Impact of Concomitant Mitral Valve Surgery With LVAD Placement: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the outcomes of concomitant mitral valve surgery for significant preexisting mitral regurgitation (MR) in patients undergoing continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD) implantation. Electronic search was performed to identify all studies in the English literature examining concurrent mitral valve surgery in patients with CF-LVAD implantation. Identified articles were systematically assessed for inclusion and exclusion criteria. Of 2319 studies identified, 8 studies were included. Among 445 patients with moderate to severe or severe MR, 113 (25.4%) patients received concurrent mitral valvular intervention during CF-LVAD implantation. There were no significant differences in cardiopulmonary bypass time (MR Surgery 154 min vs. no MR Surgery 119 min, P = 0.64) or hospital length of stay (MR Surgery 21 days vs. no MR Surgery 18 days, P = 0.93). On follow-up, there were no significant differences in freedom from greater than moderate MR (MR Surgery 100% vs. no MR Surgery 74%, P = 0.12) or left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (MR Surgery: 60 mm vs. no MR Surgery 65 mm, P = 0.51). Survival was comparable at 6-months (MR Surgery 77% vs. no MR Surgery 81%, P = 0.75), 1-year (MR Surgery 72% vs. no MR Surgery 80%, P = 0.36), and 2-years of follow-up (MR Surgery 65% vs. no MR Surgery 70%, P = 0.56). The results of our systematic review and meta-analysis of 8 studies consisting of 445 patients demonstrates that the addition of mitral valve intervention to CF-LVAD implantation appears to be safe with comparable survival to those undergoing CF-LVAD implantation alone. Large prospective randomized clinical trials are needed to elucidate whether concomitant mitral valve intervention during CF-LVAD implantation in patients with severe MR is necessary.

Risk of mortality for ventricular arrhythmia in ambulatory LVAD patients.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data regarding the incidence and prognostic significance of ventricular arrhythmias (VA) in ambulatory continuous flow left ventricular assist device (LVAD) patients. METHODS: Sixty-one consecutive patients from November 1, 2006 through December 31, 2010 with an LVAD and implantable cardioverter defibrillator that survived to discharge from the LVAD implantation admission were studied. Follow-up began from date of discharge with both devices in situ and ended with death, transplant, on June 1, 2011. Pre-LVAD VA history was related to the primary endpoints of post-LVAD VA, mortality, and the combined endpoint of post-LVAD VA/mortality. RESULTS: During a mean follow-up of 622 days 19 patients (31%) experienced VA (14 episodes of VT, 5 episodes of VF). Pre-LVAD VA was predictive of post-LVAD VA (hazard ratio [HR] 2.91, P = 0.026) and the combined post-LVAD VA/mortality endpoint (HR 2.70, P = 0.021) but only displayed a nonsignificant association with mortality (HR 2.30, P = 0.11). In multivariate analysis, pre-LVAD VA remained a significant predictor of post-LVAD VA (HR 2.84, P = 0.03) and the combined post-LVAD VA/mortality endpoint (HR 2.65, P = 0.025). Post-LVAD VA was the strongest univariate predictor of mortality (HR 13.92, P < 0.001) and remained so after multivariate adjustment (HR 9.69, P = 0.001). Post-LVAD VA occurred at a mean of 1 year from mortality events with 45% within 1 month. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-LVAD VA is a significant predictor of post-LVAD VA but not of mortality. VA in the continuous flow LVAD population carries a significant risk of mortality often within the first month.

Influence of panel-reactive antibodies on posttransplant outcomes in lung transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Panel-reactive antibody (PRA) is used to estimate the degree of humoral sensitization in the recipient before transplantation. Although pretransplant sensitization is associated with increased complications in other solid organ transplant recipients, less is known about the outcome of sensitized lung transplant recipients. Therefore, we sought to determine the impact of elevated pretransplant PRA on clinical outcomes after lung transplantation. METHODS: The records of the first 200 lung transplant operations performed at Duke University Medical Center were reviewed. The outcomes of sensitized patients, PRA greater than 10% before transplantation (n = 18), were compared with the outcomes of nonsensitized patients. RESULTS: Sensitized patients experienced a significantly greater number of median ventilator days posttransplant (9 +/- 8) as compared with nonsensitized recipients (1 +/- 11; p = 0.0008). There were no significant differences between the number of episodes of acute rejection; however, there was a significantly increased incidence of bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome occurring in untreated sensitized recipients (56%) versus nonsensitized (23%; p = 0.044). In addition, there was a trend towards decreased survival in the sensitized recipients, with a 2-year survival of 58% in sensitized recipients as compared with 73% in the nonsensitized patients (p = 0.31). CONCLUSIONS: Sensitized lung transplant recipients experience more acute and chronic complications after transplantation. These patients probably warrant alternative management strategies.

Intensive surveillance of femoropopliteal-tibial autogenous vein bypasses improves long-term graft patency and limb salvage.

OBJECTIVE: The authors determined the impact of an intensive surveillance program of autogenous vein bypasses on patency and limb salvage. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Surveillance protocols of vein bypasses can identify graft-threatening lesions to permit elective revisions before thrombosis. The authors compared follow-up based on clinically indicated procedures with intensive surveillance. METHODS: From 1985 to 1994, 615 autogenous vein bypasses (454 in situ, 161 reversed/composite) to popliteal (n = 169) and tibial (n = 446) arteries were performed for critical limb ischemia (n = 507), claudication (n = 88), and popliteal aneurysm (n = 20). Intensive surveillance of autogenous vein bypasses consisted of ankle brachial index and duplex scan with graft velocities measured at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and every 6 months subsequently. After surgery 317 bypasses had intensive surveillance, 222 bypasses were clinically indicated for follow-up, and 76 bypasses were excluded because follow-up or patency was less than 31 days. RESULTS: Primary patency at 5 years was similar for bypasses treated by intensive surveillance (56%) and those treated with clinically indicated procedures (67%). Secondary patency and limb salvage at 5 years was significantly improved (p < 0.02) for bypasses followed by intensive surveillance (80% and 94%) compared with clinically indicated procedures (67% and 73%). Revision of patent bypasses was higher (p < 0.000001) for bypasses treated by intensive surveillance (61 of 70, 87%) compared with those treated with clinically indicated procedures (9 of 34, 26%). Secondary patency at 2 years was significantly higher (p < 0.02) for revision of patent bypasses (79%) compared with thrombosed bypasses (55%). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term autogenous vein bypass patency and limb salvage is significantly improved by intensive surveillance, permitting identification and correction of graft threatening lesions before thrombosis.

Pedal or peroneal bypass: which is better when both are patent?

PURPOSE: We compared autogenous vein pedal and peroneal bypasses, focusing on extremities that could have a bypass to either artery. METHODS: From 1985 to 1993 we performed a total of 175 pedal and 77 peroneal autogenous vein bypasses for rest pain (n = 75, 30%) and tissue loss (n = 177, 70%). One hundred ninety-six (78%) in situ saphenous vein and 56 (22%) reversed or composite vein bypasses were performed. One hundred fifty-two of these 252 bypasses were performed in extremities with both the pedal and peroneal arteries patent by arteriography. The vascular surgeon chose to perform 99 pedal and 53 peroneal vein bypasses in these 152 extremities. RESULTS: The angiogram score of the outflow arteries were similar for pedal and peroneal bypasses with the Society for Vascular Surgery and the International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery and modified scoring systems. At 2 years the primary and secondary patency rates for pedal bypasses (70% and 77%) were not significantly different compared with those for peroneal bypasses (60% and 72%). Limb salvage rates at 2 years were similar for pedal and peroneal bypasses for all patients (74% and 73%), patients with both pedal and peroneal arteries patent (83% and 72%), diabetics (76% and 66%), and patients with tissue necrosis (77% and 71%). CONCLUSIONS: Pedal and peroneal artery bypasses with equivalent angiogram scores have similar long-term graft patency and limb salvage. The choice between pedal or peroneal artery bypass should be based on the quality of vein and the surgeon's preference.