RESUMEN
Background: Right ventricular failure (RVF) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with a left ventricular assist device (LVAD). This study is aimed to investigate the influence of a pectus excavatum on early and late outcomes, specifically RVF, following LVAD implantation. Methods: A retrospective study was performed, that included patients with a HeartMate 3 LVAD at our tertiary referral center. The Haller index (HI) was calculated using computed tomography (CT) scan to evaluate the chest-wall dimensions. Results: In total, 80 patients (median age 57 years) were included. Two cohorts were identified: 28 patients (35%) with a normal chest wall (HI < 2.0) and 52 patients (65%) with pectus excavatum (HI 2.0-3.2), with a mean follow-up time of 28 months. Early ( ≤ 30 days) RVF and early acute kidney injury events did not differ between cohorts. Overall survival did not differ between cohorts with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.47 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.19-1.19, p = 0.113). Late ( > 30 days) recurrent readmission for RVF occurred more often in patients with pectus excavatum (p = 0.008). The onset of late RVF started around 18 months after implantation and increased thereafter in the overall study cohort. Conclusions: Pectus excavatum is observed frequently in patients with a LVAD implantation. These patients have an increased rate of readmissions and late RVF. Further investigation is required to explore the extent and severity of chest-wall abnormalities on the risk of RVF.
RESUMEN
AIMS: This retrospective study investigated the association between anatomical variations in the aortic arch branching and adverse events, including the risk of cerebrovascular accidents (CVAs), in patients with a left ventricular assist device (LVAD). METHODS: Medical charts were reviewed for all patients with HeartMate 3 LVAD support at our center from 2016 to 2021. Computed tomography scans were evaluated to categorize the variations in the aortic arch branching based on seven different types, as described in the literature. RESULTS: In total, 101 patients were included: 86 (85.1%) with a normal branching pattern and 15 (14.9%) with an anatomical variation. The following variations were observed: eight (7.9%) with a bovine arch and seven (6.9%) with a left vertebral arch. The median age was 57âyears, 77.2% were men, and the median follow-up was 25âmonths. No difference was found in the rate of early (< 30âdays) re-exploration due to bleeding after LVAD implantation. The rate of CVA and mortality did not differ significantly between patients with a normal arch or an anatomical variation during follow-up, with hazard ratios of 1.47 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.48-4.48; Pâ=â0.495] and 0.69 (95% CI: 0.24-1.98; Pâ=â0.489), respectively. CONCLUSION: This preliminary study showed no differences in early and long-term adverse events, including CVA, when comparing patients with a variation in the aortic arch branching to patients with a normal aortic arch. However, knowledge of the variations in aortic arch branching could be meaningful during cardiac surgery for potential differences in surgical events in the perioperative period.