Financial impact of donation after circulatory death heart transplantation: A single-center analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical success of donation after circulatory death (DCD) heart transplantation is leading to growing adoption of this technique. In comparison to procurement from a brain-dead donor, DCD requires additional resources. The economic impact of DCD heart transplantation from the hospital perspective is not well known. METHODS: We compared the financial data of patients who received DCD allografts to those who received a DBD organ at our institution from January 1, 2021 to December 31, 2022. We also compared the cost of ex-situ machine perfusion to in-situ organ perfusion employed during DCD recovery. RESULTS: We performed 58 DBD and 22 DCD heart-alone transplantations during the study period. Out of 22 DCD grafts, 16 were recovered with thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion (TA-NRP) and six with direct procurement followed by normothermic machine perfusion (DP-NMP). The contribution margin per case for DBD versus DCD was $234,362 and $235,440 (P = .72). The direct costs did not significantly differ between the two groups ($171,949 and 186,250; P = .49). In comparing the two methods of procuring hearts from DCD donors, the direct cost of TA-NRP was $155,955 in comparison to $223,399 for DP-NMP (P = .21). This difference translated into a clinically meaningful but not statistically significant greater contribution margin for TA-NRP ($242, 657 vs. $175,768; P = .34). CONCLUSIONS: Our data showed that the adoption of DCD procurement did not have a negative financial impact on the contribution margin in our institution. Programs considering starting DCD heart transplantation, and those who are currently performing DCD procurement should evaluate their own financial situation.

Ventricular assist device using a thoracotomy-based implant technique: Multi-Center Implantation of the HeartMate 3 in Subjects With Heart Failure Using Surgical Techniques Other Than Full Median Sternotomy (HM3 SWIFT).

OBJECTIVES: The HeartMate 3 (Abbott) left ventricular assist device provides substantial improvement in long-term morbidity and mortality in patients with advanced heart failure. The Implantation of the HeartMate 3 in Subjects With Heart Failure Using Surgical Techniques Other Than Full Median Sternotomy study compares thoracotomy-based implantation clinical outcomes with standard median sternotomy. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, multicenter, single-arm study in patients eligible for HeartMate 3 implantation with thoracotomy-based surgical technique (bilateral thoracotomy or partial upper sternotomy with left thoracotomy). The composite primary end point was survival free of disabling stroke (modified Rankin score >3), or reoperation to remove or replace a malfunctioning device, or conversion to median sternotomy at 6-months postimplant (elective transplants were treated as a success). The primary end point (noninferiority, -15% margin) was assessed with >90% power compared with a propensity score-matched cohort (ratio 1:2) derived from the Multi-Center Study of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy With HeartMate 3 continued access protocol. RESULTS: The study enrolled 102 patients between December 2020 and July 2022 in the thoracotomy-based arm at 23 North American centers. Follow-up concluded in December 2022. In the Implantation of the HeartMate 3 in Subjects With Heart Failure Using Surgical Techniques Other Than Full Median Sternotomy study group, noninferiority criteria was met (absolute between-group difference, -1.2%; Farrington Manning lower 1-sided 95% CI, -9.3%; P < .0025) and event-free survival was not different (85.0% vs 86.2%; hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.58-2.10). Length of stay with thoracotomy-based implant was longer (median, 20 vs 17 days; P = .03). No differences were observed for blood product utilization, adverse events (including right heart failure), functional status, and quality of life between cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Thoracotomy-based implantation of the HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device is noninferior to implantation via standard full sternotomy. This study supports thoracotomy-based implantation as an additional standard for surgical implantation of the HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device.

Utilization of Paragonix Sherpapak Cardiac Transport System for the Preservation of Donor Hearts After Circulatory Death.

BACKGROUND: Donation after circulatory death (DCD) heart transplantation is being increasingly adopted by transplant centers. The optimal method of DCD heart preservation during transport after in situ thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion (TA-NRP) is not known. METHODS: We evaluated our experience with the Paragonix SherpaPak Cardiac Transport System (SCTS) for the transport of DCD cardiac allografts after TA-NRP recovery between January 2021 and December 2022. We collected and evaluated donor characteristics, allograft ischemic intervals, and recipient baseline demographic and clinical variables, and short-term outcomes. RESULTS: Twelve recipients received DCD grafts recovered with TA-NRP and transported in SCTS during the study period. The median age of 10 male and 2 female donors was 32 years (min 15, max 38). The median duration of functional warm ischemia was 12 minutes (min 8, max 22). Hearts were preserved in SCTS for a median of 158 minutes (min 37, max 224). Median recipient age was 61 years (min 28, max 70). Ten recipients (83%) survived to hospital discharge, with one death attributable to graft dysfunction (8%). The median vasoactive-inotropic (VIS) score at 72 hours post-transplantation of the entire cohort was 6 (min 0, max 15). The median length of intensive care unit stay in hospital survivors was 5 days (min 3, max 17) days and hospital stay 17 days (min 9, max 37). CONCLUSIONS: The Paragonix SCTS provides efficacious preservation of DCD grafts for ≥3.5 hours. Organs transported with this device showed satisfactory post-transplantation function.

Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Cardiogenic Shock.

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a clinical condition characterized by inadequate tissue perfusion in the setting of low cardiac output. CS is the leading cause of death following acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Several temporary mechanical support devices are available for hemodynamic support in CS until clinical recovery ensues or until more definitive surgical procedures have been performed. Veno-arterial (VA) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has evolved as a powerful treatment option for short-term circulatory support in refractory CS. In the absence of randomized clinical trials, the utilization of ECMO has been guided by clinical experience and based on data from registries and observational studies. Survival to hospital discharge with the use of VA-ECMO ranges from 28-67%. The initiation of ECMO requires venous and arterial cannulation, which can be performed either percutaneously or by surgical cutdown. Components of an ECMO circuit include an inflow cannula that draws blood from the venous system, a pump, an oxygenator, and an outflow cannula that returns blood to the arterial system. Management considerations post ECMO initiation include systemic anticoagulation to prevent thrombosis, left ventricle unloading strategies to augment myocardial recovery, prevention of limb ischemia with a distal perfusion catheter in cases of femoral arterial cannulation, and prevention of other complications such as hemolysis, air embolism, and Harlequin syndrome. ECMO is contraindicated in patients with uncontrolled bleeding, unrepaired aortic dissection, severe aortic insufficiency, and in futile cases such as severe neurological injury or metastatic malignancies. A multi-disciplinary shock team approach is recommended while considering patients for ECMO. Ongoing studies will evaluate whether the addition of routine ECMO improves survival in AMI patients with CS who undergo revascularization.

Transplantation Outcomes with Donor Hearts after Circulatory Death.

BACKGROUND: Data showing the efficacy and safety of the transplantation of hearts obtained from donors after circulatory death as compared with hearts obtained from donors after brain death are limited. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, noninferiority trial in which adult candidates for heart transplantation were assigned in a 3:1 ratio to receive a heart after the circulatory death of the donor or a heart from a donor after brain death if that heart was available first (circulatory-death group) or to receive only a heart that had been preserved with the use of traditional cold storage after the brain death of the donor (brain-death group). The primary end point was the risk-adjusted survival at 6 months in the as-treated circulatory-death group as compared with the brain-death group. The primary safety end point was serious adverse events associated with the heart graft at 30 days after transplantation. RESULTS: A total of 180 patients underwent transplantation; 90 (assigned to the circulatory-death group) received a heart donated after circulatory death and 90 (regardless of group assignment) received a heart donated after brain death. A total of 166 transplant recipients were included in the as-treated primary analysis (80 who received a heart from a circulatory-death donor and 86 who received a heart from a brain-death donor). The risk-adjusted 6-month survival in the as-treated population was 94% (95% confidence interval [CI], 88 to 99) among recipients of a heart from a circulatory-death donor, as compared with 90% (95% CI, 84 to 97) among recipients of a heart from a brain-death donor (least-squares mean difference, -3 percentage points; 90% CI, -10 to 3; P<0.001 for noninferiority [margin, 20 percentage points]). There were no substantial between-group differences in the mean per-patient number of serious adverse events associated with the heart graft at 30 days after transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, risk-adjusted survival at 6 months after transplantation with a donor heart that had been reanimated and assessed with the use of extracorporeal nonischemic perfusion after circulatory death was not inferior to that after standard-care transplantation with a donor heart that had been preserved with the use of cold storage after brain death. (Funded by TransMedics; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03831048.).

Impact of donation after circulatory death heart transplantation on waitlist outcomes and transplantation activity.

INTRODUCTION: Donation after circulatory death (DCD) heart transplantation has been shown to have comparable outcomes to transplantation using brain death donors (DBDs). This study evaluates the impact of this alternative source of allografts on waitlist mortality and transplant volume. METHODS: We compared waitlist mortality and transplant rates in patients who were registered before (2019 period) and after we adopted DCD heart transplantation (2021 period). RESULTS: We identified 111 patients who were on the waiting list in 2019 and 77 patients who were registered during 2021. Total number of donor organ offers received in 2019 was 385 (178 unique donors) versus 3450 (1145 unique donors) in 2021. More than 40% of all donors in 2021 were DCDs. Waitlist mortality was comparable for patients in 2019 and 2021 (18/100 person-years in 2019 vs. 26/100 person-years in 2021, p = .49). The transplant rate was 67/100 person-years in 2019 versus 207/100 person-years in 2021 (p < .001). After adjusting for acuity status, gender, blood type, and weight, patients listed in 2021 had 2.08 times greater chance of transplantation compared to patients listed in 2019 (HR 2.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.26-3.45, p = .004). CONCLUSIONS: Use of DCD donor hearts significantly increased heart transplant rate in our institution.

Cardiac function unchanged following reanimation with normothermic regional perfusion in donation after circulatory death.

Objectives: To determine whether hearts reanimated with normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) have clinically detectable changes in function using echocardiography comparing the prearrest and post-NRP imaging. As heart transplantation from donation after circulatory death (DCD) continues to increase, preliminary results suggest outcomes comparable with donation after brain death. It is unknown whether the obligatory period of warm ischemia experienced during DCD withdrawal process causes immediate changes in cardiac allograft function following in situ reanimation. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed and compared predonation with postreanimation echocardiographic findings in all DCD donors at our institution from January to October 2021. All DCD donor organs were reanimated with in situ thoracoabdominal NRP after circulatory death. Echocardiographic assessment included (1) 2-dimensional and speckle-tracking measures of chamber size and function; (2) ejection fraction; (3) fractional area change; and (4) global longitudinal strain. Results: Altogether, 4 DCD heart donations were performed during the study period. Basic demographics and withdrawal ischemic time periods are reported. There were no changes in left ventricular ejection fraction and right ventricular fractional area change when comparing the predonation and the postreanimation echocardiogram. There was a minimal, nonstatistically significant decrease in left ventricular global longitudinal strain and right ventricular free-wall systolic strain in 3 of the 4 donors following reanimation. Conclusions: DCD cardiac allografts reanimated with NRP demonstrated no change in echocardiographic parameters used for a standard predonation donor heart evaluation. Findings suggest cardiac function of DCD allografts reanimated with thoracoabdominal NRP is not adversely impacted by limited period of warm ischemia following circulatory arrest.

In a large-volume multidisciplinary setting individual surgeon volume does not impact LVAD outcomes.

BACKGROUND: In complex operations surgeon volume may impact outcomes. We sought to understand if individual surgeon volume affects left ventricular assist device (LVAD) outcomes. METHODS: We reviewed primary LVAD implants at an experienced ventricular assist devices (VAD)/transplant center between 2013 and 2019. Cases were dichotomized into a high-volume group (surgeons averaging 11 or more LVAD cases per year), and a low-volume group (10 or less per year). Propensity score matching was performed. Survival to discharge, 1-year survival, and incidence of major adverse events were compared between the low- and high-volume groups. Predictors of survival were identified with multivariate analysis. RESULTS: There were 315 patients who met inclusion criteria-45 in the low-volume group, 270 in the high-volume group. There was no difference in survival to hospital discharge between the low (91.9%) and high (83.3%) volume matched groups (p = .22). Survival at 1-year was also similar (85.4% vs. 80.6%, p = .55). There was no difference in the incidence of major adverse events between the groups. Predictors of mortality in the first year included: age (hazards ratio [HR]: 1.061, p < .001), prior sternotomy (HR: 1.991, p = .01), increasing international normalized ratio (HR: 4.748, p < .001), increasing AST (HR: 1.001, p < .001), increasing bilirubin (HR: 1.081, p = .01), and preoperative mechanical ventilation (HR: 2.662, p = .005). Individual surgeon volume was not an independent predictor of discharge or 1-year survival. CONCLUSION: There was no difference in survival or adverse events between high and low volume surgeons suggesting that, in an experienced multidisciplinary setting, low-volume VAD surgeons can achieve similar outcomes to their high-volume colleagues.

Thoracoabdominal Normothermic Perfusion in Donation After Circulatory Death.

Donation after circulatory death is emerging as an alternative pathway to donation after brain death to expand the cardiac organ donor pool. We describe the surgical technique and circuit configuration for in-situ organ reperfusion with thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion using portable venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

Successful lung transplantation with graft recovered after thoracoabdominal normothermic perfusion from donor after circulatory death.

Lung transplantation with lungs procured from donors after circulatory death (DCD) has been established as an alternative technique to traditional donation after brain death (DBD) with comparable outcomes. Recently, in situ thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion (TA-NRP) has emerged as a novel technique employed in the procurement of cardiac allografts after circulatory death. TA-NRP, in contrast to ex situ machine perfusion, has the advantage of allowing in situ assessment of donor organs prior to final acceptance. However, there are some concerns that this technique may adversely impact the quality of lung allografts. Here, we present a case of a successful bilateral sequential lung transplantation in a patient with postinflammatory pulmonary fibrosis due to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), with lungs procured after normothermic in situ lung perfusion. Apart from the lungs, heart, liver, and kidneys were also successfully transplanted from this donor.

Pulmonary Function Testing Pre-heart Transplant Predicts Posttransplant Survival.

Although pulmonary function testing (PFT) is typically performed for heart transplant evaluation, the prognostic utility of PFTs after transplantation is unknown. We evaluated whether PFT parameters were correlated with outcomes following heart transplantation. METHODS: International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation Thoracic Organ Transplant Registry data were utilized. Survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier method and compared via log-rank test. Cox proportional hazard modeling was used to evaluate univariate and multivariate predictors of survival. RESULTS: Eight hundred two patients pretransplant PFT data were available for evaluation. Forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) < 50% predicted (P < 0.0001), and forced vital capacity (FVC) < 50% predicted each had significantly higher mortality (P = 0.001) compared with patients with FEV1 or FVC 50%-80% or >80%. FEV1/FVC < 0.7 was not associated with increased mortality. FEV1 and FVC below 50% both predicted longer lengths of stay (P = 0.028 for FEV1 and P = 0.0075 for FVC). After adjusting for male gender, age, body mass index, smoking history, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, creatinine, albumin, and total bilirubin, FEV1 < 50% (hazard ratio, 4.91; P < 0.0001; 95% confidence interval, 2.69-8.94) and FVC < 50% (hazard ratio, 2.75; P = 0.003; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-5.4) both remained independent predictors of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Abnormal pulmonary function (FEV1 or FVC below 50% of predicted) pre-heart transplantation is associated with increased mortality and longer lengths of stay posttransplant.

Preoperative Right Heart Dysfunction and Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Patients with Left Ventricular Assist Devices.

Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) is a common cause of morbidity among patients supported by left ventricular assist devices (LVADs). The aim of this study was to identify if pre-LVAD right ventricular (RV) dysfunction is associated with risk of GIB after LVAD implantation. Of 398 patients implanted with LVADs between July 2008 and July 2016, 130 (33%) developed GIB at a median of 2.6 months following LVAD implantation. Arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) were found in 42 (34%) GIB patients. Patients with GIB were older and more likely to have hypertension, diabetes, and ischemic cardiomyopathy. On pre-LVAD echocardiography, GIB patients had increased RV diastolic dimension (4.7 ± 0.8 vs. 4.4 ± 0.9 cm, p = 0.02), a higher rate of greater than mild tricuspid valve (TV) regurgitation (73 [60%] vs. 120 [47%], p = 0.006), and underwent TV repair more often (38 [30%] vs. 43 [16%], p = 0.0006) during LVAD implantation. After multivariable adjustment, preoperative greater than mild RV enlargement (hazard ratio [HR] 2.32, 95% CI 1.12-5.03; p = 0.03), TV regurgitation (HR 1.83, CI 1.02-3.44; p = 0.01), and TV repair (HR 3.76, confidence interval [CI] 1.02-4.44; p = 0.01) remained associated with risk of GIB. This finding was driven by the AVM-GIB subgroup. Preoperative RV enlargement and TV regurgitation are associated with post-LVAD AVM-related GIB.

Prospective Multicenter Study of Myocardial Recovery Using Left Ventricular Assist Devices (RESTAGE-HF [Remission from Stage D Heart Failure]): Medium-Term and Primary End Point Results.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) unloading and hemodynamic support in patients with advanced chronic heart failure can result in significant improvement in cardiac function allowing LVAD removal; however, the rate of this is generally considered to be low. This prospective multicenter nonrandomized study (RESTAGE-HF [Remission from Stage D Heart Failure]) investigated whether a protocol of optimized LVAD mechanical unloading, combined with standardized specific pharmacological therapy to induce reverse remodeling and regular testing of underlying myocardial function, could produce a higher incidence of LVAD explantation. METHODS: Forty patients with chronic advanced heart failure from nonischemic cardiomyopathy receiving the Heartmate II LVAD were enrolled from 6 centers. LVAD speed was optimized with an aggressive pharmacological regimen, and regular echocardiograms were performed at reduced LVAD speed (6000 rpm, no net flow) to test underlying myocardial function. The primary end point was the proportion of patients with sufficient improvement of myocardial function to reach criteria for explantation within 18 months with sustained remission from heart failure (freedom from transplant/ventricular assist device/death) at 12 months. RESULTS: Before LVAD, age was 35.1±10.8 years, 67.5% were men, heart failure mean duration was 20.8±20.6 months, 95% required inotropic and 20% temporary mechanical support, left ventricular ejection fraction was 14.5±5.3%, end-diastolic diameter was 7.33±0.89 cm, end-systolic diameter was 6.74±0.88 cm, pulmonary artery saturations were 46.7±9.2%, and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure was 26.2±7.6 mm Hg. Four enrolled patients did not undergo the protocol because of medical complications unrelated to the study procedures. Overall, 40% of all enrolled (16/40) patients achieved the primary end point, P<0.0001, with 50% (18/36) of patients receiving the protocol being explanted within 18 months (pre-explant left ventricular ejection fraction, 57±8%; end-diastolic diameter, 4.81±0.58 cm; end-systolic diameter, 3.53±0.51 cm; pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, 8.1±3.1 mm Hg; pulmonary artery saturations 63.6±6.8% at 6000 rpm). Overall, 19 patients were explanted (19/36, 52.3% of those receiving the protocol). The 15 ongoing explanted patients are now 2.26±0.97 years after explant. After explantation survival free from LVAD or transplantation was 90% at 1-year and 77% at 2 and 3 years. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter prospective study, this strategy of LVAD support combined with a standardized pharmacological and cardiac function monitoring protocol resulted in a high rate of LVAD explantation and was feasible and reproducible with explants occurring in all 6 participating sites. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01774656.

Impact of temporary mechanical circulatory support for early graft failure on post-heart transplantation outcomes.

Although temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) for hemodynamic failure following heart transplantation is associated with increased early morbidity and mortality, the impact of etiology of graft dysfunction and long-term clinical implications are less well known. The objective of our study was to evaluate outcomes in patients who required venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA ECMO) or temporary right ventricular assist device (RVAD) support for either primary or secondary early graft dysfunction. Hospital mortality in 27 patients who required tMCS following heart transplantation at our institution between 2007 and 2017 was 56%, 30% in patients with right ventricular dysfunction secondary to increased afterload, 60% in patients with primary graft dysfunction, and 100% in patients with graft failure secondary to coagulopathy with intraoperative bleeding or overwhelming sepsis. Conditional 1-year and 5-year survival was comparable between patients with, and without, the need for post-transplantation support with tMCS (98% and 89%; 92% and 65% at 1 and 5 years, P = .21). Etiology of early graft failure plays an important part in determining the short-term post-heart transplantation outcome. Although complications associated with tMCS use, such as renal dysfunction and infection, extend beyond index transplant hospitalization, long-term conditional survival is not compromised.

Percutaneous Deactivation of Left Ventricular Assist Devices.

Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) deactivation may be considered in cases of left ventricular recovery, pump thrombosis, infection, and end-of-life palliation. Surgical pump explantation remains the principal method, but percutaneous deactivation presents a safe and effective alternative. We have developed a formal program for percutaneous LVAD deactivation within our advanced heart failure program including patient selection criteria, preprocedure testing, a procedural algorithm, and a postprocedure care plan. Patient selection for percutaneous LVAD deactivation required review by an interdisciplinary heart transplant team including reason for deactivation, cardiac function, surgical risk, and patient preference. All candidates underwent LVAD ramp studies with both transthoracic echocardiography and right heart catheterization assessment. Deactivation was performed under general anesthesia with transesophageal echocardiography guidance. Three Amplatzer Vascular Plug IIs (Abbott, St. Paul, MN) were deployed in the LVAD outflow cannula with the proximal edge of the third plug aligned with the aortic anastomosis of the graft as guided by angiography and 3-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography. In a separate procedure, the LVAD drive line was transected below the skin, which was closed surgically over the driveline stump. Anticoagulation was continued for at least 3 months. Since initiation in January 2017, our program has performed 7 percutaneous LVAD deactivation procedures. All procedures have been successful, 5 of the patients remain medically managed, and 2 have proceeded to heart transplant. Percutaneous LVAD deactivation provides an alternative to surgical explantation. A percutaneous LVAD deactivation program is an important component of an advanced heart failure program.

Impaired Exercise Tolerance Early After Heart Transplantation Is Associated With Development of Cardiac Allograft Vasculopathy.

BACKGROUND: Exercise performance remains limited in some patients after heart transplantation (HTx). The goal of this study was to assess for association between cardiopulmonary exercise test performance at 1 year after HTx and future development of cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV). METHODS: Overall 243 HTx recipients performed cardiopulmonary exercise testing at 1 year after HTx. During the median follow-up period of 31 (interquartile range 19;61) months, 76 (32%) patients were diagnosed with CAV (CAV group). RESULTS: The CAV group patients had lower exercise capacity (5.2 ± 1.9 versus 6.5 ± 2.2 metabolic equivalents; P = 0.001) and duration (9.6 ± 3.5 versus 11.4 ± 4.8 min; P = 0.008), lower peak oxygen consumption (VO2) (18.4 ± 5.4 versus 21.4 ± 6.1 mL/kg/min; P = 0.0005), lower normalized peak VO2 (63% ± 18% versus 71% ± 19%; P = 0.007), and higher minute ventilation (VE)/carbon dioxide production (VCO2) (34 ± 5 versus 32 ± 5, P = 0.04). On Cox proportional hazards regression analysis, normalized peak VO2 ≤60%, and VE/VCO2 ≥34 were associated with a high hazard for CAV (HR = 1.8 [95% CI 1.10-4.53, P = 0.03] and 2.5 [95% CI 1.01-8.81, P = 0.04], respectively). The subgroup of patients with both normalized peak VO2 ≤60% and VE/VCO2 ≥34 was at highest risk for development of CAV (HR = 5.2, 95% CI 2.27-15.17, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Normalized peak VO2 ≤60% and VE/VCO2 ≥34 at 1 year after HTx are associated with the development of CAV.

Recurrent pump thrombosis is common after axial continuous-flow left ventricular assist device exchange.

In selected patients with left ventricular assist device-associated infection or malfunction, pump exchange may become necessary after conservative treatment options fail and heart transplantation is not readily available. We examined the survival and complication rate in patients (⩾19 years of age) who underwent HeartMate II to HeartMate II exchange at our institution from 1 January 2010 to 28 February 2018. Clinical outcomes were analyzed and compared for patients who underwent exchange for pump thrombosis (14 patients), breach of driveline integrity (5 patients), and device-associated infection (2 patients). There were no differences in 30-day mortality (p = 0.58), need for temporary renal replacement therapy (p = 0.58), right ventricular mechanical support (p = 0.11), and postoperative stroke (p = 0.80) among groups. Survival at 1 year was 90% ± 7% for the whole cohort and 85% ± 10% for those who underwent exchange for pump thrombosis. In patients exchanged for device thrombosis, freedom from re-thrombosis and survival free from pump re-thrombosis at 1 year were 49% ± 16% and 42% ± 15%, respectively. No association of demographic and clinical variables with the risk of recurrent pump thrombosis after the first exchange was identified. Survival after left ventricular assist device exchange compares well with published results after primary left ventricular assist device implantation. However, recurrence of thrombosis was common among patients who required a left ventricular assist device exchange due to pump thrombosis. In this sub-group, consideration should be given to alternative strategies to improve the outcomes.

Valve in Valve Trans-Catheter Aortic Valve Replacement Followed by LVAD Deactivation in the Setting of Recovered Systolic Function.

BACKGROUND: Advanced heart failure has extremely high mortality without advanced therapies (left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation or cardiac transplant). LVAD patients with bioprosthetic aortic valve are more prone to leaflet fusion resulting in valvular stenosis and regurgitation. CASE PRESENTATION: We present a 46-year-old patient who had LV systolic function recovery while on LVAD. However, he had a severely stenotic aortic valve bioprosthesis with leaflet fusion that had to be replaced before deactivating his LVAD. Due to high surgical risk, we performed valve-invalve Trans-Catheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) with an Evolut self-expanding valve, however, the patient had significant aortic regurgitation secondary to deployment above the bioprosthetic valve ring. We successfully deployed a second Evolut Self-expanding valve inside the ring with excellent results. This was followed by a successful LVAD deactivation next day. His LV systolic function continued to recover and he had no heart failure symptoms at 3 month follow up. In the right settings, TAVR in recovered LVAD patients with aortic stenosis as a bridge to LVAD deactivation is a viable option, especially for patients who fall in the high-risk group. CONCLUSION: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first reported case of a valve-in-valve TAVR followed by successful LVAD deactivation in the setting of recovered LV systolic function.