A novel intrapericardial pulsatile device for individualized, biventricular circulatory support without direct blood contact.

OBJECTIVE: Due to severely limited donor heart availability, durable mechanical circulatory support remains the only treatment option for many patients with end-stage heart failure. However, treatment complexity persists due to its univentricular support modality and continuous contact with blood. We investigated the function and safety of reBEAT (AdjuCor GmbH), a novel, minimal invasive mechanical circulatory support device that completely avoids blood contact and provides pulsatile, biventricular support. METHODS: For each animal tested, an accurately sized cardiac implant was manufactured from computed tomography scan analyses. The implant consists of a cardiac sleeve with three inflatable cushions, 6 epicardial electrodes and driveline connecting to an electro-pneumatic, extracorporeal portable driver. Continuous epicardial electrocardiogram signal analysis allows for systolic and diastolic synchronization of biventricular mechanical support. In 7 pigs (weight, 50-80 kg), data were analyzed acutely (under beta-blockade, n = 5) and in a 30-day long-term survival model (n = 2). Acquisition of intracardiac pressures and aortic and pulmonary flow data were used to determine left ventricle and right ventricle stroke work and stroke volume, respectively. RESULTS: Each implant was successfully positioned around the ventricles. Automatic algorithm electrocardiogram signal annotations resulted in precise, real-time mechanical support synchronization with each cardiac cycle. Consequently, progressive improvements in cardiac hemodynamic parameters in acute animals were achieved. Long-term survival demonstrated safe device integration, and clear and stable electrocardiogram signal detection over time. CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrates biventricular cardiac support with reBEAT. Various demonstrated features are essential for realistic translation into the clinical setting, including safe implantation, anatomical fit, safe device-tissue integration, and real-time electrocardiogram synchronized mechanical support, result in effective device function and long-term safety.

Heart transplantation in children and adults with Down syndrome: A single centre experience.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, rapid advances in cardiac surgery and changes in attitude towards patients with cognitive disability have led to these patients receiving cardiac transplantation. METHOD: This is a retrospective report describing the experience of four patients with Down Syndrome who received heart transplantation in a single institution. RESULTS: Anthracycline-induced cardiomyopathy was the most common cause of heart failure in this group (3/4). Two patients were bridged to transplantation, one by using a combination of extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation and biventricular assist device and the other by using a durable implantable left ventricular assist device. All the four patients are alive with the longest surviving patient 17 years after transplantation. Against strong hypothetical predictions, we observed no propensity for the development of post-transplant infections or lymphoproliferative disorders. CONCLUSION: Down Syndrome should not be the sole contraindication to heart transplantation. The decision for transplantation should be on a case-by-case basis provided adequate social support is in place.

Ventricular assist devices in transposition and failing systemic right ventricle: role of tricuspid valve replacement.

OBJECTIVES: Ventricular assist device (VAD) for systemic right ventricular (RV) failure patients post-atrial switch, for transposition of the great arteries (TGA), and those with congenitally corrected TGA has proven useful to reduce transpulmonary gradient and bridge-to-transplantation. The purpose of this study is to describe our experience of VAD in systemic RV failure and our move towards concomitant tricuspid valve replacement (TVR). METHODS: This is a single-centre retrospective study of consecutive adult patients receiving HeartWare VAD for systemic RV failure between 2010 and 2019. From 2017, concomitant TVR was performed routinely. Demographic, clinical variables and echocardiographic and haemodynamic measurements pre- and post-VAD implantation were recorded. Complications on support, heart transplantation and survival rates were described. RESULTS: Eighteen patients underwent VAD implantation. Moderate or severe systemic tricuspid regurgitation was present in 83.3% of patients, and subpulmonic left ventricular impairment in 88.9%. One-year survival was 72.2%. VAD implantation was technically feasible and successful in all but one. Post-VAD, transpulmonary gradient fell from 16 (15-22) to 10 (7-13) mmHg (P = 0.01). Patients with TVR (n = 6) also demonstrated a reduction in mean pulmonary and wedge pressures. Furthermore, subpulmonic left ventricular end-diastolic dimension (44.3 vs 39.6 mm; P = 0.03) and function improved in this group. After 1 year of support, 72.2% of patients were suitable for transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: VAD is an effective strategy as bridge-to-candidacy and bridge-to-transplantation in patients with end-stage systemic RV failure. Concomitant TVR at the time of implant is associated with better early haemodynamic and echocardiographic results post-VAD.

HeartWare Explant After Recovery 6 Years After Implant in a 3-Year-Old Child: Has the Game Changed?

The use of continuous-flow mechanical circulatory support in preschool children remains anecdotal. This case report describes the sequel to the implantation with a HeartWare HVAD system (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN) in a 3-year old child. A 3-year-old boy with myocarditis-related cardiomyopathy underwent implantation with a HeartWare device. After an uncomplicated postoperative course, the patient was discharged home. Serial echocardiography showed progressive left ventricular recovery. After 6 months, the device was decommissioned, and the outflow graft was tied off. Six years after insertion, the device was explanted uneventfully. The HeartWare ventricular assist device offers viable long-term mechanical circulatory support in selected children that results in sustainable care and good quality of life.

Validity of Hemodynamic Monitoring Using Inert Gas Rebreathing Method in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure and Those Implanted With a Left Ventricular Assist Device.

OBJECTIVE: The present study assessed agreement between resting cardiac output estimated by inert gas rebreathing (IGR) and thermodilution methods in patients with heart failure and those implanted with a left ventricular assist device (LVAD). METHODS AND RESULTS: Hemodynamic measurements were obtained in 42 patients, 22 with chronic heart failure and 20 with implanted continuous flow LVAD (34 males, aged 50 ± 11 years). Measurements were performed at rest using thermodilution and IGR methods. Cardiac output derived by thermodilution and IGR were not significantly different in LVAD (4.4 ± 0.9 L/min vs 4.7 ± 0.8 L/min, P = .27) or patients with heart failure (4.4 ± 1.4 L/min vs 4.5 ± 1.3 L/min, P = .75). There was a strong relationship between thermodilution and IGR cardiac index (r = 0.81, P = .001) and stroke volume index (r = 0.75, P = .001). Bland-Altman analysis showed acceptable limits of agreement for cardiac index derived by thermodilution and IGR, namely, the mean difference (lower and upper limits of agreement) for patients with heart failure -0.002 L/min/m2 (-0.65 to 0.66 L/min/m2), and -0.14 L/min/m2 (-0.78 to 0.49 L/min/m2) for patients with LVAD. CONCLUSIONS: IGR is a valid method for estimating cardiac output and should be used in clinical practice to complement the evaluation and management of chronic heart failure and patients with an LVAD.

Effect of Preoperative Tricuspid and/or Mitral Regurgitation on Development of Late Right-Sided Heart Failure After Insertion of the HeartWare Left Ventricular Assist Device.

Right-sided heart failure (RHF) after left ventricular assist device implantation is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Although multiple predictors of early RHF have been described, information on late RHF is scarce. The aim of this study was to identify predictors of late RHF in left ventricular assist device patients. A retrospective analysis of all adult patients who underwent HeartWare-ventricular assist device implantation as a bridge to transplantation in a single-centre was performed. Late RHF was defined as RHF requiring rehospitalization after 30 days of implantation. A total of 16 (10.3%) patients from 156 implantations developed late RHF. Median time to late RHF onset was 182.5 (interquartile range 105 to 618) days. Patients developing late RHF were older at surgery. A significantly higher rate of moderate or severe tricuspid regurgitation before implantation was found in patients presenting with late RHF (81.2% vs 33.5%; p <0.001). Several echocardiographic parameters at discharge postimplant, such as significant mitral regurgitation, demonstrated a strong association with late RHF. A multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that significant preoperative tricuspid regurgitation was the strongest predictor of late RHF (hazard ratio 5.50, 95% confidence interval [1.34 to 22.58]; p = 0.02). Significant mitral regurgitation postimplantation and older age also significantly predicted late RHF. In conclusion, preoperative significant tricuspid regurgitation and mitral regurgitation after implantation predict the occurrence of late RHF.

Initial conservative management strategy of HeartWare left ventricular assist device thrombosis with intravenous heparin or bivalirudin.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Pump thrombosis is a serious left ventricular assist device complication, though there are no guidelines regarding its treatment. The main aim of this study was to describe a strategy of intravenous anticoagulation as the initial treatment in these patients and then to compare intravenous heparin with bivalirudin. METHODS: All consecutive patients who received a HeartWare left ventricular assist device from July 2009 to March 2019 were retrospectively analysed. Patients developing a pump thrombosis were selected, and treatment, outcomes and complications were recorded. RESULTS: During this period of time (116 months), 220 patients underwent HeartWare left ventricular assist device implantation and 57 developed pump thrombosis, with an incidence rate of first pump thrombosis of 0.17 events per patient-year of support (incidence rate of all episodes of pump thrombosis: 0.30 events per patient-year of support). All the patients were initially treated medically, predominantly with either intravenous heparin (n = 26) or bivalirudin (n = 16). Patients treated with bivalirudin during the first pump thrombosis episode had less subsequent re-thrombosis episodes (18.7% vs 57.7%, p < 0.05). In addition, percentage time in therapeutic range was greater for bivalirudin compared with heparin (68.5% ± 16.9% vs 37.4% ± 31.0%, p < 0.01). During the first pump thrombosis episode, 26.3% of the patients needed surgery (left ventricular assist device exchange (n = 8), transplant (n = 6) or decommissioning (n = 1)). The overall survival at 1 year was 61.4%, and there was no significant difference in survival. CONCLUSION: Left ventricular assist device thrombosis is a serious life-threatening complication; hence, we propose an initial conservative management of pump thrombosis with enhanced intravenous anticoagulation with either intravenous heparin or bivalirudin, with surgery reserved for refractory cases.

Durable left ventricular assist device support as a bridge to heart transplant candidacy†.

OBJECTIVES: Left ventricular assist devices are funded in the UK exclusively as a bridge to transplant (BTT). However, patients who potentially could receive a transplant may develop reversible contraindications to transplant. Bridge to candidacy (BTC) has sometimes been controversial, given the uncertain clinical efficacy of BTC and the risk that reimbursement could be denied. We analysed the UK ventricular assist device database to understand how common BTC was and to assess patient survival rates and incidences of transplants. METHODS: We identified BTC implants in patients with pulmonary hypertension, chronic kidney disease and obesity using the UK guidelines for heart transplants. RESULTS: A total of 306 of 540 patients had complete data and 157 were identified as BTC (51%). Overall, there was no difference in survival rates between patients designated as BTC and those designated at BTT (71.9 vs 72.9% at 1 year, respectively; P = 0.82). However, the survival rate was lower at all time points in those with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <40 and in patients with a body mass index (BMI) >32 up to 1-year postimplant. There were no significant differences in the incidence of transplant between patients who were BTC and BTT or for any subgroup up to 5 years. However, we noted a diverging trend towards a lower cumulative incidence of transplant for patients with a BMI >32. CONCLUSIONS: BTC is common in the UK and appears clinically effective, given that the survival rates and the incidence of transplants were comparable with those for BTT. Patients with a high BMI have a worse survival rate through to 1 year and a trend for a lower incidence of a transplant. Patients with a low eGFR also have a worse survival rate, but a similar proportion received transplants.

Impact of donor variables on heart transplantation outcomes in mechanically bridged versus standard recipients†.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to quantify the impact of donor variables on post-heart transplantation mortality and morbidity in recipients with and without a pretransplant left ventricular assist device (LVAD). METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study of the ISHLT Transplant Registry that includes all primary heart transplants in adult recipients (January 2005-June 2013, n = 15 532). All recipients were divided into patients with a durable continuous-flow LVAD (LVAD recipient, n = 3315) and without mechanical support (standard recipient, n = 12 217). Donors were classified as high risk (n = 3751) and low risk (n = 11 781). Transplants were categorized into low-risk donor/standard recipient (n = 9214), high-risk donor/standard recipient (n = 3003), low-risk donor/LVAD recipient (n = 2567) and high-risk donor/LVAD recipient (n = 748). Outcomes prior to discharge, survival at 5 years and freedom from complications were computed for each group. RESULTS: LVAD recipients experienced more episodes of infection, stroke and acute rejection with both low- (P < 0.001, P < 0.001, P < 0.001) and high-risk donors (P < 0.001, P = 0.008, P = 0.028) prior to transplant discharge. Within standard recipients, a higher rate of primary graft failure (P = 0.035), infection (P = 0.001), dialysis (P = 0.012), acute rejection (P = 0.037) and less freedom from cardiac allograft vasculopathy (P < 0.001) and malignancy (P = 0.004) was observed with high-risk donors. Within LVAD recipients, no differences in complications prior to discharge or long-term morbidity were detected between low- and high-risk donors. When compared to standard recipient/low-risk donors, all the 3 remaining categories had an increased probability of death or graft failure within 90 days: LVAD recipient/low-risk donor [hazard ratio (HR) 1.26, confidence interval (CI) 1.05-1.51; P = 0.012], standard recipient/high-risk donor (HR 1.47, CI 1.27-1.71; P < 0.001) and LVAD recipient/high-risk donor (HR 1.72, CI 1.32-2.24; P < 0.001). Between 90 days and 5 years, only standard recipient/high-risk donor had an increased probability of death or graft failure (HR 1.140, CI 1.020-1.274; P = 0.021) when compared to standard recipient/low-risk donor. CONCLUSIONS: LVAD recipients, whether with high- or low-risk donors, have worse early (but not late) survival and more early complications than those of standard recipients. We found that adverse donor characteristics are less predictive for determining the outcome of LVAD-bridged recipients than standard recipients.

Donor and recipient risk factor analysis of inferior postheart transplantation outcome in the era of durable mechanical assist devices.

The study objective is to quantify the impact of donor and recipient variables on heart transplant survival in recipients with a significant proportion of implanted continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVADs). This is a prospective cohort study of International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) Registry that includes all primary heart-alone transplants in adult recipients (January 2005 and June 2013, N = 15 532, 27% LVADs). Donor and recipient characteristics were assessed for association with death or graft failure within 90 days and between 90 days and 5 years after transplantation. On Cox proportional hazard model donor cause of death other than head trauma (hazard ratio [HR] 1.985, P < 0.0001), recipient congenital (HR 2.7555, P < 0.0001) and ischemic (HR 1.165, P = 0.0383) vs dilated etiology and female donor heart transplanted into male recipient (HR 1.207, P = 0.0354) were predictors of death or graft failure within 90 days. Between 90 days and 5 years, donor cigarette use (HR 1.232, P = 0.0001), recipient cigarette use (HR 1.193, P = 0.0003), diabetes (HR 1.159, P = 0.0050), arterial hypertension (HR 1.129, P = 0.0115), and ischemic vs dilative cardiomyopathy had an increased probability of death or graft failure.

Bloodstream infections in mechanical circulatory support device recipients in the International Society of Heart and Lung Transplantation Mechanically Assisted Circulation Support Registry: Epidemiology, risk factors, and mortality.

BACKGROUND: We used multicenter international data from the International Society of Heart and Lung Transplantation Mechanically Assisted Circulation Support (IMACS) registry to determine bloodstream infection (BSI) event rate, independent risk factors, and association with mortality. METHODS: Included were patients registered in IMACS from January 2013 through December 2015, assessed BSI event rate of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) and non-MCS-related BSIs, and conducted univariate and multivariate analyses between BSI with baseline characteristics and mortality. RESULTS: We documented 1,606 BSIs in 1,231 of 10,171 MCS recipients (12%), with an event rate of 2.43 BSIs/100 patient-months within 3 months after implant (early onset) and 1.03 BSIs/100 patient-months after 3 months (late onset). Of these episodes, 1,378 (85.8%) were non- MCS-related BSI. Increasing body mass index and bilirubin were independent correlates of MCS-related BSI. Independent correlates of non-MCS-related BSI included older age, higher body mass index, previous cardiac surgery, baseline chronic renal disease and dialysis, pre-implant frailty, presence of biventricular assist device, total artificial heart or right ventricular assist device, and Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support category 1. Survival after 3 months after implant of patients who developed early-onset BSI was 56.9% at 24 months vs 77.4% in patients without early-onset BSI (p < 0.001). Early-onset BSI was an independent correlate of mortality at 3 months after implantation (hazard ratio, 2.56; 95% confidence interval, 2.09-3.15; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Early-onset BSI was associated with significantly increased 24-month mortality. More than 85% of these BSIs were not device related. There is an opportunity for infection prevention practices to decrease the BSI event rate, which may affect 24-month survival. These data can also serve as benchmarking for individual institutions.

Aortic Valve Replacement with a Conventional Stented Bioprosthesis versus Sutureless Bioprosthesis: a Study of 763 Patients.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this retrospective study was to compare early postoperative outcomes after aortic valve replacement (AVR) with sutureless bioprostheses and conventional stented bioprostheses implanted through median sternotomy. METHODS: From January 2011 to December 2016, 763 patients underwent aortic valve replacement with bioprostheses; of these, 139 received a Perceval S sutureless valve (Group A) and 624 received a Perimount Magna Ease valve (Group B). These groups were further divided into A1 (isolated Perceval AVR), A2 (Perceval AVR with coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG]), B1 (isolated conventional stented bioprosthesis), and B2 (conventional stented bioprosthesis + CABG). RESULTS: Patients in Group A were older (mean 74 years vs. 71 years; P<0.0001), predominantly women (53% vs. 32%; P<0.0001), had a higher logistic EuroSCORE (3.26 vs. 2.43; P<0.001), more preoperative atrial fibrillation (20% vs. 13%; P=0.03), and had a lower reopening rate for bleeding (2.1% vs. 6.7%; P=0.04). Compared to Group B1, Group A1 had shorter cross-clamp (mean 40 min vs. 57 min; P≤0.0001) and bypass times (mean 63 min vs. mean 80 min; P=0.02), and they bled less postoperatively (mean 295 ml vs. mean 393 ml; P=0.002). The mean gradient across Perceval valve was 12.5 mmHg while its effective orifice area was 1.5 cm2. CONCLUSION: In our retrospective study of 763 patients, sutureless valve group patients are older, mostly women, more symptomatic preoperatively, and have higher logistic EuroSCORE. They have shorter cross-clamp and bypass times, less postoperative bleeding, and reduced incidence of reopening. Further studies are needed to evaluate the clinical benefits in short, mid, and long-terms.

Thrombocytopenia After Aortic Valve Replacement: Comparison Between Sutureless Perceval S Valve and Perimount Magna Ease Bioprosthesis.

INTRODUCTION: The incidence of postoperative thrombocytopenia after aortic valve replacement (AVR) with the Perceval S Sutureless bioprosthesis remains unclear. The aim of this study was to report thrombocytopenia associated with the use of sutureless AVR. METHODS: The data was collected retrospectively for patients who had isolated AVR with sutureless Perceval S valve (Group A: 72 patients) and was compared with patients who underwent isolated sutured AVR with Perimount Magna Ease Bioprosthesis (Group B: 101 patients) in our institution between June 2014 and January 2017. RESULTS: Cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp time were significantly shorter in group A. Maximum drop in platelet count was 58% mean (day 2.3) in group A versus 44% mean (day 1.7) in group B (P=0.0001). Absolute platelet count on postoperative day 1-6 in group A was significantly less than in group B (P≤0.05). Platelet count recovered to preoperative value in 44% patients in group B versus only in 26% patients in group A at discharge (P=0.018). Moderate thrombocytopenia occurs more often in group A (41% vs. 26%) (P=0.008) while severe thrombocytopenia (<50 x 109) was observed in 6% in group A but never in group B. Platelets (P=0.007) and packed red blood cells (P=0.009) transfusion was significantly higher in the group A. CONCLUSION: The implantation of sutureless Perceval aortic valves was associated with a significant drop in platelet count postoperatively with slow recovery and higher platelets and packed red blood cells transfusion requirements. A prospective randomised trial is needed to confirm our findings.

Early Clinical Results of Perceval Sutureless Aortic Valve in 139 Patients: Freeman Experience.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this retrospective study is to evaluate the safety and performance of the Perceval sutureless valve in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement. We report the 30-day clinical outcomes of 139 patients. METHODS: From January 2014 to December 2016, 139 patients underwent sutureless aortic valve replacement. Their operation notes, National Adult Cardiac Surgery Database and perioperative transoesophageal echocardiography findings were studied retrospectively. RESULTS: Ninety-two patients underwent isolated aortic valve replacement (group A) with Perceval valve and 47 patients had combined procedures of aortic valve replacement and coronary artery bypass grafting (group B). The patients received a size S (n=23), M (n=39), L (n=42) or XL (n=35) prosthesis. Perceval valve was successfully implanted in 135 (97.1%) patients. Mean cross-clamping time and bypass time were 40 and 63 minutes for isolated cases, while 68 and 107 minutes for combined cases. Three (2.1%) patients died within 30 days. Four patients suffered stroke and 5 patients went into acute renal failure. Median intensive care unit and hospital stay was 2 and 8.5, respectively. Four valves were explanted due to significant paravalvular leak after surgery. Five patients had permanent pacemaker as a result of complete heart block and mean postoperative drainage was 295 mL for isolated case and 457 mL for combined cases. The mean gradient across Perceval valve was 12.5 mmHg while its effective orifice area was 1.5 cm2. CONCLUSION: Early postoperative results showed that Perceval valve is safe. Further follow up is needed to evaluate the long-term outcome with this bioprosthesis.

Thrombocytopenia after aortic valve replacement: comparison between sutureless perceval s valve and perimount magna ease bioprosthesis

Abstract Introduction: The incidence of postoperative thrombocytopenia after aortic valve replacement (AVR) with the Perceval S Sutureless bioprosthesis remains unclear. The aim of this study was to report thrombocytopenia associated with the use of sutureless AVR. Methods: The data was collected retrospectively for patients who had isolated AVR with sutureless Perceval S valve (Group A: 72 patients) and was compared with patients who underwent isolated sutured AVR with Perimount Magna Ease Bioprosthesis (Group B: 101 patients) in our institution between June 2014 and January 2017. Results: Cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp time were significantly shorter in group A. Maximum drop in platelet count was 58% mean (day 2.3) in group A versus 44% mean (day 1.7) in group B (P=0.0001). Absolute platelet count on postoperative day 1-6 in group A was significantly less than in group B (P≤0.05). Platelet count recovered to preoperative value in 44% patients in group B versus only in 26% patients in group A at discharge (P=0.018). Moderate thrombocytopenia occurs more often in group A (41% vs. 26%) (P=0.008) while severe thrombocytopenia (<50 x 109) was observed in 6% in group A but never in group B. Platelets (P=0.007) and packed red blood cells (P=0.009) transfusion was significantly higher in the group A. Conclusion: The implantation of sutureless Perceval aortic valves was associated with a significant drop in platelet count postoperatively with slow recovery and higher platelets and packed red blood cells transfusion requirements. A prospective randomised trial is needed to confirm our findings.

Aortic valve replacement with a conventional stented bioprosthesis versus sutureless bioprosthesis: a study of 763 patients

Abstract Objective: The aim of this retrospective study was to compare early postoperative outcomes after aortic valve replacement (AVR) with sutureless bioprostheses and conventional stented bioprostheses implanted through median sternotomy. Methods: From January 2011 to December 2016, 763 patients underwent aortic valve replacement with bioprostheses; of these, 139 received a Perceval S sutureless valve (Group A) and 624 received a Perimount Magna Ease valve (Group B). These groups were further divided into A1 (isolated Perceval AVR), A2 (Perceval AVR with coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG]), B1 (isolated conventional stented bioprosthesis), and B2 (conventional stented bioprosthesis + CABG). Results: Patients in Group A were older (mean 74 years vs. 71 years; P<0.0001), predominantly women (53% vs. 32%; P<0.0001), had a higher logistic EuroSCORE (3.26 vs. 2.43; P<0.001), more preoperative atrial fibrillation (20% vs. 13%; P=0.03), and had a lower reopening rate for bleeding (2.1% vs. 6.7%; P=0.04). Compared to Group B1, Group A1 had shorter cross-clamp (mean 40 min vs. 57 min; P≤0.0001) and bypass times (mean 63 min vs. mean 80 min; P=0.02), and they bled less postoperatively (mean 295 ml vs. mean 393 ml; P=0.002). The mean gradient across Perceval valve was 12.5 mmHg while its effective orifice area was 1.5 cm2. Conclusion: In our retrospective study of 763 patients, sutureless valve group patients are older, mostly women, more symptomatic preoperatively, and have higher logistic EuroSCORE. They have shorter cross-clamp and bypass times, less postoperative bleeding, and reduced incidence of reopening. Further studies are needed to evaluate the clinical benefits in short, mid, and long-terms.

Pre-transplant ventricular assist device explant.

Explantation of a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) may be challenging even in the most experienced hands. We aim to describe the technique for explantation of an LVAD together with the heart as applicable to all contemporary implantable mechanical assist devices. In order to ensure safe explantation, particular care must be taken at three distinct stages: at the time of LVAD implantation, at pre-transplant assessment and at the time of heart transplantation. The preparation for a safe explantation at LVAD implantation includes positioning the driveline and the outflow graft away from the back of the sternum to ensure protection from injury during re-entry into the chest. At transplant assessment, essential investigations include computed tomography (CT) of the chest and ultrasound imaging of femoral vessels. At the time of heart transplantation, the site of peripheral access should be prepared and vessels exposed in case of a need for emergency bypass. We advise careful dissection starting from the lower aspect of the under surface of the sternum, moving as proximally as possible before attempting to use the oscillating saw. Much of the dissection of the heart is done off-pump. Cardiopulmonary bypass may be established either through peripheral vessels or the outflow graft in an emergency. Central direct cannulation is then established. After the heart and major vessels are isolated, explantation of the heart may begin either en-bloc or after splitting the ventricles in a sagittal plane. The basal regions of both ventricles and both atria are removed, leaving generous cuffs for anastomosis of the left atrium, pulmonary artery, aorta, inferior and superior vena cava (SVC). The apex of the heart is then removed with the device taking care not to injure the phrenic nerve.

Early clinical results of perceval sutureless aortic valve in 139 patients: freeman experience

Abstract Objective: The aim of this retrospective study is to evaluate the safety and performance of the Perceval sutureless valve in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement. We report the 30-day clinical outcomes of 139 patients. Methods: From January 2014 to December 2016, 139 patients underwent sutureless aortic valve replacement. Their operation notes, National Adult Cardiac Surgery Database and perioperative transoesophageal echocardiography findings were studied retrospectively. Results: Ninety-two patients underwent isolated aortic valve replacement (group A) with Perceval valve and 47 patients had combined procedures of aortic valve replacement and coronary artery bypass grafting (group B). The patients received a size S (n=23), M (n=39), L (n=42) or XL (n=35) prosthesis. Perceval valve was successfully implanted in 135 (97.1%) patients. Mean cross-clamping time and bypass time were 40 and 63 minutes for isolated cases, while 68 and 107 minutes for combined cases. Three (2.1%) patients died within 30 days. Four patients suffered stroke and 5 patients went into acute renal failure. Median intensive care unit and hospital stay was 2 and 8.5, respectively. Four valves were explanted due to significant paravalvular leak after surgery. Five patients had permanent pacemaker as a result of complete heart block and mean postoperative drainage was 295 mL for isolated case and 457 mL for combined cases. The mean gradient across Perceval valve was 12.5 mmHg while its effective orifice area was 1.5 cm2. Conclusion: Early postoperative results showed that Perceval valve is safe. Further follow up is needed to evaluate the long-term outcome with this bioprosthesis.