Aortic Root Thrombosis in patients with HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device support.

BACKGROUND: Aortic root thrombosis(ART) is a complication of continuous-flow left ventricular assist device therapy. However, the incidence and related complications of ART in HeartMate 3 (HM3) patients remain unknown. METHODS: Patients who underwent HM3 implantation from November 2014 to August 2020 at a quaternary academic medical center were included. Demographics and outcomes were abstracted from the medical record. Echocardiograms and contrast-enhanced computed tomography studies were reviewed to identify patients who developed ART and/or moderate or greater aortic insufficiency (AI) on HM3 support. RESULTS: The study cohort included 197 HM3 patients with a median postimplant follow-up of 17.5 months. Nineteen patients (9.6%) developed ART during HM3 support, and 15 patients (7.6%) developed moderate or greater AI. Baseline age, gender, race, implantation strategy, and INTERMACS classification were similar between the ART and no-ART groups. ART was associated with an increased risk of death, stroke, or aortic valve (AV) intervention (subhazard ratio [SHR] 3.60 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.71-7.56]; p = 0.001) and moderate or greater AI (SHR 11.1 [CI 3.60-34.1]; p < 0.001) but was not associated with a statistically significantly increased risk of death or stroke on HM3 support (2.12 [0.86-5.22]; p = 0.10). Of the 19 patients with ART, 6 (31.6%) developed moderate or greater AI, necessitating more frequent AV interventions (ART: 5 AV interventions [3 surgical repairs, 1 surgical replacement, 1 transcatheter replacement; 26.3%]; no-ART: 0). CONCLUSIONS: Nearly 10% of HM3 patients developed ART during device support. ART was associated with increased risk of a composite end-point of death, stroke, or AV intervention as well as moderate or greater AI.

Outflow Graft Narrowing of the HeartMate 3 Left Ventricular Assist Device.

BACKGROUND: In patients with the HeartMate 3 (HM3, Abbott) left ventricular (LV) assist device (LVAD), outflow graft narrowing has been reported as a result of accumulation of biodebris either internal or external to the graft. This study describes the prevalence, imaging findings, and clinical outcomes associated with HM3 LVAD outflow graft narrowing. METHODS: A single-center retrospective cohort study was performed in patients who received an HM3 LVAD between November 2014 and July 2019. All patients with a computed tomographic (CT) angiogram or a CT scan with intravenous contrast sufficient to evaluate the outflow graft lumen were included. Narrowing was defined as a hypodensity of ≥3 mm. RESULTS: Of 165 HM3 LVAD recipients, 46 (28%) had qualifying imaging. Outflow graft narrowing was present in 33% (15/46). One patient had complete obstruction requiring emergency surgery, whereas 14 patients had a median hypodensity of 4.5 mm (interquartile range, 3.3-5.8 mm). The presence of outflow graft narrowing was significantly associated with a longer duration of LVAD support (588.2 ± 277.5 days vs 131.5 ± 170.9 days; P < .0001). One-year survival after identification of narrowing was 93%, with death occurring in 1 patient with complete obstruction. LV unloading (mean percent decrease in LV end-diastolic diameter at time of CT imaging vs pre-LVAD) was 16.7% vs 17.7% in patients with and without narrowing, respectively (P = .86). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with adequate imaging, one-third have evidence of narrowing. Outflow graft narrowing secondary to biodebris was more likely to be found in HM3 LVAD recipients with longer duration of LVAD support. There was no significant difference in LV unloading between patients with and without narrowing.

Geriatric Domains in Patients with Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction.

Because heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is closely linked to aging processes and disproportionately affects older adults, consideration of geriatric domains is paramount to ensure high-quality care to older adults with HFpEF. Multimorbidity, polypharmacy, cognitive impairment, depressive symptoms, frailty, falls, and social isolation each have important implications on quality of life and clinical events including hospitalization and mortality. There are multiple strategies to screen for these conditions. This narrative review underscores the importance of screening for multiple geriatric conditions, integrating these conditions into decision making, and addressing these conditions when caring for older adults with HFpEF.

Impact of heart failure drug therapy on rates of gastrointestinal bleeding in LVAD recipients: An INTERMACS analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) remains a common and vexing complication of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support. Recent single-center analyses suggest that ACE inhibitors (ACEi)/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) and digoxin may prevent GIB in LVAD patients. Here we evaluate the effect of guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMT) for heart failure (HF) on rates of GIB through analysis of the INTERMACS registry database. METHODS: Thirteen thousand seven hundred thirty-two patients who received a continuous-flow LVAD and were on antiplatelet therapy and anticoagulation with warfarin after 3 months of pump support were included in the analysis. GIB events following implant were assessed based on receipt of ACEi/ARB, beta-blockers (BB), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA), amiodarone, digoxin, loop diuretics, and phosphiesterase-5 inhibitors (PDE5). Backwards stepwise cox regression was used to control for confounding of each drug class on each other, as well as for clinical variables like age, gender, renal function, HF etiology, and device strategy. RESULTS: After 3 months of pump support medications used in LVAD patients were BB (65.0%), ACEi/ARB (51.7%), Amio (43.7%), MRA (37.9%), and loop diuretics (70.1%). In patients with available data, PDE and digoxin use were 18.2% and 16.9%, respectively. The overall incidence of GIB was 19.5% at 2 years of support. After adjustment for other clinical variables, loop diuretics (HR 1.274, p < 0.001) and PDE5 (HR 1.241, p < 0.001) use were associated with increased risk of GIB, while use of BB (HR 0.871, p = 0.006) was associated with lower risk of GIB. ACEi/ARB (HR 1.002, p = 0.971), Amio (HR 1.083, p = 0.106), AA (HR 0.967, p = 0.522) or digoxin (HR 1.087, p = 0.169) did not affect GIB rates on LVAD support (Figure). CONCLUSION: Despite recent reports, ACEi/ARB, MRA, Amio, and digoxin use does not appear to be associated with GIB during LVAD support. The heightened risk seen in those on loop diuretics may reflect venous congestion in these patients, while antiplatelet effects of PDE5 could drive the higher risk of GIB.

Safety of reduced anti-thrombotic strategy in patients with HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device.

There are limited safety data on reduced anti-thrombotic therapy (RT) in patients with HeartMate 3 (HM3) left ventricular assist device (LVAD). We conducted a single-center, retrospective study of patients with HM3 managed with RT from November 2014 through January 2020. We analyzed baseline characteristics, RT indications, and bleeding and thrombotic complications. We found that 50 of 161 patients with HM3 (31.1%) received RT starting at a median time of 90.5 days after LVAD implantation. Patients on RT were older and more likely to have ischemic heart failure than patients on standard anti-thrombotic therapy (ST). The most common indication for RT was gastrointestinal bleeding (29 patients [58.0%]). At 1-year follow-up, 5.0% of patients on RT developed a thrombotic event. Switching patients from ST to RT reduced the occurrence of major bleeding from 1.252 to 0.324 events per patient-year (p = 0.006). In our population of patients with HM3 LVAD, RT reduces bleeding without increasing the incidence of thrombosis. Our retrospective study suggests that an upfront RT strategy in patients with HM3 may be beneficial and should be prospectively studied.