Anticoagulation alone as an effective and safe antithrombotic therapy in LVAD: When less is more.

To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of anticoagulation alone in HeartMate3 patients. According to antithrombotic regimen, patients were divided into 2 groups: Group-1(warfarin+aspirin) and Group-2(warfarin). A comparison of hemocompatibility-related adverse events (HRAEs), hemocompatibility score (HCS), and hemocoagulative laboratory markers, both qualitative and quantitative, between the 2 groups were performed. Fifty patients were enrolled, 28 (56%) in Group-1 and 22 in Group-2 (44%), without statistical differences at baseline. Median time of follow-up was 590 days (IQR: 410.25-1007.50). Eighteen HRAEs (36.0%) occurred: 17 in Group-1 (34%) and 1 in Group-2 (2%) (P < 0.001). The net HCS for Group-1 versus Group-2 was 24 points and 1 point (OR 12.116[2.034-233.226], P = 0.023), respectively. Hemocoagulative values turned into the normality and remained stable during follow-up, without differences between groups, except for ASPI-test (P = 0.003). HeartMate3 showed a high hemocompatibility independently from antithrombotic therapy. Aspirin avoidance resulted a safe and effective strategy since it reduced hemorrhagic events, without increasing thrombotic risk.

Antiphospholipid antibody syndrome and LVAD: What are the chances? A case report and literature review.

Left-ventricular-assist-device (LVAD) implantation in patients with antiphospholipid-syndrome (APS) is considered a high-risk procedure and its indication still represents an open challenge. Herein, we report a 63-year-old man with APS and end-stage heart failure, for whom a HeartMate3-LVAD and a continuous rheologic profile monitoring with a multiparametric assessment resulted the optimal therapeutic strategy.

Impact of vacuum-assisted closure therapy on outcomes of sternal wound dehiscence†.

OBJECTIVES: Sternal wound dehiscence (SWD) after cardiac surgery is a rare but serious condition associated with considerable costs and morbidity. We sought to evaluate the results of the introduction of vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) therapy in the management of sternal wound dehiscence, compared with those of previous conventional treatments. METHODS: We retrospectively collected 7148 patients who underwent cardiac surgery at our institution between January 2002 and June 2012. A total of 152 (2.1%) patients had a sternal wound dehiscence: 107 were treated with conventional treatments (Group A) and 45 were managed with VAC therapy (Group B). Patients were stratified according to preoperative risk factors and type of sternal wound dehiscence (superficial or deep; infected or not) and compared by means of a propensity-matched analysis. A cost analysis was also performed. RESULTS: Forty-five patients of each group matched for all preoperative risk factors and type of sternal wound dehiscence. SWD-related mortality rate was significantly lower in Group B (11 vs 0%; P = 0.05). Incidence of mediastinitis (P < 0.0001), sepsis (P = 0.04), delayed SWD infection (P = 0.05), other complication (P = 0.05), surgical sternal revision (P = 0.04) and surgical superficial revision (P < 0.0001) were all significantly lower in Group B. Mean patient cost was 31 106€ in Group A and 24 383€ in Group B, thus achieving a mean saving of 6723€ per patient. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, the use of VAC therapy for the management of SWD was considerably effective in decreasing mortality (SWD related), incidence of complications and need for surgical procedures; thus, leading to a significant reduction of costs.