Single center outcomes after temporary mechanical circulatory assist device prior to Heartmate 3 implantation - a retrospective cohort study.

Objectives. Temporary mechanical circulatory support (TMCS) has become a component in the therapeutic strategy for treatment of cardiogenic shock as a bridge-to-decision. TMCS can facilitate recovery of cardiopulmonary function, end-organ function, and potentially reduce the surgical risk of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. Despite the improvements of hemodynamics and end-organ function, post-LVAD operative morbidity might be increased in these high-risk patients. The aim of the study was to compare outcomes after Heartmate 3 (HM3) implantation in patients with and without TMCS prior to HM3 implant. Methods. In this retrospective cohort study of all HM3 patients in the period between November 2015 and October 2021, patients with and without prior TMCS were compared. Patients' demographics, baseline clinical characteristics, laboratory tests, intraoperative variables, postoperative outcomes, and adverse events were collected from patient records. Results. The TMCS group showed an improvement in hemodynamics prior to LVAD implantation. Median TMCS duration was 19.5 (14-26) days. However, the TMCS group were more coagulopathic, had more wound infections, neurological complications, and more patients were on dialysis compared with patient without TMCS prior to HM3 implantation. Survival four years after HM3 implantation was 80 and 82% in the TMCS (N = 22) and non-TMCS group (N = 41), respectively. Conclusion. Patients on TMCS had an acceptable short and long-term survival and comparable to patients receiving HM3 without prior TMCS. However, they had a more complicated postoperative course.

Extrinsic Outflow Graft Obstruction of the HeartMate 3 LVAD: A State-of-the-Art Review.

While notable improvements in survival, incidence of hemocompatibility-related adverse events, hospitalizations and cost have been demonstrated with the only commercially available durable left ventricular assist device, a category of pump malfunctions characterized by outflow graft obstruction has been noted with broader use and clinical follow up of recipients of this technology. Of particular concern, is the accumulation of acellular biodebris between the outflow graft and bend relief covering the outflow graft at its origin with the pump (which we term extrinsic outflow graft obstruction at the bend relief, or EOGO-BR). This process tends to be insidious, occurs late in the postoperative course, can be challenging to diagnose, and can result in significant morbidity and mortality. Herein we provide a review of this complication and outline diagnostic, treatment and preventive strategies.

Validation of the HeartMate 3 survival risk score in a large left ventricular assist device center.

OBJECTIVE: The HeartMate 3 survival risk score was recently validated in the Multicenter study Of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy with HeartMate 3 to predict patient-specific survival in HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device candidates. The HeartMate 3 survival risk score stratifies individuals into tertiles according to survival probability. METHODS: We performed a single-center retrospective review of all HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device recipients between September 2017 and August 2022. Baseline characteristics were collected from the electronic medical records. HeartMate 3 survival risk scores were calculated for all eligible patients. One- and 2-year Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were conducted. A univariate and multivariable Cox regression model was used to identify predictors. RESULTS: A total of 181 patients were included in this final analysis. The median age was 62 years, 83% were male, and 26% were Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support Profile 1. The mean HeartMate 3 survival risk score for the entire cohort was 2.66 ± 0.66. Two-year survivals in the high, average, and low survival groups were 93.5% ± 3.2%, 81.6% ± 7.4%, and 82.0% ± 6.6%, respectively. As a continuous variable, the unadjusted HeartMate 3 survival risk score was a significant predictor of mortality (hazard ratio, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.08-4.45; P = .029). The areas under the curve were 0.70 and 0.66 at 1 and 2 years, respectively. We were unable to demonstrate the discriminatory ability of the HeartMate 3 survival risk score using the original stratification, but we found significantly increased survival in the high survival group using a binary cutoff (hazard ratio, 4.8; 95% CI, 1.01-20.9; P = .038). CONCLUSIONS: The unadjusted HeartMate 3 survival risk score was associated with postimplant survival in patients outside of the Multicenter study Of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy with HeartMate 3 but did not remain an independent predictor after adjusting for ischemic etiology and severe diabetes. The HeartMate 3 survival risk score was able to identify patients at high survival using a binary cutoff, but we were unable to demonstrate its discriminatory ability among the previously published risk tertiles.

Long-term discontinuation of warfarin in a patient with HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device without thromboembolic events.

The gold standard therapy for end-stage heart failure is cardiac transplantation. However, in the face of a donor shortage, a mechanical assist device such as the left ventricular assist device HeartMate 3 (Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Park, IL, USA) serves as bridging therapy to transplantation and/or destination therapy. Current guidelines recommend anticoagulation with a vitamin K antagonist in combination with low-dose aspirin. We herein report a challenging anticoagulation regimen in a patient with a HeartMate 3 in whom systemic anticoagulation with warfarin was not feasible for 4 years because of low compatibility and a rare X-factor deficiency. This is a rare hematological disorder, estimated to affect approximately 1 in every 500,000 to 1,000,000 people in the general population. The patient finally received a modified anticoagulation regimen involving the combination of rivaroxaban and clopidogrel without warfarin. Under this regimen, the patient remained free of thromboembolic complications for 4 years with in situ placement of the left ventricular assist device. This case illustrates that under specific circumstances, long-term absence of warfarin therapy is feasible in patients with a HeartMate 3.

Pressure-dimension index and left ventricular sphericity index following HeartMate II and HeartMate 3 implantation.

AIMS: This study aimed to compare the changes in the left ventricle (LV) and right ventricle (RV) geometry and performance after the implantation of HeartMate II (HMII) and HeartMate 3 (HM3). In addition, we investigated whether the echocardiographic parameters LV sphericity index (LVSI) and the novel pressure-dimension index (PDI) can predict post-operative right ventricular failure (RVF). METHODS AND RESULTS: Between 2012 and 2020, 46 patients [HMII (n = 22) and HM3 (n = 24)] met the study's criteria and had echocardiography tests pre-operatively, 6 and 12 months post-operatively. The LVSI and PDI were calculated together with the standard LV and RV echocardiographic parameters. The mean follow-up was 24 ± 7 months. In both groups, the LV end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) significantly decreased 12 months post-operatively compared with the pre-operative values (HMII: 6.4 ± 1.4 cm vs. 5.7 ± 0.9 cm, P = 0.040; HM3: 6.7 ± 1.3 cm vs. 5.5 ± 0.9 cm, P < 0.01, respectively). RV function 12 months post-operatively was better in the HM3 group than in the HMII group, as indicated by a significantly higher RV fractional area change (RVFAC) in the HM3 group than in the HMII group 12 months post-operatively (35 ± 12% vs. 26 ± 16%, P = 0.039), significantly higher tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) in the HM3 group 12 months post-operatively compared with the HMII group (13.9 ± 1.9 mm vs. 12.0 ± 2.1 mm, P = 0.002), and the tissue Doppler estimated tricuspid annular systolic velocity (TASV) was also significantly higher in the HM3 group 12 months post-operatively compared with the HMII group (11.5 ± 2.7 mm/s vs. 9.9 ± 1.5 mm/s, P = 0.020). The LVSI value was significantly higher 12 months post-operatively in the HMII group than in the HM3 group (1.2 ± 0.4 vs. 0.8 ± 0.2, P = 0.001, respectively), indicating worse geometric changes. The PDI decreased 12 months post-operatively in the HM3-group compared with the baseline (3.4 ± 1.4 mmHg/cm2 vs. 2.0 ± 0.8 mmHg/cm2, P < 0.001). In the univariate and multivariate analyses, only the pre-operative PDI was a predictor of post-operative RVF [odds ratio: 3.84 (95% CI: 1.53-18.16, P = 0.022)]. The area under the curve for pre-operative PDI was 0.912. The 2 year survival was significantly better in the HM3 group (log-rank, P = 0.042). CONCLUSIONS: The design of HM3 offered better geometrical preservation of the LV and enabled normal PDI values, leading to improved RV function, as indicated by better RVFAC, TAPSE, and TASV values. The use of pre-operative PDI as an additional tool for established risk scores might offer a better pre-operative predictor of RVF.

Apixaban in bridge to transplant and destination LVAD - rationale and study design: the ApixiVAD trial.

AIMS: Use of novel anticoagulation in mechanical circulatory support is controversial. We report the rationale and design of the ApixiVad pilot trial, a pilot study testing the safety of apixaban as an anticoagulant in patients bridged to transplant (BTT) or for destination (DT) with Heartmate 3 (HM3) left ventricular assist device (LVAD). METHODS AND RESULTS: Apixaban has been used in small non-randomized cohorts in LVAD patients and shown to be effective in ex vivo studies. The ApixiVAD study examines apixaban use in a multicentre, international, open-label, randomized, controlled trial aiming to include 50 BTT or DT HM3 patients with a 1:1 randomization ratio. This event-driven study has a maximum follow-up period of 24 months with interim analysis at 6 months. The primary outcome is death, thromboembolic events and major bleeding, including operative bleeding and immediate transplant outcomes. The secondary outcome focuses on patients' quality of life related to anticoagulation. This investigator-driven pilot study is not powered to determine the non-inferiority of apixaban. An increase in primary outcome in the apixaban group of 20% will be considered a signal of harm. CONCLUSIONS: A positive outcome in the ApixiVAD study would provide the basis for future, larger, pivotal anticoagulation trials in LVAD patients.

Outcomes of outflow graft stenting in HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist devices: A systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: LVAD outflow graft stenosis continues to remain prevalent with a high complication rate. We sought to pool the existing evidence on indications, utilization patterns, and outcomes of transcatheter interventions for outflow graft stenosis in the HeartMate 3 LVAD. METHODS: An electronic search was performed to identify all studies in the English literature reporting on HeartMate 3 LVAD outflow graft stenting. Patient-level data were extracted for analysis. RESULTS: Thirteen published reports and one unpublished case comprising a total of 28 patients were included. Median patient age was 68.5 years [Interquartile range: 58, 71] and 25.9% (7/27) were female. Dyspnea [60.7% (17/28)] was the most common presenting symptom. Low flow alarms were present in 60% (15/25) of patients. Findings included external compression [35.7% (10/28)], graft twist [21.4% (6/28)], graft twist and external compression [14.3% (4.28)], intraluminal thrombus [10.7% (3/28)], graft twist and intraluminal thrombus [3.6% (1/28)], and pseudoaneurysm of outflow graft [3.6% (1/28)]. Median time from LVAD implantation to stenting was 2.1 years [1.4, 3]. Immediate flow normalization after stenting was observed in 85.7% (24/28). The 30-day mortality was 12% (3/25). Overall mortality was 12% (3/25) at a median follow-up of 3.9 months [1, 17]. CONCLUSION: Outflow graft stenting in the HeartMate 3 LVAD appears to be a reasonable treatment option for outflow graft stenosis, with low overall rates of complications and mortality. Further refinement of indications and approaches may improve outcomes.

Echocardiographic haemodynamic monitoring in the context of HeartMate 3™ therapy: a systematic review.

AIMS: While echocardiography remains essential within haemodynamic monitoring of durable mechanical circulatory support, previous echocardiographic guidelines are missing scientific evidence for the novel HeartMate 3™ (HM3) system. Accordingly, this review aims to summarize available echocardiographic evidence including HM3. METHODS AND RESULTS: This systematic review adhered to the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Searches were conducted during August 2023 across PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar using specific echocardiographic terms combined with system identifiers. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for cohort studies and Critical Appraisal Instrument (PCAI) for cross-sectional studies. Nine studies met the inclusion criteria, of which eight cohort studies and one cross-sectional study. Aortic regurgitation (AR) prevalence at approximately 12 months of support exhibited heterogenicity (33.5% (Δ 33%)) in a limited number of studies (n = 3). Several studies (n = 5) demonstrated an increasing prevalence and severity of AR during HM3 support, generating moderate to high level of evidence. One AR study showed a higher cumulative incidence of death and heart failure (HF) readmission compared with those without significant AR, hazard ratio 3.42 (95% CI 1.48-8.76). A second study showed that a worsening AR group had significantly lower survival-free from HF readmission (59% vs. 89%, P = 0.023) with a hazard ratio of 5.18 (95% CI 1.07-25.0), while a third study did not reveal any differences in cardiac-related hospitalizations in the 12 months follow-up or non-cardiac-related hospitalization. Mitral regurgitation (MR) prevalence at approximately 12 months of support exhibited good consistency 15.0% (Δ 0.8%) in both included studies, which did not reveal any significant pattern of changing prevalence over time. Tricuspid regurgitation (TR) prevalence at approximately 12 months of support exhibited fair consistency 28.5% (Δ 8.3%) in a limited number of studies (n = 2); both studies showed a statistically un-confirmed trend of increased TR prevalence over time. The evidence of general prevalence of right ventricular dysfunction (RVD) was insufficient due to lack of studies. CONCLUSIONS: There are few methodologically consistent studies with focus on long-term haemodynamic effects. Aortic regurgitation still seems to be a prevalent and potentially significant finding. The available evidence concerning right heart function is limited despite clinical relevance and potential prognostic value. Potential interventricular and haemodynamic interplay are identified as a white field for future research.

Beyond Quadruple Therapy and Current Therapeutic Strategies in Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction: Medical Therapies with Potential to Become Part of the Therapeutic Armamentarium.

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is a complex clinical syndrome with significant morbidity and mortality and seems to be responsible for approximately 50% of heart failure cases and hospitalizations worldwide. First-line treatments of patients with HFrEF, according to the ESC and AHA guidelines, include ß-blockers, angiotensin receptor/neprilysin inhibitors, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. This quadruple therapy should be initiated during hospital stay and uptitrated to maximum doses within 6 weeks after discharge according to large multicenter controlled trials. Quadruple therapy improves survival by approximately 8 years for a 55-year-old heart failure patient. Additional therapeutic strategies targeting other signaling pathways such as ivabradine, digoxin, and isosorbide dinitrate and hydralazine combination for African Americans, as well as adjunctive symptomatic therapies, seem to be necessary in the management of HFrEF. Although second-line medications have not achieved improvements in mortality, they seem to decrease heart failure hospitalizations. There are novel medical therapies including vericiguat, omecamtiv mecarbil, genetic and cellular therapies, and mitochondria-targeted therapies. Moreover, mitraclip for significant mitral valve regurgitation, ablation in specific atrial fibrillation cases, omecamtiv mecarbil are options under evaluation in clinical trials. Finally, the HeartMate 3 magnetically levitated centrifugal left ventricular assist device (LVAD) has extended 5-year survival for stage D HF patients who are candidates for an LVAD.

Ventricular assist device using a thoracotomy-based implant technique: Multi-Center Implantation of the HeartMate 3 in Subjects With Heart Failure Using Surgical Techniques Other Than Full Median Sternotomy (HM3 SWIFT).

OBJECTIVES: The HeartMate 3 (Abbott) left ventricular assist device provides substantial improvement in long-term morbidity and mortality in patients with advanced heart failure. The Implantation of the HeartMate 3 in Subjects With Heart Failure Using Surgical Techniques Other Than Full Median Sternotomy study compares thoracotomy-based implantation clinical outcomes with standard median sternotomy. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, multicenter, single-arm study in patients eligible for HeartMate 3 implantation with thoracotomy-based surgical technique (bilateral thoracotomy or partial upper sternotomy with left thoracotomy). The composite primary end point was survival free of disabling stroke (modified Rankin score >3), or reoperation to remove or replace a malfunctioning device, or conversion to median sternotomy at 6-months postimplant (elective transplants were treated as a success). The primary end point (noninferiority, -15% margin) was assessed with >90% power compared with a propensity score-matched cohort (ratio 1:2) derived from the Multi-Center Study of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy With HeartMate 3 continued access protocol. RESULTS: The study enrolled 102 patients between December 2020 and July 2022 in the thoracotomy-based arm at 23 North American centers. Follow-up concluded in December 2022. In the Implantation of the HeartMate 3 in Subjects With Heart Failure Using Surgical Techniques Other Than Full Median Sternotomy study group, noninferiority criteria was met (absolute between-group difference, -1.2%; Farrington Manning lower 1-sided 95% CI, -9.3%; P < .0025) and event-free survival was not different (85.0% vs 86.2%; hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.58-2.10). Length of stay with thoracotomy-based implant was longer (median, 20 vs 17 days; P = .03). No differences were observed for blood product utilization, adverse events (including right heart failure), functional status, and quality of life between cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Thoracotomy-based implantation of the HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device is noninferior to implantation via standard full sternotomy. This study supports thoracotomy-based implantation as an additional standard for surgical implantation of the HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device.

Surgical Outcomes of Centrifugal Continuous-Flow Implantable Left Ventricular Assist Devices: Heartmate 3 versus Heartware Ventricular Assist Device.

Background: Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are widely employed as a therapeutic option for end-stage heart failure. We evaluated the outcomes associated with centrifugal-flow LVAD implantation, comparing 2 device models: the Heartmate 3 (HM3) and the Heartware Ventricular Assist Device (HVAD). Methods: Data were collected from patients who underwent LVAD implantation between June 1, 2015 and December 31, 2022. We analyzed overall survival, first rehospitalization, and early, late, and LVAD-related complications. Results: In total, 74 patients underwent LVAD implantation, with 42 receiving the HM3 and 32 the HVAD. A mild Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support score was more common among HM3 than HVAD recipients (p=0.006), and patients receiving the HM3 exhibited lower rates of preoperative ventilator use (p=0.010) and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (p=0.039). The overall early mortality rate was 5.4% (4 of 74 patients), with no significant difference between groups. Regarding early right ventricular (RV) failure, HM3 implantation was associated with a lower rate (13 of 42 [31.0%]) than HVAD implantation (18 of 32 [56.2%], p=0.051). The median rehospitalization-free period was longer for HM3 recipients (16.9 months) than HVAD recipients (5.3 months, p=0.013). Furthermore, HM3 recipients displayed a lower incidence of late hemorrhagic stroke (p=0.016). In the multivariable analysis, preoperative use of continuous renal replacement therapy (odds ratio, 22.31; p=0.002) was the only significant predictor of postoperative RV failure. Conclusion: The LVAD models (HM3 and HVAD) demonstrated comparable overall survival rates. However, the HM3 was associated with a lower risk of late hemorrhagic stroke.

Evolution of Mechanical Circulatory Support for advanced heart failure.

This comprehensive review highlights the significant advancements in Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD) therapy, emphasizing its evolution from the early pulsatile flow systems to the cutting-edge continuous-flow devices, particularly the HeartMate 3 (HM3) LVAD. These advancements have notably improved survival rates, reduced complications, and enhanced the quality of life (QoL) for patients with advanced heart failure. The dual role of LVADs, as a bridge-to-transplantation and destination therapy is discussed, highlighting the changing trends and policies in their application. The marked reduction in hemocompatibility-related adverse events (HRAE) with the HM3 LVAD, compared to previous models signifies ongoing progress in the field. Challenges such as managing major infections are discussed, including innovative solutions like energy transfer systems aimed at eliminating external drivelines. It explores various LVAD-associated complications, including HRAE, infections, hemodynamic-related adverse events, and cardiac arrhythmias, and underscores emerging strategies for predicting post-implantation outcomes, fostering a more individualized patient care approach. Tools such as the HM3 risk score are introduced for predicting survival based on pre-implant factors, along with advanced imaging techniques for improved complication prediction. Additionally, the review highlights potential new technologies and therapies in LVAD management, such as hemodynamic ramp tests for optimal speed adjustment and advanced remote monitoring systems. The goal is to automate LVAD speed adjustments based on real-time hemodynamic measurements, indicating a shift towards more effective, patient-centered therapy. The review concludes optimistically that ongoing research and potential future innovations hold the promise of revolutionizing heart failure management, paving the way for more effective and personalized treatment modalities.

A multicenter evaluation of the HeartMate 3 risk score.

BACKGROUND: The Heartmate 3 (HM3) risk score (HM3RS) was derived and validated internally from within the Multicenter Study of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy with HeartMate 3 (MOMENTUM 3) trial population and provides 1- and 2-year mortality risk prediction for patients in those before HM3 left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. We aimed to evaluate the HM3RS in nontrial unselected patients, including those not meeting inclusion criteria for MOMENTUM 3 trial enrollment. METHODS: Patients who underwent HM3 LVAD implant at 1 of 7 US centers between 2017 and 2021, with at least 1-year follow-up, were included in this analysis. Patients were retrospectively assessed for their eligibility for the MOMENTUM 3 trial based on study inclusion and exclusion criteria. HM3RS risk discrimination was evaluated using time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curve analysis for 1-year mortality for all patients and further stratified by MOMENTUM 3 trial eligibility. Kaplan-Meier curves were constructed using the HM3RS-based risk categories. RESULTS: Of 521 patients included in the analysis, 266 (51.1%) would have met enrollment criteria for MOMENTUM 3. The 1- and 2-year survival for the total cohort was 85% and 81%, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in survival between those who met and did not meet enrollment criteria at 1 (87% vs 83%; p = 0.21) and 2 years postimplant (80% vs 78%; p = 0.39). For the total cohort, HM3RS predicted 1-year survival with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.63 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.57-0.69, p < 0.001). HM3RS performed better in the subset of patients meeting enrollment criteria: AUC 0.69 (95% CI:0.61-0.77, p < 0.001) compared to the subset that did not: AUC 0.58 (95% CI: 0.49-0.66, p = 0.078). CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world evidence, multicenter cohort, 1- and 2-year survival after commercial HM3 LVAD implant was excellent, regardless of trial eligibility. The HM3RS provided adequate risk discrimination in "trial-like" patients, but predictive value was reduced in patients who did not meet trial criteria.

Gastrointestinal bleeding following Heartmate 3 left ventricular assist device implantation: The Michigan Bleeding Risk Model.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) results in frequent hospitalizations and impairs quality of life in durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) recipients. Anticipation of these events before implantation could have important implications for patient selection and management. METHODS: The study population included all adult HeartMate 3 (HM3) primary LVAD recipients enrolled in the STS Intermacs registry from January 2017 to December 2020. Using multivariable modeling methodologies, we investigated the relationships between preimplantation characteristics and postimplant bleeding, bleeding and death, and additional bleeding episodes on subsequent bleeding episodes and created a risk score to predict the likelihood of post-LVAD GIB based solely on preimplantation factors. RESULTS: Of 6,425 patients who received an HM3 LVAD, 1,010 (15.7%) patients experienced GIB. Thirteen preimplantation factors were independent predictors of post-LVAD GIB. A risk score was created from these factors and calculated for each patient. By 3 years postimplant, GIB occurred in 11%, 26%, and 43% of low-, medium- and high-risk patients, respectively. Experiencing 1 post-LVAD GIB event was associated with an increased risk for further GIB events, with 33.9% of patients experiencing at least 1 recurrence. While post-LVAD GIB was associated with mortality, there was no relationship between number of GIB events and death. CONCLUSIONS: The Michigan Bleeding Risk Model is a simple tool, which facilitates the prediction of post-LVAD GIB in HM3 recipients using 13 preimplant variables. The implementation of this tool may help in the risk stratification process and may have therapeutic and clinical implications in HM3 LVAD recipients.