Recovery of a dilated left ventricle after cessation of cocaine and HVAD™ explantation using a titanium plug.

The ultimate goal in the treatment of end-stage heart failure is the recovery of cardiac function following mechanical assistance of the left ventricle. The HVAD™ pump (HeartWare Inc.) left ventricular assist device (LVAD) can be explanted without resternotomy. This article demonstrates that the use of a custom-made mechanical plug (manufactured by INNOVO Solutions GmbH), which can be inserted into the LVAD's sewing ring, is feasible. This mechanical plug explicitly designed for device explantation is a viable alternative to the current standard of care. This article adopts a less invasive technique to explant the pump. The following case illustrates this technique.

Retrograde washout of prepump LVAD thrombosis in a patient on HeartWare™ support.

The success of the left ventricular assist device (LVAD) as a treatment for terminal left-side heart failure is still restrained by some severe complications associated with mechanical circulatory support. Pump thrombus still affects many patients. It is associated with high morbidity and mortality. The therapeutic options include augmentation of anticoagulation and antiplatelet medication, intravenous or catheter-guided thrombolysis, and pump exchange. Heart transplantation would be a desirable option in this population, but unfortunately, it is only theoretical given the increasing number of LVAD implants and decreasing number of organ donors. A retrograde washout maneuver may be a treatment option in prepump thrombosis in selected patients. Therefore, the decision should be made on an individual basis after balancing the risks and benefits of different treatment approaches. In this context, we report a case of retrograde washout of prepump thrombus in a patient who has been on HeartWare™ support for more than 3 years, with a successful bailout strategy.

Stroke Risk Following Infection in Patients with Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device.

BACKGROUND: Infection has been associated with stroke in patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVAD); however, little data exist on the timing, type and mortality impact of infection-related stroke. METHODS: Prospectively collected data of HeartMate II (N = 332) and HeartWare (N = 70) LVAD patients from a single center were reviewed. Only strokes (ischemic or hemorrhagic) that occurred within 6 weeks following a LVAD infection were considered in analyses. The association between LVAD infections (wound, pump pocket, driveline and/or bloodstream infection [BSI]), specific pathogens and ischemic and hemorrhagic strokes was evaluated using multivariable logistic regression analysis. The impact of infection-related stroke on cumulative survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: Of 402 patients, LVAD infection occurred in 158 (39%) including BSI in 107 (27%), driveline infection in 67 (17%), wound infection in 31 (8%) and pump pocket infection in 24 (6%). LVAD infection-related stroke occurred in 20/158 (13%) patients in a median of 4 days (0-36 days) from documented infection. In multivariable analysis, ischemic stroke was associated with wound infection (aOR 9.0, 95% CI 2.4-34.0, P = 0.001) and BSI (aOR 7.7, 95% CI 0.9-66.0, P = 0.064), and hemorrhagic stroke was associated with BSI in 100% of cases (P = 0.01). There was no association with driveline or pump pocket infection. The cumulative survival rate among patients with infection-related stroke was significantly lower compared to those with LVAD infection but no stroke (log-rank P < 0.001). There was a trend toward shorter stroke-free survival among patients with LVAD infection. CONCLUSIONS: LVAD infections, particularly BSI, are significantly associated with stroke, and infection-related stroke conferred significantly lower cumulative survival.

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.

Stroke and Intracranial Hemorrhage in HeartMate II and HeartWare Left Ventricular Assist Devices: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Ischemic stroke and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) following left ventricular assist device (LVAD) placement are major causes of morbidity. The incidence and mortality associated with these events stratified by device type have not been systematically explored. METHODS: A systematic review of PubMed was conducted from January 2007 through June 2016 for all English-language articles involving HeartMate II (HMII) and HeartWare LVAD patients. Ischemic stroke and/or ICH incidence (events per patient-year) and associated mortality rates were abstracted for each device type. RESULTS: Of 735 articles reviewed, 48 (11,310 patients) met inclusion criteria (33 HMII, six HeartWare, eight both devices, and one unspecified). The median duration of device support was 112 days (total 13,723 patient-years). Overall, ischemic stroke or ICH occurred in 9.8% (1110 persons and 0.08 events per patient year [EPPY]). Ischemic stroke occurred in a median of 6.0% or 0.06 EPPY (range 0-16% or 0-0.21 EPPY) of HMII patients versus 7.5% or 0.09 EPPY (range 4-17.1% or 0.01-0.94 EPPY) of HeartWare patients. ICH occurred in a median of 3.0% or 0.04 EPPY (range 0-13.5% or 0-0.13 EPPY) of HMII and 8.0% or 0.08 EPPY (range 3-23% or 0.01-0.56 EPPY) of HeartWare patients. The median mortality rate for LVAD-associated ischemic stroke was 31% (HMII: 33%, [range 2.4-75%] and HeartWare: 11.5% [range 3.9-40%]), and the median mortality rate following ICH was 71% (HMII: 75%, [range 3.9-100%] and HeartWare: 44%, [range 3.1-88%]). CONCLUSIONS: Ischemic stroke and ICH are common after LVAD placement, but heterogeneous event rates are reported in the literature. Given the high associated mortality, further prospective study is warranted.

Endovascular stenting of an HVAD™ outflow graft pseudoaneurysm that exerts compression and kinking stenosis on the soft portion of the prosthesis.

Key Clinical Message: Complex presentations of MCS patients may necessitate a multidisciplinary approach involving HF cardiologists, CT surgeons, advanced cardiac imagers, and interventional cardiologists in order to define the optimal management strategy. Abstract: Left ventricle assist devices (LVADs) provide life-sustaining treatment for patients with terminal heart failure, but their intricacy allows for complications. One complication is LVAD outflow graft obstruction due to the graft's intraluminal thrombus or extraluminal compression. It may be treated endovascularly with stenting. We report an endovascular stenting of an outflow tract in HVAD™ (HeartWare Inc.) due to a pseudoaneurysm causing compression and kinking stenosis.

Third-generation continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices: a comparative outcome analysis by device type.

AIMS: Continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVADs) have become a standard of care in end-stage heart failure. Limited data exist comparing outcomes of HeartMate3 (HM3) and HeartWare HVAD (HW). We aimed to compare midterm outcomes of these devices. METHODS AND RESULTS: Investigator-initiated retrospective-observational comparative analysis of all patients who underwent primary LVAD implantation of either HM3 or HW at our centre between January 2010 and December 2020. Data were derived from a prospective registry. Primary endpoints were all-cause mortality and heart transplantation. Secondary endpoints included device-related major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, which included major bleeding, major neurological dysfunction (defined as persisting neurological impairment for ≥24 h), device-related major infection (excluding driveline infections), major device malfunctions leading to re-intervention or partial device exchange (pump failure, outflow-graft twist or failure, controller failure, battery failure, patient cable failure, but excluding pump thrombosis), and pump thrombosis. Further secondary endpoints included right heart failure, gastrointestinal bleeding, driveline infections, and surgical re-interventions. The secondary outcomes were analysed not only for the first event but also for recurrent events. The analysis included competing risks analysis and recurrent event regression analysis, with adjustment for confounders age, gender, body mass index (BMI), and Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) level. Out of 106 primary CF-LVAD implantations, 36 (34%) received HM3 and 70 (66%) received HW. Median follow-up was 1.48 years [interquartile range 0.67, 2.41]. HM3 was more often implanted in men (91.7% vs. 72.9%, P = 0.024); patients were older (median 61 years [54, 66.5] vs. 52.5 years [43, 60], P < 0.001), had a higher BMI (median 26.7 kg/m2 [23.4, 29.0] vs. 24.3 kg/m2 [20.7, 27.4], P = 0.013), had more comorbidities, and were more likely targeted for destination therapy (36.1% vs. 14.3%, P = 0.010). Death occurred in 33.3% of HM3 patients, compared with 22.9% of HW patients, P = 0.247 (probability of survival at 4 years, 54.7% vs. 74.1%, P = 0.296). After adjustment for confounders, we observed a significant six-fold risk increase in device malfunctions for HW [hazard ratio (HR) 6.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.89, 22.32], P = 0.003], but no significant differences in pump thrombosis (P = 0.173) or overall survival (P = 0.801). CONCLUSIONS: Comparing midterm outcomes between HM3 and HW for LVAD support from a prospective registry, HW patients had a significantly higher risk of device malfunctions. No significant differences were evident between devices in overall survival and in respect to most outcomes.

Global best practices consensus: Long-term management of patients with hybrid centrifugal flow left ventricular assist device support.

OBJECTIVES: Six months after withdrawal of the HeartWare HVAD System (HVAD; Medtronic) from sale, approximately 4000 patients continue ongoing support with this device. In light of the diminishing experience, this global consensus document summarizes key management recommendations. METHODS: International experts with experience in the management of patients with ongoing HVAD support were invited to summarize key aspects of patient and pump management and highlight differences in the current HeartMate 3 (Abbott Laboratories) ventricular assist device. Clinicians from high-implanting HVAD sites reviewed current literature and reported experience to generate a consensus statement. RESULTS: Specific guidelines to assist in the management of ongoing HVAD patients are developed. Key management protocols and helpful techniques developed from experienced clinicians are combined into a short guideline document. As experience with HeartMate 3 increases, key differences in approach to management are highlighted, where appropriate. CONCLUSIONS: With decreasing worldwide experience in the ongoing management of HVAD-supported patients, this consensus guideline provides a summary of best practice techniques from international centers. Differences in HeartMate 3 management are highlighted.

Inflow cannula obstruction of the HeartWare left ventricular assist device: what do we really know?

In the setting of HeartWare left ventricular assist device (HVAD, Medtronic) implantation, pre-pump blood flow obstruction has been described due to intraventricular thrombus formation occluding the inflow cannula. This phenomenon often evolves in suboptimal pump performance, and requires prompt management to prevent its progression. However, to date, effective strategies and tools for the diagnosis and management of this complication are poorly described. We report a case of HVAD inflow cannula obstruction that drove later in-pump thrombosis and, eventually, complete cannula occlusion, and discuss gap of knowledge and limitations of currently available diagnostic and therapeutic tools in this scenario. Furthermore, we reinforce the value of time-frequency analysis of the HVAD log files to early identify abnormal pump operation associated with inflow cannula obstruction despite unremarkable trends of pump parameters.

International experience using a durable, centrifugal-flow ventricular assist device for biventricular support.

BACKGROUND: Heart transplantation is limited by the scarcity of suitable donors. Patients with advanced biventricular failure may require biventricular support to provide optimal cardiac output and end-organ perfusion. We highlight the outcomes of using the HeartWare HVAD System (HVAD) in a biventricular configuration. METHODS: This retrospective study included patients implanted with HVAD as a biventricular assist device (BiVAD) between 2009 and 2017 at 12 participating centers. When used as a right ventricular assist device (VAD) (RVAD), the HVAD can be attached to the right ventricle (RV) or the right atrium (RA). Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were calculated comparing the 2 RVAD implant locations. Comparisons were also made between the timing of RVAD implantation (primary vs staged) on adverse event (AE) profiles and survival. RESULTS: Among the 93 patients who were implanted with a HVAD BiVAD, Kaplan-Meier survivals at 1-year and 2-year were 56% and 47%, respectively. Survival was independent of the location of the HVAD RVAD implant or whether there was an interval between left VAD and RVAD implantation. The most common AEs were bleeding (35.5%), infection (25.8%), and respiratory failure (20.4%). CONCLUSIONS: This study illustrated similar survival in patients receiving a primary or staged HVAD BiVAD implant at 1 year and 2 years. This study also established that the locations of the RVAD implant (RV or RA) result in similar AE profiles.

Comparison of SynCardia total artificial heart and HeartWare HVAD biventricular support for management of biventricular heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of patients undergoing SynCardia total artificial heart (TAH) and biventricular HeartWare ventricular assist device (Bi-HVAD) support for biventricular heart failure (HF). METHODS: Electronic search was performed to identify all relevant studies detailing patients who underwent biventricular assist device implantation using Bi-HVAD devices and those who underwent TAH placement for biventricular HF. Twelve studies including 512 patients in the TAH group versus 38 patients in the Bi-HVAD group were pooled for meta-analysis. RESULTS: Ischemic cardiac etiology was present in 32% (95% CI, 24-47) of TAH vs. 15% (95% CI, 4-44) of Bi-HVAD patients (P=0.21). There was a comparable incidence of stroke [TAH 11% (95% CI, 7-16) vs. Bi-HVAD 13% (95% CI, 2-51), P=0.86] and acute kidney injury [TAH 28% (95% CI, 2-89) vs. Bi-HVAD 27% (95% CI, 9-59), P=0.98]. Overall infection rate was 67% (95% CI, 47-82) in TAH and 36% (95% CI, 10-74) in Bi-HVAD (P=0.16). Driveline infections were comparable between the two groups [TAH 11% (95% CI, 6-19) vs. Bi-HVAD 8% (95% CI, 1-39), P=0.73] and although a higher incidence of mediastinitis was found in the Bi-HVAD group [TAH 4% (95% CI, 2-7) vs. Bi-HVAD 15% (95% CI, 4-45), P=0.07] there was no statistically significant difference between the groups. Postoperative bleeding was present in 42% (95% CI, 28-58) of TAH vs. 23% (95% CI, 8-52) of Bi-HVAD (P=0.22). Patients in the TAH group had shorter duration of support [TAH 71 days (95% CI, 15-127) vs. Bi-HVAD 167 days (95% CI, 116-217), P=0.01]. At the mean follow-up time of 120 days, (95% CI, 83-157) patients in both groups had similar overall mortality [TAH 36% (95% CI, 22-49) vs. Bi-HVAD 26% (95% CI, 6-46), P=0.44] including mortality on device support [TAH 26% (95% CI, 17-36) vs. Bi-HVAD 21% (95% CI, 4-37), P=0.55]. Discharge home on support was achieved in 6% (95% CI, 4-17%) of TAH patients vs. 73% (95% CI, 48-89%) of Bi-HVAD (P<0.01), and 68% (95% CI, 52-84) of TAH patients were transplanted vs. 61% (95% CI, 47-75) in the Bi-HVAD group (P=0.14). CONCLUSIONS: Patients on Bi-HVAD support were more likely to be able to be discharged home on support and had similar overall mortality to TAH, albeit with much longer duration of support.

Thrombolysis as first-line therapy for Medtronic/HeartWare HVAD left ventricular assist device thrombosis.

OBJECTIVES: We reviewed our institutional experience with intravenous thrombolysis (TL) as first-line therapy in patients with Medtronic/HeartWare HVAD left ventricular assist device pump thrombosis (PT). METHODS: From March 2006 to November 2018, 30 Medtronic/HeartWare HVAD left ventricular assist device patients had 48 PT events. We analysed outcomes with intravenous Alteplase as a first-line therapy for PT. Pump exchange or urgent heart transplantation was only considered after the failure of TL or existing contraindications to TL. RESULTS: TL was used as the first-line therapy in 44 PT events in 28 patients without a contraindication to TL. TL was successful in 61.4% of PT events. More than 1 cycle of TL was necessary in 55.6% of events. The combined success of TL and heart transplantation or device exchange was 81.8%. In 15.9% of events, PT was fatal. Causes of death were severe complications (9.1%) related to TL or discontinuation of therapy for multi-organ failure (6.8%). Intracranial bleeding and arterial thromboembolism were observed in 4.5% and 11.5% of the PT events after TL. CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous TL as a first-line therapy for PT in Medtronic/HeartWare HVAD patients can be a reasonable treatment option and does not preclude subsequent heart transplantation or device exchange. However, thromboembolic and bleeding complications are common. The decision to perform TL or device exchange should, therefore, be made on an individual basis after balancing the risks and benefits of different treatment approaches.

HVAD: The ENDURANCE Supplemental Trial.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate the impact of blood pressure management on stroke rates in patients receiving the HeartWare HVAD System. BACKGROUND: The ENDURANCE trial demonstrated noninferiority of the HeartWare HVAD System versus control (HeartMate II) in patients with advanced heart failure ineligible for heart transplantation. However, stroke was more common in HVAD subjects. Post hoc analyses demonstrated increased mean arterial blood pressure as a significant independent risk factor for stroke. METHODS: The ENDURANCE Supplemental Trial was a prospective, multicenter evaluation of 465 patients with advanced heart failure ineligible for transplantation, randomized 2:1 to HVAD (n = 308) or control (n = 157). The primary endpoint was the 12-month incidence of transient ischemic attack or stroke with residual deficit 24 weeks post-event. Secondary endpoints included the composite of freedom from death, disabling stroke, and need for device replacement or urgent transplantation, as well as comparisons of stroke or transient ischemic attack rates in HVAD cohorts in ENDURANCE Supplemental and ENDURANCE. RESULTS: The enhanced blood pressure protocol significantly reduced mean arterial blood pressure. The primary endpoint was not achieved (14.7% with HVAD vs. 12.1% with control, noninferiority [margin 6%] p = 0.14). However, the secondary composite endpoint demonstrated superiority of HVAD (76.1%) versus control (66.9%) (p = 0.04). The incidence of stroke in HVAD subjects was reduced 24.2% in ENDURANCE Supplemental compared with ENDURANCE (p = 0.10), and hemorrhagic cerebrovascular accident was reduced by 50.5% (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The ENDURANCE Supplemental Trial failed to demonstrate noninferiority of HVAD versus control regarding the pre-specified primary endpoint. However, the trial confirmed that BP management is associated with reduced stroke rates in HVAD subjects. HVAD subjects, relative to control subjects, more commonly achieved the composite endpoint (freedom from death, disabling stroke, and device replacement or urgent transplantation). (A Clinical Trial to Evaluate the HeartWare™ Ventricular Assist System [ENDURANCE SUPPLEMENTAL TRIAL] [DT2]; NCT01966458).

Design changes in continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices and life-threatening pump malfunctions.

OBJECTIVES: The implantable continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) HeartMate II (HM II) and HeartWare HVAD (HW) underwent design modifications. The impact of these changes on life-threatening pump malfunctions was evaluated. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed pump malfunctions due to thrombosis or cable damage in patients supported with primarily implanted HM II (n = 191) and HW (n = 347), separated into patients supported with the old and new pump designs. In 2010, the cable strain relief of the HM II device was improved (132 patients with old and 79 with new) and sealed grafts were introduced (68 patients with sealed inflow connector and outflow graft and 125 without). In 2011, titanium sintering of the inflow cannula of HW pumps was introduced (137 patients with a non-sintered and 210 with a sintered inflow cannula). RESULTS: The median support time was 1.12 (0-6.1) years for all HM II and 0.59 (0-4.2) years for all HW patients. The cumulative rate of events per patient-year (EPPY) was 0.11 in HM II patients, compared with 0.09 EPPY in HW patients (P = 0.32). After introduction of the new cable design, incidence of cable damage in HM II patients dropped from 0.06 to 0 EPPY (P = 0.03), whereas pump thrombosis increased from 0.02 to 0.14 EPPY (P < 0.001) after the sealed graft was introduced. Pump thrombosis occurred in 4% of patients supported with HW with a sintered inflow cannula vs 15% with a non-sintered pump; the incidence changed from 0.10 to 0.07 EPPY in sintered pumps (P = 0.45). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no differences over a period of 2.5 years for events when the HM II cohort with sealed graft and new cable design (n = 68) was compared with the HW group with a sintered cannula (P = 0.14). CONCLUSIONS: The modified cable strain relief of the HM II pump and the sintering of the inflow cannula of the HW pump demonstrated a significant reduction in the incidence of life-threatening pump-related complications, whereas the sealed inflow connector and outflow graft seem to be associated with a higher incidence of pump thrombosis. However, the overall incidence of pump-related complications after the latest design changes was similar for both pumps over a 2.5-year period.

An analysis of pump thrombus events in patients in the HeartWare ADVANCE bridge to transplant and continued access protocol trial.

BACKGROUND: The HeartWare left ventricular assist device (HVAD, HeartWare Inc, Framingham, MA) is the first implantable centrifugal continuous-flow pump approved for use as a bridge to transplantation. An infrequent but serious adverse event of LVAD support is thrombus ingestion or formation in the pump. In this study, we analyze the incidence of pump thrombus, evaluate the comparative effectiveness of various treatment strategies, and examine factors pre-disposing to the development of pump thrombus. METHODS: The analysis included 382 patients who underwent implantation of the HVAD as part of the HeartWare Bridge to Transplant (BTT) and subsequent Continued Access Protocol (CAP) trial. Descriptive statistics and group comparisons were generated to analyze baseline characteristics, incidence of pump thrombus, and treatment outcomes. A multivariate analysis was performed to assess significant risk factors for developing pump thrombus. RESULTS: There were 34 pump thrombus events observed in 31 patients (8.1% of the cohort) for a rate of 0.08 events per patient-year. The incidence of pump thrombus did not differ between BTT and CAP. Medical management of pump thrombus was attempted in 30 cases, and was successful in 15 (50%). A total of 16 patients underwent pump exchange, and 2 underwent urgent transplantation. Five patients with a pump thrombus died after medical therapy failed, 4 of whom also underwent a pump exchange. Survival at 1 year in patients with and without a pump thrombus was 69.4% and 85.5%, respectively (p = 0.21). A multivariable analysis revealed that significant risk factors for pump thrombus included a mean arterial pressure > 90 mm Hg, aspirin dose ≤ 81 mg, international normalized ratio ≤ 2, and Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) profile level of ≥ 3 at implant. CONCLUSIONS: Pump thrombus is a clinically important adverse event in patients receiving an HVAD, occurring at a rate of 0.08 events per patient-year. Significant risk factors for pump thrombosis include elevated blood pressure and sub-optimal anti-coagulation and anti-platelet therapies. This suggests that pump thrombus event rates could be reduced through careful adherence to patient management guidelines.