Predictors and Impact of Prolonged Vasoplegia After Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation.

Background: Vasoplegia after cardiac surgery is associated with adverse outcomes. However, the clinical effects of vasoplegia and the significance of its duration after continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD) implantation are less known. Objectives: This study aimed to identify predictors of and outcomes from transient vs prolonged vasoplegia after CF-LVAD implantation. Methods: The study was a retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent CF-LVAD implantation between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2017. Vasoplegia was defined as the presence of all of the following: mean arterial pressure ≤65 mm Hg, vasopressor (epinephrine, norepinephrine, vasopressin, or dopamine) use for >6 hours within the first 24 hours postoperatively, cardiac index ≥2.2 L/min/m2 and systemic vascular resistance <800 dyne/s/cm5, and vasodilatory shock not attributable to other causes. Prolonged vasoplegia was defined as that lasting 12 to 24 hours; transient vasoplegia was that lasting 6 to <12 hours. Patient characteristics, outcomes, and risk factors were analyzed. Results: Of the 600 patients who underwent CF-LVAD implantation during the study period, 182 (30.3%) developed vasoplegia. Mean patient age was similar between the vasoplegia and no-vasoplegia groups. Prolonged vasoplegia (n = 78; 13.0%), compared with transient vasoplegia (n = 104; 17.3%), was associated with greater 30-day mortality (16.7% vs 5.8%; P = 0.02). Risk factors for prolonged vasoplegia included preoperative dialysis and elevated body mass index. Conclusions: Compared with vasoplegia overall, prolonged vasoplegia was associated with worse survival after CF-LVAD implantation. Treatment to avoid or minimize progression to prolonged vasoplegia may be warranted.

Clinical Predictors and Outcomes After Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation and Tracheostomy.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative respiratory failure is a major complication that affects up to 10% of patients who undergo cardiac surgery and has a high in-hospital mortality rate. Few studies have investigated whether patients who require tracheostomy for postoperative respiratory failure after continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD) implantation have worse survival outcomes than patients who do not. OBJECTIVE: To identify risk factors for respiratory failure necessitating tracheostomy in CF-LVAD recipients and to compare survival outcomes between those who did and did not require tracheostomy. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent primary CF-LVAD placement at a single institution between August 1, 2002, and December 31, 2019, were retrospectively reviewed. Propensity score matching accounted for baseline differences between the tracheostomy and nontracheostomy groups. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify tracheostomy risk factors and 90-day survival; Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to assess midterm survival. RESULTS: During the study period, 664 patients received a CF-LVAD; 106 (16.0%) underwent tracheostomy for respiratory failure. Propensity score matching produced 103 matched tracheostomy-nontracheostomy pairs. Patients who underwent tracheostomy were older (mean [SD] age, 57.9 [12.3] vs 54.6 [13.9] years; P = .02) and more likely to need preoperative mechanical circulatory support (61.3% vs 47.8%; P = .01) and preoperative intubation (27.4% vs 8.8%; P < .001); serum creatinine was higher in the tracheostomy group (mean [SD], 1.7 [1.0] vs 1.4 [0.6] mg/dL; P < .001), correlating with tracheostomy need (odds ratio, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.21-2.56; P = .003). Both before and after propensity matching, 30-day, 60-day, 90-day, and 1-year survival were worse in patients who underwent tracheostomy. Median follow-up was 0.8 years (range, 0.0-11.2 years). Three-year Kaplan-Meier survival was significantly worse for the tracheostomy group before (22.0% vs 61.0%; P < .001) and after (22.4% vs 48.3%; P < .001) matching. CONCLUSION: Given the substantially increased probability of death in patients who develop respiratory failure and need tracheostomy, those at high risk for respiratory failure should be carefully considered for CF-LVAD implantation. Comprehensive management to decrease respiratory failure before and after surgery is critical.

Preoperative hyponatremia and survival after left ventricular assist device implantation.

BACKGROUND: Hyponatremia is associated with adverse outcomes in heart failure and after cardiac surgery. We hypothesized that hyponatremia is associated with poorer short-term and longer term survival in patients after continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD) placement. METHODS: We reviewed a single-center database of patients who received a CF-LVAD during 2012-2017. Sodium (Na) values obtained within 14 days before CF-LVAD insertion were averaged; patients (n = 332) were divided into hyponatremia (mean Na <135 mEq/L; n = 160; 48.2%) and normonatremia groups (mean Na 135-145 mEq/L; n = 172; 51.8%). Patients requiring preoperative dialysis or pump exchange were excluded. We compared outcomes between preoperative hyponatremia and normonatremia groups. RESULTS: The two groups' baseline characteristics were similar, although hyponatremia patients more often had preoperative mechanical circulatory support (44.4% vs. 31.4%, p = 0.002). Although hyponatremic and normonatremic patients did not differ in 30-day mortality (7.5% vs. 6.5%, p = 0.7), preoperative hyponatremia was associated with greater 5-year mortality (61% vs. 44%, p = 0.03). On binary logistic regression analysis, the strongest independent predictors of late mortality were hyponatremia (odds ratio [OR] 1.88, 95% CI [1.07-3.31], p = 0.02), older age (OR 1.03, 95% CI [1.01-1.05], p = 0.01), and elevated mean right atrial pressure/pulmonary capillary wedge pressure ratio (OR 4.69, 95% CI [1.76-12.47], p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Hyponatremia was not associated with greater early mortality but was associated with poorer late survival. The optimal timing of LVAD implantation in relation to hyponatremia, and whether correcting hyponatremia perioperatively improves long-term survival, should be investigated.

The influence of preoperative dialysis on survival after continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implantation.

OBJECTIVES: Dialysis is considered a contraindication to continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD) implantation. We evaluated clinical outcomes and survival in carefully selected, low-risk patients with renal failure who required dialysis before CF-LVAD implantation. METHODS: We extracted medical record data of patients who underwent CF-LVAD placement at our centre between 1 January 2006 and 31 August 2017, with 2 clinical scenarios: those who required long-term (>14 days) dialysis and those who required short-term (≤14 days) dialysis immediately before implantation. Demographic, clinical and intraoperative characteristics and survival outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: Of 621 patients who underwent CF-LVAD implantation during the study period, 31 underwent dialysis beforehand. Of these, 17 required long-term dialysis (13 haemodialysis, 4 peritoneal dialysis), and 14 underwent short-term haemodialysis. Compared with the long-term dialysis patients, the short-term dialysis patients were more likely to be Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support profile 1-2 (92.9% vs 70.6%; P < 0.001), to have needed preoperative mechanical circulatory support (78.6% vs 70.6%; P < 0.01) and to have higher in-hospital mortality (85.7% vs 29.4%; P = 0.01). Patients stable on long-term dialysis had acceptable overall survival and markedly better 6-month and 1-year survival than those with short-term dialysis before implantation (64.7% vs 14.3% and 58.8% vs 7.1%, respectively; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Carefully selected patients who are stable on long-term dialysis have acceptable survival rates after CF-LVAD implantation. Patients with acute renal failure had much poorer outcomes than those with chronic end-stage renal disease.

Factor Xa inhibitors in patients with continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices.

OBJECTIVE: Warfarin is standard anticoagulation therapy for patients with a continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD). However, warfarin requires regular monitoring and dosage adjustments and fails for many patients, causing thromboembolic and bleeding events. Factor Xa inhibitors have been shown to be noninferior to warfarin in preventing strokes and are associated with less intracranial hemorrhage in patients with atrial fibrillation. We evaluated treatment safety and effectiveness in CF-LVAD patients who switched from warfarin to a factor Xa inhibitor (apixaban or rivaroxaban) after warfarin failure. METHODS: This was a retrospective, single-center study of patients treated between 2008 and 2018. We assessed the occurrence of stroke, non-central nervous system (CNS) embolism, pump thrombosis, and major gastrointestinal bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage during therapy. RESULTS: We identified seven patients: five were male, the average body mass index was 30 kg/m2, and average age was 56 years. Preimplantation comorbidities included hypertension (all patients) and diabetes mellitus, ischemic cardiomyopathy, atrial fibrillation, and previous myocardial infarction (four patients each). Overall, patients received warfarin for 3968 days and apixaban/rivaroxaban for 1459 days. The warfarin group was within the therapeutic INR range (2.0-3.0) 30% of the time. Complication rates did not differ between warfarin and apixaban/rivaroxaban: strokes, 0.20 vs none, non-CNS embolism, 0.54 vs none; pump thrombosis, 0.27 vs none; major gastrointestinal bleeding, 0.20 vs 0.50; intracranial hemorrhage, 0.13 vs none. CONCLUSIONS: Factor Xa inhibitors may be viable treatment options for CF-LVAD patients for whom warfarin therapy has failed. Large prospective studies are necessary to confirm these results.

Effect of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy on Heart Transplant Status in 4 Patients with Left Ventricular Assist Devices.

Bariatric surgery helps many morbidly obese patients lose substantial weight. However, few data exist on its long-term safety and effectiveness in patients who also have continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices and in whom heart transplantation is contemplated. We retrospectively identified patients at our institution who had undergone ventricular assist device implantation and subsequent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy from June 2015 through September 2017, and we evaluated their baseline demographic data, preoperative characteristics, and postoperative outcomes. Four patients (3 men), ranging in age from 32 to 44 years and in body mass index from 40 to 57, underwent sleeve gastrectomy from 858 to 1,849 days after left ventricular assist device implantation to treat nonischemic cardiomyopathy. All had multiple comorbidities. At a median follow-up duration of 42 months (range, 24-47 mo), median body mass index decreased to 31.9 (range, 28.3-44.3) at maximal weight loss, with a median percentage of excess body mass index lost of 72.5% (range, 38.7%-87.4%). After achieving target weight, one patient was listed for heart transplantation, another awaited listing, one was kept on destination therapy because of positive drug screens, and one regained weight and remained ineligible. On long-term follow-up, laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy appears to be safe and feasible for morbidly obese patients with ventricular assist devices who must lose weight for transplantation consideration. Additional studies are warranted to evaluate this weight-loss strategy after transplantation and immunosuppression.

Accuracy of Postoperative Risk Scores for Survival Prediction in Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support Profile 1 Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device Recipients.

In this study, we sought to determine the accuracy of several critical care risk scores for predicting survival of Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) Profile 1 patients after continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD) placement. We retrospectively analyzed the records of 605 patients who underwent CF-LVAD implantation between 2003 and 2016. We calculated the preoperative HeartMate II Risk Score (HMRS) and preoperative Right Ventricular Failure Risk Score (RVFRS) and the following risk scores for postoperative days 1-5: HMRS, RVFRS, Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD), MELD-eXcluding International Normalized Ratio, Post Cardiac Surgery (POCAS) risk score, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) risk score, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III. The preoperative scores and the postoperative day 1, 5-day mean, and 5-day maximum scores were entered into a receiver operating characteristic curve analysis to examine accuracy for predicting 30-day, 90-day, and 1-year survival. The mean POCAS score was the best predictor of 30-day and 90-day survival (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.869 and 0.816). The postoperative mean RVFRS was the best predictor of 1-year survival (AUC = 0.7908). The postoperative maximum and mean RVFRS and HMRS were more accurate than the preoperative scores. Both of these risk score measurements of acuity in the postoperative intensive care unit setting help predict early mortality after LVAD implantation.

Outcomes of Repeat Left Ventricular Assist Device Exchange.

Implantable continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVADs) are used for long-term LV support in bridging patients to heart transplantation or as destination therapy. With prolonged support times, some patients will have repeat complications necessitating multiple device exchanges. To elucidate the safety and efficacy of repeat device exchange, we retrospectively reviewed data from 25 patients who underwent two or more CF-LVAD implantations between July 2005 and August 2017. Indications for exchange were thrombus/hemolysis (n = 8, 32%), electromechanical device malfunction (n = 14, 56%), and infection (n = 3, 12%). The implanted devices were the HeartMate II (n = 13, 52%), the HeartWare HVAD (n = 11, 44%), and the Jarvik 2000 (n = 1, 4%). Average hospital length of stay was 44 days (range 4-221 days), and 17 patients (68%) survived to discharge. Average duration of support after the most recent LVAD implantation was 802 days (range 1-3,229 days). Overall survival was 72% at 1 year and 60% at 2 years. Postoperative complications included respiratory failure in five patients (20%), device infection in five (20%), bleeding requiring reoperation in four (16%), neurologic dysfunction in four (16%), and acute renal failure in two (8%). Overall, our data suggest that repeat LVAD exchange is a feasible option for patients with recurrent device-related complications.

Plasmapheresis in Patients With Heparin-induced Thrombocytopenia Requiring Ventricular Assist Device.

Anticoagulation with unfractionated heparin is vital to reduce the risk of thromboembolic events during cardiopulmonary bypass and left ventricular assist device placement. However patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia are at risk of developing immune-mediated thrombotic events. We describe 2 patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia confirmed via serotonin release assay who were successfully treated with plasmapheresis exchange before left ventricular assist device placement.

Device exchange from Heartmate II to HeartWare HVAD.

BACKGROUND: Despite technological advancements, pump durability and pump-related complications continue to affect and adversely impact the lives of patients with end-stage heart failure on left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support. In an attempt to avoid recurrent LVAD-related complications, there may be circumstances where it is clinically advantageous to exchange a patient's device from HeartMate II to HeartWare HVAD. However, there is a paucity of data that describes the safety and feasibility of such an approach. OBJECTIVE: We present the largest single-center series of HeartMate II (HMII) to HeartWare (HVAD) device exchanges. METHODS: A retrospective review of 11 patients who underwent HMII to HVAD exchange from 2012 to 2017 was conducted to evaluate patient characteristics, incidence of postoperative complications, and survival. RESULTS: Eleven male patients (mean age 55 ± 14.4 years) underwent HMII to HVAD device exchange. One patient expired on postoperative day 7 secondary to sepsis. One patient was lost-to-follow-up after 23 months. An additional three patients died at 5, 7, and 24 months. Mean follow-up after device exchange was 1555 ± 311 days for the remaining six patients. None of the 11 study patients underwent LVAD explant, further device exchange, or heart transplant. CONCLUSION: Exchange of an HMII LVAD to an HVAD can be performed safely with acceptable perioperative morbidity and mortality.

Gallstone ileus associated with impaction at Meckel's diverticulum: Case report and literature review.

Gallstone ileus due to erosion of one or more gallstones into the gastrointestinal tract is an uncommon cause of small bowel obstruction. The site of impaction is usually distal ileum, and less commonly the jejunum, colon, duodenum, or stomach. We report a rare case of gallstone ileus with impaction at the proximal small bowel and at a Meckel's diverticulum (MD) in a 64-year-old woman managed with laparoscopic converted to open small bowel resections. Patient was discharged home in stable condition and remained asymptomatic at 6-mo follow up. We review the current literature on surgical approaches to MD and gallstone ileus. Diverticulectomy or segmental resection is preferred for complicated MD. For gallstone ileus, simple enterolithotomy or segmental resection are the most the most favored especially in older co-morbid patients due to lower mortality rates and the rarity of recurrent gallstone ileus. In addition, laparoscopy has been increasingly reported as a safe approach to manage gallstone ileus.

Tissue valves are preferable for patients with end-stage renal disease: an aggregate meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Valve selection in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) is uncertain. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare clinical outcome in ESRD patients undergoing valve replacement. METHODS: We systematically searched multiple databases (2000-October 2015) to identify original studies comparing adverse events between mechanical and biological valve replacement in ESRD patients. End-points studied were: postoperative mortality, bleeding events, need for re-operation, and late survival. A random-effect inverse-variance weighted analysis was performed; event rates are compared as odds ratio (OR and 95% confidence interval) and hazard ratios (HR) for time-to-event data. Mechanical valve and tissue valve replacement were considered as study and control cohorts, respectively. RESULTS: Fifteen retrospective studies (5523 mechanical and 1600 tissue valve) were included in our meta-analysis. Early mortality was comparable (OR 1.15 [0.77; 1.72]; p = 0.49). The mean follow-up among studies ranged from 1.6-15 years. Bleeding was significantly higher after mechanical valve replacement (OR 2.55 [1.53; 4.26]; p = 0.0003). Structural valve degeneration was present in only 0.6% patients after a tissue valve replacement. Overall survival after valve replacement was poor (median 2.61 years); valve choice did not influence this outcome (pooled HR 0.87 [0.73; 1.04]; p = 0.14). CONCLUSION: Operative mortality in ESRD patients is comparable between mechanical and tissue valve replacement. Major bleeding episodes are significantly higher after mechanical valve replacement but structural degeneration in tissue valves during the follow-up period is low. Based on the findings from this meta-analysis, we would recommend using tissue valves in patients with ESRD.