LIS may be associated with less RHF after LVAD implantation compared with CMS. Despite the possible reduction in RHF, there was no difference in 1-year survival. LIS is an alternative to traditional CMS.

Outcomes after surgery for functional tricuspid regurgitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: This study aims to provide a contemporary overview of outcomes after tricuspid valve (TV) surgery for functional tricuspid regurgitation (TR). METHODS AND RESULTS: The literature was systematically searched for papers published between January 2005 and December 2017 reporting on clinical/echocardiographic outcomes after TV surgery for functional TR. A random effects meta-analysis was conducted for outcome variables, and late outcomes are visualized by pooled Kaplan-Meier curves. Subgroup analyses were performed for studies with a within-study comparison of suture vs. ring repair and flexible vs. rigid ring repair. Eighty-seven publications were included, encompassing 13 184 patients (mean age: 62.1 ± 11.8 years, 55% females). A mitral valve procedure was performed in 92% of patients. Pooled mean follow-up was 4.0 ± 2.8 years. Pooled early mortality was 3.9% (95% CI: 3.2-4.6), and late mortality rate was 2.7%/year (95% CI: 2.0-3.5), of which approximately half was cardiac-related 1.2%/year (95% CI: 0.8-1.9). Pooled risk of early moderate-to-severe TR at discharge was 9.4% (95% CI: 7.0-12.1). Late moderate-to-severe TR rate after discharge was 1.9%/year (95% CI: 1.0-3.5). Late reintervention rate was 0.3%/year (95% CI: 0.2-0.4). Mortality and overall (early and late) TR rate were comparable between suture vs. ring annuloplasty (14 studies), whereas overall TR rate was higher after flexible ring vs. rigid ring annuloplasty (6 studies) (7.5%/year vs. 3.9%/year, P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: This study shows that patients undergoing surgery for functional tricuspid regurgitation (FTR) have an acceptable early and late mortality. However, TR remains prevalent after surgery. The results of this study can be used to inform patients and clinicians about the expected outcome after surgery for FTR and can results serve as a benchmark for the performance of emerging transcatheter TV interventions.