Impact of Continuous Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device Therapy on Chronic Kidney Disease: A Longitudinal Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Many patients undergoing durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation suffer from chronic kidney disease (CKD). Therefore, we investigated the effect of LVAD support on CKD. METHODS: A retrospective multicenter cohort study, including all patients undergoing LVAD (HeartMate II (n = 330), HeartMate 3 (n = 22) and HeartWare (n = 48) implantation. In total, 227 (56.8%) patients were implanted as bridge-to-transplantation; 154 (38.5%) as destination therapy; and 19 (4.7%) as bridge-to-decision. Serum creatinine measurements were collected over a 2-year follow-up period. Patients were stratified based on CKD stage. RESULTS: Overall, 400 patients (mean age 53 ± 14 years, 75% male) were included: 186 (46.5%) patients had CKD stage 1 or 2; 93 (23.3%) had CKD stage 3a; 82 (20.5%) had CKD stage 3b; and 39 (9.8%) had CKD stage 4 or 5 prior to LVAD implantation. During a median follow-up of 179 days (IQR 28-627), 32,629 creatinine measurements were available. Improvement of kidney function was noticed in every preoperative CKD-stage group. Following this improvement, estimated glomerular filtration rates regressed to baseline values for all CKD stages. Patients showing early renal function improvement were younger and in worse preoperative condition. Moreover, survival rates were higher in patients showing early improvement (69% vs 56%, log-rank P = 0 .013). CONCLUSIONS: Renal function following LVAD implantation is characterized by improvement, steady state and subsequent deterioration. Patients who showed early renal function improvement were in worse preoperative condition, however, and had higher survival rates at 2 years of follow-up.

Need for cardiac implantable electronic devices and long-term follow-up in recipients of orthotopic heart transplants.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac pacemaker implantation after orthotopic heart transplantation declined dramatically after development of the bicaval anastomosis technique. However, much less is known about the rate, indications, and predictors of device implantation procedures with the current surgical technique. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the indications, patient characteristics, incidence, and survival related to cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation after heart transplantation. METHODS: This was a single-center study of 399 consecutive adult recipients of orthotopic heart transplants with bicaval anastomosis from 1991 to 2017. The primary end point was freedom from pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation, and the secondary end point was all-cause mortality. RESULTS: At the time of transplantation, the mean age of recipients was 50 ± 12 years and that of donors 31 ± 12 years. CIEDs were implanted in 8% of recipients (n = 31): 11 pacemakers (35%) for sinus node dysfunction, 17 (55%) for high-grade heart block, and 3 ICDs (10%) for the primary prevention of sudden cardiac death. Early CIED implantation (<30 days) was rare and absent for sinus node dysfunction. The risk for CIED implantation increased progressively during follow-up (0-30 years; median 11 years), with low-, moderate-, and high-risk periods between 0 and 10, between 10 and 20, and between 20 and 30 years, respectively. Recipients receiving CIEDs survived longer after transplantation (21 years vs 13 years; P < .01). Recipients receiving pacemakers for heart block were more likely to receive older donor hearts at the time of transplantation. CONCLUSION: The risk of pacemaker implantation increases progressively, while ICD implantation is rare. Donor age is the predominant risk factor for subsequent heart block. Early sinus node dysfunction requiring permanent pacing is rare.

inHEART Models software - novel 3D cardiac modeling solution.

INTRODUCTION: Advanced cardiac imaging is an important component in pre-procedural planning for ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablations. inHEART's proprietary software, inHEART Models, and its academic version, Multimodality Platform for Specific Imaging in Cardiology (MUSIC), provide detailed characterization of anatomical structures and scars. AREAS COVERED: This review highlights the current overview of the market and offers insight into inHEART Models and MUSIC and its application during VT ablations with supporting case examples. An overview of the clinical profile and regulatory status of inHEART Models, and other competing technologies, such as Automatic Detection of Arrhythmia Substrate (ADAS) 3D software and Catheter Precision's View into Ventricular Onset (VIVO), are also discussed. EXPERT OPINION: inHEART and MUSIC utilization has increased over the last few years and continues to establish its presence as an important aspect of VT ablations. Its unique proprietary software sets itself apart from others in the field. The introduction of dual source-photon counting detector computed tomography (PCD-CT) is expected to make significant advancements in the field and take imaging to a new level. inHEART's continued research in cardiac imaging and digital technology is expected to increase as is its global presence in the electrophysiology (EP) community.

Role of Electrical Delay in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Response.

Traditionally, left ventricular (LV) lead position was guided by anatomic criteria of pacing from the lateral wall of the LV. However, large trials showed little effect of LV lead position on outcomes, other than noting worse outcomes with apical positions. Given the poor correlation of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) outcomes with anatomically guided LV lead placement, focus shifted toward more physiologic predictors such as targeting the areas of delayed mechanical and electrical activation. Measures of left ventricular delay and interventricular delay are strong predictors of CRT response.

Acute Hemodynamic Effects of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Versus Alternative Pacing Strategies in Patients With Left Ventricular Assist Devices.

Background The hemodynamic effects of cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are uncharacterized. We aimed to quantify the hemodynamic effects of different ventricular pacing configurations in patients with LVADs, focusing on short-term changes in load-independent right ventricular (RV) contractility. Methods and Results Patients with LVADs underwent right heart catheterization during spontaneous respiration without sedation and with pressures recorded at end expiration. Right heart catheterization was performed at different pacemaker configurations (biventricular pacing, left ventricular pacing, RV pacing, and unpaced conduction) in a randomly generated sequence with >3 minutes between configuration change and hemodynamic assessment. The right heart catheterization operator was blinded to the sequence. RV maximal change in pressure over time normalized to instantaneous pressure was calculated from digitized hemodynamic waveforms, consistent with a previously validated protocol. Fifteen patients with LVADs who were in sinus rhythm were included. Load-independent RV contractility, as assessed by RV maximal change in pressure over time normalized to instantaneous pressure, was higher in biventricular pacing compared with unpaced conduction (15.7±7.6 versus 11.0±4.0 s-1; P=0.003). Thermodilution cardiac output was higher in biventricular pacing compared with unpaced conduction (4.48±0.7 versus 4.38±0.8 L/min; P=0.05). There were no significant differences in heart rate, ventricular filling pressures, or atrioventricular valvular regurgitation across all pacing configurations. Conclusions Biventricular pacing acutely improves load-independent RV contractility in patients with LVADs. Even in these patients with mechanical left ventricular unloading via LVAD who were relative pacing nonresponders (required LVAD support despite cardiac resynchronization therapy), biventricular pacing was acutely beneficial to RV contractility.

Less invasive surgical implant strategy and right heart failure after LVAD implantation.

BACKGROUND: Conventional median sternotomy (CMS) is still the standard technique utilized to implant left ventricular assist devices (LVADs). Recent studies suggest that less invasive surgery (LIS) may be beneficial; however, robust data on differences in right heart failure (RHF) are lacking. This study aimed to determine the impact of LIS compared with that of CMS on RHF outcomes after LVAD implantation. METHODS: An international multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted across 5 centers. Patients were grouped according to their implantation technique (LIS vs CMS). Only centrifugal devices were included. RHF was defined as severe or severe acute RHF according to the 2013 Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) definition. Logistic multivariate regression and propensity score‒matched analyses were performed to account for confounding. RESULTS: Overall, 427 implantations occurred during the study period, with 305 patients implanted using CMS and 122 using LIS. Pre-operative extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) use was more common in the CMS group; off-pump implantation was more common in the LIS group. Other pre-implant variables, including age, creatinine, hemodynamics, and tricuspid regurgitation, did not differ between the 2 groups. Post-operative RHF was less common in the patients who underwent LIS than in those who underwent CMS as was post-operative right ventricular assist device (RVAD) use. LIS remained associated with less RHF in the multivariate analysis. After propensity score matching conditional for age, sex, INTERMACS profile, ECMO, and IABP use in a ratio of 2:1 (CMS to LIS), RHF (29.9% vs 18.6%, p = 0.001) and the need for post-operative RVAD (18.6% vs 8.2%; p = 0.009) remained more common in the CMS group than in the LIS group. There were no significant differences in survival up to 1 year between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: LIS may be associated with less RHF after LVAD implantation compared with CMS. Despite the possible reduction in RHF, there was no difference in 1-year survival. LIS is an alternative to traditional CMS.

Pulmonary Arterial Elastance and INTERMACS-Defined Right Heart Failure Following Left Ventricular Assist Device.

BACKGROUND: Acute right heart failure (RHF) after left ventricular assist device implantation remains a major source of morbidity and mortality, yet the definition of RHF and the preimplant variables that predict RHF remain controversial. This study evaluated the ability of (1) INTERMACS (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support) RHF classification to predict post-left ventricular assist device survival and (2) preoperative characteristics and hemodynamic parameters to predict severe and severe acute RHF. METHODS AND RESULTS: An international, multicenter study at 4 large academic centers was conducted between 2008 and 2016. All subjects with hemodynamics measured by right heart catheterization within 30 days before left ventricular assist device implantation were included. RHF was defined using the INTERMACS definition for RHF. In total, 375 subjects were included (mean age, 57.4±13.2 years, 54% bridge-to-transplant). Mild RHF was most common (34%), followed by moderate RHF (16%), severe RHF (13%), and severe acute RHF (9%). Estimated on-device survival rates at 2 years were 72%, 71%, and 55% in the patients with none, mild-to-moderate, and severe-to-severe acute RHF, respectively (P=0.004). In addition, the independent hazard ratio for mortality was only increased in the patients with severe-to-severe acute RHF (hazard ratio, 3.95; 95% CI, 2.16-7.23; P<0.001). INTERMACS-defined RHF was superior to postimplant inotrope duration alone in the prediction of all-cause mortality. In multivariable analysis, older age, lower INTERMACS classes, and higher pulmonary arterial elastance (ratio of systolic pulmonary artery pressure to stroke volume) before left ventricular assist device, were identified as significant predictors of severe-to-severe acute RHF. Stratifying patients by ratio of systolic pulmonary artery pressure to stroke volume and right atrial pressure significantly improved the discrimination between patients at risk for severe-to-severe acute RHF. CONCLUSIONS: The INTERMACS RHF classification correctly identifies patients at risk for mortality, though this risk is only increased in patients with severe-to-severe acute RHF. Several predictors for RHF were identified, of which ratio of systolic pulmonary artery pressure to stroke volume was the strongest hemodynamic predictor. Coupling ratio of systolic pulmonary artery pressure to stroke volume with right atrial pressure may be most helpful in identifying patients at risk for severe-to-severe acute RHF.