Search

Since pulmonary hypertension (PH) due to left-sided heart failure (HF) with elevated pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) is contraindication for heart transplantation (HTx), correct evaluation of reversibility in PVR is essential for adequate therapeutic decision-making. However, guidelines or recommended protocols for pharmacological testing to evaluate the reversibility of PVR have not been established yet. In this report, we presented a 34-year-old male with advanced HF complicated by severe PH with high PVR [5.93 Wood units (WU)] who was deemed eligible for HTx. To evaluate his HTx candidacy, oxygen inhalation test was applied during right heart catheterization (RHC) and PVR was drastically decreased to 2.29 WU. At that time, acute response test to adaptive servo-ventilation (ASV) was also applied and use of ASV temporarily but substantially decreased PVR to 2.15 WU. From the results of both oxygen inhalation test and acute response test to ASV, reversibility of PVR in this patient was confirmed, and the patient was approved as HTx candidate and received left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation for bridge to transplant. After LVAD implantation, PVR substantially and persistently decreased to 2.4 WU. These findings indicate that acute response test to ASV during RHC may be a possible modality to evaluate the reversibility of PVR in HF patients with PH complicated by elevated PVR.

Despite continual improvements in ventricular assist device (VAD) therapy, various clinical issues are emerging. Importantly, various types of thromboembolic complications have been reported to date. Recently, we encountered a rare continuous-flow VAD-related thromboembolic event that resulted in acute myocardial infarction. A 26-year-old female who just underwent HeartMate II(®) VAD implantation suddenly developed widespread anterolateral myocardial infarction on postoperative day 16. Echocardiography and aortography revealed a large thrombus on the left coronary cusp of the aortic valve that almost completely occluded the left coronary ostium. After VAD implantation, her aortic valve did not open, even at relatively low pump speeds; this was thought to be one of the causes for thrombus formation. Continuous suction of blood from the left ventricle and non-pulsatile flow into the ascending aorta resulted in a continuously closed aortic valve and stagnation of blood in the coronary cusp. Furthermore, both small body size (body surface area <1.3 m(2)) and postoperative right ventricular failure may have exacerbated blood stagnation and thrombus formation in this patient. We should have adjusted the anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy protocols based on the patient's condition. She underwent off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery and remained in clinically stable condition afterwards.

Ventricular assist devices (VADs) have long been used as bridge to transplant therapy (BTT). Nipro-Toyobo paracorporeal pulsatile-flow VAD (nt-VAD) was the only device available until April 2011, when implantable continuous-flow VADs (cf-VADs) became available. Although cf-VADs are central to BTT, nt-VAD remains a necessary option. We aimed to clarify the role of nt-VAD in an era of increasing cf-VAD use. We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent VAD implantation at the National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center from May 2011 to March 2013. Characteristics were compared between the nt-VAD and cf-VAD groups. Twenty-nine patients (mean age 37.7 ± 11.1 years, 23 males) underwent VAD implantation. Fifteen patients initially received nt-VADs, although 4 were converted to cf-VADs. Of these 15 patients, 3 were too small for cf-VADs and 2 needed bilateral ventricular support. The remaining 10 patients received nt-VADs (7 patients at INTERMACS level 1 and 3 at level 2). The nt-VAD group patients had significantly more preoperative mechanical circulatory support and were in a more critical condition before VAD implantation than the cf-VAD group. The 2-year survival rate was not significantly different. Despite the critical conditions of nt-VAD patients, their overall survival is not statistically inferior to that of cf-VAD patients. nt-VAD is a good option as a BTC for the patient with urgent and critical condition.

Fixed pulmonary hypertension (PH) is a contraindication for heart transplantation (HTx). Several studies showed that use of a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) in patients with fixed PH who were initially deemed ineligible for HTx effectively decreased pulmonary arterial pressure (PAP), thus permitting HTx. We recently encountered a candidate for HTx who had severe PH with extremely high pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR). A 27-year-old female who had been diagnosed with dilated-phase hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and who was approved for HTx at age 25 was referred to our institute because of severe fatigability with moderate dyspnea even at rest due to severe bilateral heart failure. Despite continuous inotrope infusion, the patient's symptoms were not relieved. Right heart catheterization (RHC) disclosed a PAP of 62/40 mmHg with severely reduced cardiac output (1.8 l/min). A PVR of 15.9 Wood units suggested progressive worsening of left ventricular function with almost irreversible remodeling of the pulmonary vasculature, and the patient was thought to be contraindicated for HTx. Following 3 weeks of aggressive medical treatment, repeat RHC demonstrated PVR lowering to 8.16 Wood units. This suggested it was likely that PVR could be reversed, and the patient underwent LVAD implantation. RHC performed after LVAD implantation showed a fall in PVR from the initial, extremely high measurement of 15.9 Wood units to 3.4 Wood units at 2 months postoperatively, and to 2.2 Wood units at 1 year. The patient is currently awaiting HTx with favorable LVAD support.