Packing the donor heart: Is SherpaPak cold preservation technique safer compared to ice cold storage.

INTRODUCTION: The present study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of heart transplant patients whose donor hearts were preserved with the SherpaPak controlled cold organ system versus the conventional ice storage technique. METHODS: All patients undergoing heart transplantation at our center between January 2019 and April 2021 were divided into two groups according to the technique used during donor heart preservation and transport. The first group consisted of 34 SherpaPak controlled temperature preservation patients, and the second group consisted of 47 patients where the conventional three bags and ice technique was utilized during organ transportation. The two groups were compared based on demographics, operative details, and postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the groups regarding Vasoactive Inotropic Score (VIS), Primary Graft Dysfunction (PGD), and the need for a transient pacer. However, the VIS, PGD, and pacing trends were lower in the SherpaPak patients even though the total ischemic and cardiopulmonary bypass times were significantly longer. Furthermore, SherpaPak patients exhibited a shorter stay in the ICU with no severe PGD and mortality. CONCLUSION: The SherpaPak donor heart preservation provides safe outcomes in heart transplant patients. Further research is needed to utilize this method for longer durations of ischemic time and expand travel distances for organ transportation.

Controlled temperatures in cold preservation provides safe heart transplantation results.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to investigate the short-term outcomes of heart transplant patients who underwent SherpaPak™ donor organ preservation. METHOD: We prospectively collected the data of patients who underwent heart transplantation using SherpaPak™ system for donor organ transportation from February 2020 to March 2021. Donor and recipient demographic data, preoperative and postoperative echocardiographic and hemodynamic parameters, total ischemic time and SherpaPak temperatures, vasoactive inotropic scores (VIS), primary graft dysfunction (PGD) status, intensive care unit stay, complications, and mortality during follow-up were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 39 consecutive heart transplant patients with SherpaPak system were included in the study. The mean donor age was 32.2 ± 6.7 (range: 16-46). The mean recipient age was 57.5 ± 12 (range: 19-73). The mean preoperative ejection fraction (EF) was 23.7 ± 15.4 (range: 5-75). All recipients underwent a standard bicaval technique for orthotopic heart implantation. The mean total ischemic time was 230.1 ± 41 (range: 149-342) min. The mean Sherpa temperature was 5.6 ± 0.8°C (range: 3.7-7.5). The mean VIS was 10.2 ± 6.5 (range: 2-32). The number of mild PGD was 5 (14.7%), and moderate PGD was 4 (11.8%). There was no severe PGD. The postoperative EF was 64.3 ± 5.5 (range: 50-78). Mean intubation time was 47.4 ± 64 (range: 8-312, median: 22) h. The mean time of intensive care unit stay was 6.3 ± 5 (range: 2-31, median: 5) days. Two patients required chest revision (5.8%), two patients had lung infection (5.8%). Two patients had a stroke (5.8%). There was no mortality. CONCLUSION: Using the SherpaPak system during heart transplantation is safe and not associated with significant recipient morbidity. None of the recipients experienced significant PGD and mortality.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as a salvage therapy for patients with severe primary graft dysfunction after heart transplant.

BACKGROUND: Severe primary graft dysfunction (PGD) is the leading cause of early death after heart transplant. AIM: To examine the outcomes of heart transplant recipients who received venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) for severe PGD. METHODS: We reviewed electronic health records of adult patients who underwent heart transplant from November 2005 through June 2015. We defined severe PGD according to International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation consensus statements. RESULTS: Of 1030 heart transplant patients, 31 (3%) had severe PGD and required VA-ECMO. The mean (range) age was 59 (43-69) years. Fifteen patients (48%) underwent prior sternotomy and 10 (32%) received a left ventricular assist device as a bridge to transplant. Severe PGD manifested as failure to wean from cardiopulmonary bypass in 20 patients (65%) and as severe hemodynamic instability in the immediate postoperative period in 10 (32%), including cardiac arrest in 3 (10%). Twenty-five patients (81%) were successfully weaned from VA-ECMO, and 19 (61%) were discharged; the other 12 (39%) died. CONCLUSIONS: Although VA-ECMO is a common method for providing mechanical circulatory support to patients with PGD, multicenter studies are needed to assess factors associated with successful outcomes and improved survival of these patients.

Trigeminal Amyloidoma in a Patient With Cardiac Amyloidosis.

Trigeminal amyloidoma is a rare clinical phenomenon with scarce reports in the medical literature. This report presents a case of biopsy-proven trigeminal amyloidoma in a patient with cardiac amyloidosis. This case report sheds light on the differential diagnoses that may resemble trigeminal amyloidoma and strategies for workup and treatment.

Short-term outcomes of heart transplant patients bridged with Impella 5.5 ventricular assist device.

AIMS: We sought to investigate the outcomes of heart transplant patients supported with Impella 5.5 temporary mechanical circulatory support. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patient demographics, perioperative data, hospital timeline, and haemodynamic parameters were followed during initial admission, Impella support, and post-transplant period. Vasoactive-inotropic score, primary graft failure, and complications were recorded. Between March 2020 and March 2021, 16 advanced heart failure patients underwent Impella 5.5 temporary left ventricular assist device support through axillary approach. Subsequently, all these patients had heart transplantation. All patients were either ambulatory or chair bound during their temporary mechanical circulatory support until heart transplantation. Patients were kept on Impella support median of 19 days (3-31) with the median lactate dehydrogenase level of 220 (149-430). All Impella devices were removed during heart transplantation. During Impella support, patients had improved renal function with median creatinine serum level of 1.55 mg/dL decreased to 1.25 (P = 0.007), pulmonary artery pulsatility index scores increased from 2.56 (0.86-10) to 4.2 (1.3-10) (P = 0.048), and right ventricular function improved (P = 0.003). Patients maintained improved renal function and favourable haemodynamics after their heart transplantation as well. All patients survived without any significant morbidity after their heart transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: Impella 5.5 temporary left ventricular assist device optimizes care of heart transplant recipients providing superior haemodynamic support, mobility, improved renal function, pulmonary haemodynamics, and right ventricular function. Utilizing Impella 5.5 as a direct bridging strategy to heart transplantation resulted in excellent outcomes.

Successful Use of Intragastric Balloon Therapy as a Bridge to Heart Transplantation.

Obesity is an important limiting factor for heart transplantation (HT) in patients with congestive heart failure (CHF). Achieving substantial weight loss is challenging in this population due to activity limitations and fluid retention. Endoscopic bariatric therapies (EBTs) including intragastric balloons (IGB) are effective primary weight loss therapies. IGBs have also been successfully utilized as a bridge therapy prior to liver transplantation and, in one case report, prior to HT. Potential advantages of IGBs in this population include low bleeding risk and less invasiveness as compared to other EBTs and surgery. We report the successful use of IGB as a bridge therapy in two patients with class II obesity and end-stage CHF requiring left ventricular assist devices (LVAD), anticoagulation, antiplatelet, and inotrope therapy.

Preoperative risk factors predict survival following cardiac retransplantation: analysis of the United Network for Organ Sharing database.

BACKGROUND: The aim of our study was to identify preoperative risk factors affecting overall survival after cardiac retransplantation (ReTX) in a contemporary era. METHODS: The United Network for Organ Sharing database was used to identify patients undergoing ReTX between 1995 and 2012. Of the total 28,464 primary transplants performed, 987 (3.5%) were retransplants. The primary outcome investigated was overall survival. The influence of preoperative donor and recipient characteristics on survival were then tested with univariate logistic regression and multivariate Cox regression models. RESULTS: Of 987 patients who underwent ReTX, median survival was 9 years. Estimated survival at 1, 3, 5, 10, and 15 years following retransplant was 80% (95% confidence interval [CI], 78%-83%), 70% (95% CI, 67%-73%), 64% (95% CI, 61%-67%), 47% (95% CI, 43%-51%), and 30% (95% CI, 25%-37%), respectively. Clinical predictors of survival using multivariable analysis included donor age (relative risk [RR], 1.14; P = .004), ischemic time > 4 hours (RR, 1.48; P = .004); preoperative support with extracorporeal membrane oxygenator (RR, 3.91; P < .001), and the time between previous and current transplant (P = .004). Patients with ReTX have 1.27 times higher relative risk of death compared with patients undergoing primary transplant only (RR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.13-1.42; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who undergo cardiac ReTX can expect to have a 1-year survival less than a patient undergoing primary transplant with an acceptable median overall survival. Both donor and recipient preoperative factors contribute to overall survival following cardiac ReTx. Donor characteristics include age of the donor and ischemic time. Recipient factors include the need for extracorporeal membrane oxygenator and the number of days between the first and second transplant. Optimal survival following cardiac ReTX can best be predicted by choosing patients who are farther out from their initial transplant, not dependent upon preoperative extracorporeal support, and by choosing donor hearts younger in age and those likely to have shorter ischemic times.