RESUMEN
The worldwide experience with mechanical circulatory support in adult patients with single ventricle and Fontan palliation is limited. We aimed to see the outcomes in such patients on durable left ventricular assist device. We systematically reviewed the English language literature found on PubMed and Google Scholar, searching the terms "Fontan," "single ventricle," "ventricular assist device," "LVAD," and "mechanical circulatory support," and selected all individual cases with reported outcomes. We identified 4 patients on pulsatile left ventricular assist device, all of whom were successfully bridged to transplant, and 15 patients on continuous flow LVAD, age 25.9 ± 5.8, predominantly males. Mean time on LVAD support was 718.6 ± 616.5 days, and only 2 patients (13.3%) died. Durable left ventricular assist device support in adult patients with Fontan provides excellent results and should be used more frequently.
Asunto(s)
Ventrículos Cardíacos , Corazón Auxiliar , Humanos , Adulto , Ventrículos Cardíacos/fisiopatología , Procedimiento de Fontan/métodos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/cirugía , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/terapia , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/fisiopatología , Masculino , FemeninoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) and left ventricular (LV) dysfunction demonstrate improvement in left ventricular injection fraction (LVEF) after aortic valve replacement (AVR). The timing and magnitude of recovery in patients with very low LVEF (≤ 25%) in surgical or transcatheter AVR is not well studied. OBJECTIVE: Determine clinical outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve repair (SAVR) in the subset of patients with severely reduced EF ≤ 25%. METHODS: Single-center, retrospective study with primary endpoint of LVEF 1-week following either procedure. Secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality and delayed postprocedural LVEF. T-test was used to compare variables and linear regression was used to adjust differences among baseline variables. RESULTS: 83 patients were enrolled (TAVR = 56 and SAVR = 27). TAVR patients were older at the time of procedure (TAVR 77.29 ± 8.69 vs. SAVR 65.41 ± 10.05, p < 0.001). One week post procedure, all patients had improved LVEF after both procedures (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in LVEF between either group (TAVR 33.5 ± 11.77 vs. SAVR 35.3 ± 13.57, p = 0.60). Average LVEF continued to rise and increased by 101% at final follow-up (41.26 ± 13.70). 30-day mortality rates in SAVR and TAVR were similar (7.4% vs. 7.1%, p = 0.91). CONCLUSION: Patients with severe AS and LVEF ≤ 25% have a significant recovery in post-procedural EF following AVR regardless of method. LVEF doubled at two years post-procedure. There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality or mean EF recovery between TAVR and SAVR. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Indiana University institutional review board granted approval for above study numbered 15,322.
Asunto(s)
Estenosis de la Válvula Aórtica , Implantación de Prótesis de Válvulas Cardíacas , Reemplazo de la Válvula Aórtica Transcatéter , Disfunción Ventricular Izquierda , Humanos , Válvula Aórtica/cirugía , Reemplazo de la Válvula Aórtica Transcatéter/métodos , Volumen Sistólico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Implantación de Prótesis de Válvulas Cardíacas/métodos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
Heart failure is a clinical syndrome characterized by the inability of the heart to meet the circulatory demands of the body without requiring an increase in intracardiac pressures at rest or with exertion. Hemodynamic parameters can be measured via right heart catheterization, which has an integral role in the full spectrum of heart failure: from ambulatory patients to those in cardiogenic shock, as well as patients being considered for left ventricular device therapy and heart transplantation. Hemodynamic data are critical for prompt recognition of clinical deterioration, assessment of prognosis, and guidance of treatment decisions. This review is a field guide for hemodynamic assessment, troubleshooting, and interpretation for clinicians treating patients with heart failure.
Asunto(s)
Cateterismo Cardíaco , Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Hemodinámica , Humanos , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/fisiopatología , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/terapia , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/diagnóstico , Cateterismo Cardíaco/métodos , Hemodinámica/fisiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) is a prevalent condition associated with significant morbidity. Patients may have questions that they feel embarrassed to ask or will face delays awaiting responses from their healthcare providers which may impact their health behavior. We aimed to investigate the potential of large language model (LLM) based artificial intelligence (AI) chat platforms in complementing the delivery of patient-centered care. METHODS: Using online patient forums and physician experience, we created 30 questions related to diagnosis, management and prognosis of HF. The questions were posed to two LLM-based AI chat platforms (OpenAI's ChatGPT-3.5 and Google's Bard). Each set of answers was evaluated by two HF experts, independently and blinded to each other, for accuracy (adequacy of content) and consistency of content. RESULTS: ChatGPT provided mostly appropriate answers (27/30, 90%) and showed a high degree of consistency (93%). Bard provided a similar content in its answers and thus was evaluated only for adequacy (23/30, 77%). The two HF experts' grades were concordant in 83% and 67% of the questions for ChatGPT and Bard, respectively. CONCLUSION: LLM-based AI chat platforms demonstrate potential in improving HF education and empowering patients, however, these platforms currently suffer from issues related to factual errors and difficulty with more contemporary recommendations. This inaccurate information may pose serious and life-threatening implications for patients that should be considered and addressed in future research.
Asunto(s)
Inteligencia Artificial , Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Humanos , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/terapia , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/diagnóstico , Lenguaje , Internet , Educación del Paciente como Asunto/métodosRESUMEN
Pulmonary hypertension associated with left heart disease (PH-LHD) remains the most common cause of pulmonary hypertension globally. Etiologies include heart failure with reduced and preserved ejection fraction and left-sided valvular heart diseases. Despite the increasing prevalence of PH-LHD, there remains a paucity of knowledge about the hemodynamic definition, diagnosis, treatment modalities, and prognosis among clinicians. Moreover, clinical trials have produced mixed results on the usefulness of pulmonary vasodilator therapies for PH-LHD. In this expert review, we have outlined the critical role of meticulous hemodynamic evaluation and provocative testing for cases of diagnostic uncertainty. Therapeutic strategies-pharmacologic, device-based, and surgical therapies used for managing PH-LHD-are also outlined. PH-LHD in advanced heart failure, and the role of mechanical circulatory support in PH-LHD is briefly explored. An in-depth understanding of PH-LHD by all clinicians is needed for improved recognition and outcomes among patients with PH-LHD.
Asunto(s)
Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Hipertensión Pulmonar , Humanos , Hipertensión Pulmonar/diagnóstico , Hipertensión Pulmonar/terapia , Hipertensión Pulmonar/etiología , Hipertensión Pulmonar/fisiopatología , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/diagnóstico , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/terapia , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/complicaciones , Vasodilatadores/uso terapéutico , Disfunción Ventricular Izquierda/diagnóstico , Disfunción Ventricular Izquierda/terapia , Disfunción Ventricular Izquierda/fisiopatología , Disfunción Ventricular Izquierda/etiología , Corazón Auxiliar , Hemodinámica/fisiología , Manejo de la EnfermedadRESUMEN
We explored the association of body mass index (BMI) with mortality in cardiogenic shock (CS). Using the Cardiogenic Shock Working Group registry, we assessed the impact of BMI on mortality using restricted cubic splines in a multivariable logistic regression model adjusting for age, gender, and race. We also assessed mortality, device use, and complications in BMI categories, defined as underweight (<18.5 kg/m2), normal (18.5-24.9 kg/m2), overweight (25-29.9 kg/m2), obese (30-39.9 kg/m2), and severely obese (>40 kg/m2) using univariable logistic regression models. Our cohort had 3,492 patients with CS (mean age = 62.1 ± 14 years, 69% male), 58.0% HF-related CS (HF-CS), and 27.8% acute myocardial infarction (AMI) related CS. Body mass index was a significant predictor of mortality in multivariable regression using restricted cubic splines (p < 0.0001, p = 0.194 for nonlinearity). When stratified by categories, patients with healthy weight had lower mortality (29.0%) than obese (35.1%, p = 0.003) or severely obese (36.7%, p = 0.01). In HF-CS cohort, the healthy weight patients had the lowest mortality (21.7%), whereas it was higher in the underweight (37.5%, p = 0.012), obese (29.2%, p = 0.003), and severely obese (29.9%, p = 0.019). There was no difference in mortality among BMI categories in AMI-CS.
RESUMEN
Iron deficiency (ID) is present in approximately 50% of patients with heart failure (HF) and even higher prevalence rate up to 80% in post-acute HF setting. The current guidelines for HF recommend intravenous (IV) iron replacement in HF with reduced or mildly reduced ejection fraction and ID based on clinical trials showing improvements in quality of life and exercise capacity, and an overall treatment benefit for recurrent HF hospitalization. However, several barriers cause challenges in implementing IV iron supplementation in practice due, in part, to clinician knowledge gaps and limited resource availability to protocolize routine utilization in appropriate patients. Thus, the current review will discuss practical considerations in ID treatment, implementation of evidence-based ID treatment to improve regional health disparities with toolkits, inclusion/exclusion criteria of IV iron supplementation, and clinical controversies in ID treatment, as well as gaps in evidence and questions to be answered.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The Impella 5.0 and 5.5 pumps (Abiomed, Danvers, MA) are large-bore transvalvular micro-axial assist devices used in cardiogenic shock (CS) for patients requiring high-capacity flow. Despite their increasing use, real-world data regarding indications, rates of utilization and clinical outcomes with this therapy are limited. The objective of our study was to examine clinical profiles and outcomes of patients in a contemporary, real-world CS registry of patients who received an Impella 5.0/5.5 alone or in combination with other temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) devices. METHODS: The CS Working Group (CSWG) Registry includes patients from 34 US hospitals. For this analysis, data from patients who received an Impella 5.0/5.5 between 2020-2023 were analyzed. Use of Impella 5.0/5.5 with or without additional tMCS therapies, duration of support, adverse events and outcomes at hospital discharge were studied. Adverse events including stroke, limb ischemia, bleeding and hemolysis were not standardized by the registry but reported per individual CSWG Primary Investigator discretion. For those who survived, rates of native heart recovery (NHR) or heart replacement therapy (HRT) including heart transplant (HT), or durable ventricular assist device (VAD) were recorded. We also assessed outcomes based on shock etiology (acute myocardial infarction or MI-CS vs. heart failure-related CS or HF-CS). RESULTS: Among 6,205 patients, 754 received an Impella 5.0/5.5 (12.1%), including 210 MI-CS (27.8%) and 484 HF-CS (64.1%) patients. Impella 5.0/5.5 was used as the sole tMCS device in 32% of patients, while 68% of patients received a combination of tMCS devices. Impella cannulation sites were available for 524/754 (69.4%) of patients, with 93.5% axillary configuration. Survival to hospital discharge for those supported with an Impella 5.0/5.5 was 67%, with 20.4% NHR and 45.5% HRT. Compared to HF-CS, patients with MI-CS supported on Impella 5.0/5.5 had higher in-hospital mortality (45.2% vs 26.2%, p < 0.001) and were less likely to receive HRT (22.4% vs 56.6%, p < 0.001. For patients receiving a combination of tMCS during hospitalization, this was associated with higher rates of limb ischemia (9% vs. 3%, p < 0.01), bleeding (52% vs 33%, p < 0.01), and mortality (38% vs 25%; p < 0.001) compared to Impella 5.0/5.5 alone. Among Impella 5.0/5.5 recipients, the median duration of pump support was 12.9 days (IQR: 6.8-22.9) and longer in patients bridged to HRT (14 days; IQR: 7.7-28.4). CONCLUSIONS: In this multi-center cohort of patients with CS, use of Impella 5.0/5.5 was associated with an overall survival of 67.1% and high rates of HRT. Lower adverse event rates were observed when Impella 5.0/5.5 was the sole support device used. Further study is required to determine whether a strategy of early Impella 5.0/5.5 use for CS improves survival. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: High capacity Impella heart pumps are capable of provide up to 5.5 liter/min of flow while upper body surgical placement allows for ambulation. Patients with advanced cardiogenic shock from acute myocardial infarction or heart failure requiring temporary mechanical circulatory support may benefit from upfront use of Impella 5.5 to improve overall survival, including native heart recovery or successful bridge to durable left ventricular assist device surgery or heart transplantation.
Asunto(s)
Corazón Auxiliar , Sistema de Registros , Choque Cardiogénico , Humanos , Choque Cardiogénico/terapia , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Resultado del Tratamiento , Anciano , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Tasa de Supervivencia , Diseño de PrótesisRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: There are limited data depicting the prevalence and ramifications of acute limb ischemia (ALI) among cardiogenic shock (CS) patients. METHODS: We employed data from the Cardiogenic Shock Working Group (CSWG), a consortium including 33 sites. We constructed a multi-variable logistic regression to examine the association between clinical factors and ALI, we generated another logistic regression model to ascertain the association of ALI with mortality. RESULTS: There were 7,070 patients with CS and 399 (5.6%) developed ALI. Patients with ALI were more likely to be female (40.4% versus 29.4%) and have peripheral arterial disease (13.8% versus 8.3%). Stratified by maximum SCAI shock stage, the rates of ALI were stage B 0.0%, stage C 1.8%, stage D 4.1%, and stage E 10.3%. Factors associated with higher risk for ALI included: peripheral vascular disease OR 2.24 (95% CI: 1.53 - 3.23; p < 0.01) and ≥ 2 mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices OR 1.66 (95% CI: 1.24 - 2.21, p < 0.01). ALI was highest for VA-ECMO patients (11.6%) or VA-ECMO + IABP/Impella CP (16.6%) yet use of distal perfusion catheters was less than 50%. Mortality was 38.0% for CS patients without ALI but 57.4% for CS patients with ALI. ALI was significantly associated with mortality, adjusted OR 1.40 (95% CI 1.01 - 1.95, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of ALI was 6% among CS patients. Factors most associated with ALI include peripheral vascular disease and multiple MCS devices. The downstream ramifications of ALI were dire with a considerably higher risk of mortality.
RESUMEN
Background: Cardiogenic shock is a leading cause of mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Objectives: The authors sought to compare clinical characteristics, hospital trajectory, and drug and device use between patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock (STEMI-CS) and those without (non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock [NSTEMI-CS]). Methods: We analyzed data from 1,110 adult admissions with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMI-CS) across 17 centers within Cardiogenic Shock Working Group. The primary end point was in-hospital mortality. Results: Our study included 1,110 patients with AMI-CS, of which 731 (65.8%) had STEMI-CS and 379 (34.2%) had NSTEMI-CS. Most patients were male (STEMI-CS: 71.6%, NSTEMI-CS: 66.5%) and White (STEMI-CS: 53.8%, NSTEMI-CS: 64.1%). In-hospital mortality was 41% and was similar among patients with STEMI-CS and NSTEMI-CS (43% vs 39%, P = 0.23). Patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest had higher in-hospital mortality in patients with NSTEMI-CS (63% vs 36%, P = 0.006) as compared to patients with STEMI-CS (52% vs 41%, P = 0.16). Similar results were observed for in-hospital cardiac arrest in patients with STEMI-CS (63% vs 33%, P < 0.001) and NSTEMI-CS (60% vs 32%, P < 0.001). Only 27% of patients with STEMI-CS and 12% of NSTEMI-CS received both a drug and temporary mechanical circulatory support device during the first 24 hours, which increased to 78% and 61%, respectively, throughout the course of the hospitalization (P < 0.001 for both). Conclusions: Despite increasing use of inotropic and vasoactive support and mechanical circulatory support throughout the hospitalization, both patients with STEMI-CS and NSTEMI-CS remain at increased risk for in-hospital mortality. Randomized controls trials are needed to elucidate whether timing and sequence of escalation of support improves outcomes in patients with AMI-CS.
RESUMEN
Introduction: We aim to study the utility of 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) and cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) in patients with acute systolic heart failure (HF) in predicting post-discharge outcomes. Methods: The ESCAPE trial data was utilized to examine the prognostic role of 6MWD and CPET in predicting 6-month all-cause mortality and rehospitalization in acute HF. Results: The average 6MWD recorded in 271 and 292 patients on admission and discharge was 597 and 765 ft., respectively. Compared with non-survivors, survivors had significantly higher 6MWD on admission (624 vs. 463 ft., P = 0.006) and discharge (789 vs. 636 ft., P = 0.006). Admission and discharge 6MWD had an AUC of 0.629 (P = 0.0047) and 0.628 (P = 0.0093) in predicting mortality. The combination of optimal 6MWD cutoff values of >288 ft. on admission and > 320 ft. on discharge was associated with significantly lower mortality (11.1% vs. 28.3%, OR 0.316, P = 0.002). When dividing the sample into quartiles of increasing walking distance, patients in the 1st quartile had significantly higher mortality on admission (OR 3.59, 95% CI 1.396-9.282, P = 0.008) and discharge (OR 3.66, 95% CI 1.357-9.839, P = 0.01) compared with 4th quartile. P-value for the trend in mortality across quartiles of 6MWD on admission and discharge was 0.016 and 0.047, respectively. Cox proportional hazard analysis revealed that admission (HR 0.632, 95% CI 0.449-0.890, P = 0.009) and discharge 6MWD (HR 0.657, 95% CI 0.467-0.926, P = 0.016) were independent mortality determinants after adjustment for age, creatinine, sodium, systolic blood pressure and NYHA class, all on admission. CPET-derived variables did not predict either outcomes. Conclusion: 6MWD is an independent mortality determinant in advanced systolic HF.
RESUMEN
Introduction: The pulmonary artery pulsatility index (PAPI) is a newer hemodynamic index used for assessment of right ventricular performance. We hypothesized that PAPI predicts morbidity and mortality in acute systolic heart failure (HF). Methods: The ESCAPE trial was utilized to identify the prognostic value of PAPI at different time points in patients hospitalized with acute systolic HF who received care assisted with central hemodynamic monitoring. Results: Among 167 patients (age 57 years, 71% men), PAPI significantly increased from admission to optimum hemodynamic day (from 2.88 to 4.09, P < 0.001) and final day (from 3.24 to 3.91, P = 0.032), and the magnitude of increase was strongly associated with markers of decongestion. Discharge PAPI was higher among survivors compared to non-survivors (median 3.1 vs. 2.0, P = 0.0008) and among patients who did not require rehospitalization compared to re-hospitalized patients (median 3.33 vs. 2.67, P = 0.017), both at 6-months. Discharge PAPI predicted mortality with AUC of 0.631 (P = 0.0207), rehospitalization (AUC 0.598, P = 0.0303), and composite of death, rehospitalization, cardiac transplant (AUC 0.621, P = 0.0101). An optimal cutoff value of discharge PAPI ≤2 had the highest sensitivity and specificity in predicting 6-month mortality, rehospitalization and the composite endpoint. Discharge PAPI, had a higher (though non-significant) AUC in predicting death and composite endpoint compared to admission PAPI, next day PAPI and optimal day PAPI. Cox proportional hazard analysis showed that discharge PAPI remained an independent predictor of the composite endpoint (hazard ratio 0.890, 95% CI 0.819-0.967, P = 0.006) after covariate adjustment. Conclusions: Discharge PAPI ≤2 is a marker of intermediate-term morbidity and mortality in acute systolic HF.