Search

Background: A growing proportion of transplant donors and recipients have a history of COVID‐19 infection. This study sought to characterize clinical practice after recipient or donor COVID‐19 infection. Methods: An online survey was distributed to heart transplant clinicians through a professional society message board and social media. Responses were collected between September 29 and November 5, 2021. Results: There were 222 health care professionals (68% transplant cardiologists, 22% transplant surgeons, 10% other) across diverse geographic regions who completed the survey. While there was significant variation in donor acceptance, as it relates to past and current COVID‐19 infection, the respondents were fairly cautious: 28% would not typically accept a donor with a history of COVID‐19 regardless of the infection course and > 80% would not accept donors who had evidence of myocardial dysfunction during past COVID‐19 infection, or who died of COVID‐19 or its complications. The timing of candidate reactivation on the waiting list after COVID‐19 infection also varied and often diverged from scenarios addressed by social guidelines. Eighty‐one percent of the respondents felt COVID‐19 vaccine should be mandatory before transplant, but this rate varied by geographic region. Conclusion: Our results reflect evolving experience of the heart transplant field at a time of lack of high‐quality evidence. In the absence of longer‐term outcome data for donors and transplant candidates with history of COVID‐19 infection, clinicians remain cautious; however, this approach will likely need to be refined as an increasing proportion of the population will continue to be infected with COVID‐19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) during left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation provides circulatory support and allows for safe inspection of the left ventricle (LV), whereas circulatory support by veno‐arterial extracorporeal life support (va‐ECLS) or off‐pump implantation may reduce postoperative bleeding and inflammatory response. Methods: Retrospective analysis of 616 consecutive adult patients who received an LVAD via median sternotomy between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2019. All patients undergoing concomitant intracardiac procedures other than closure of persistent foramen ovale or atrial septal defect and redo surgeries were excluded from the analysis. The remaining patients (n = 222) were divided into two groups and 1:1 propensity score‐matched regarding preoperative parameters: patients who underwent LVAD implantation with LV inspection employing CPB (CPB group, n = 62) and without LV inspection on va‐ECLS or off‐pump (non‐CPB group, n = 62). Results: The groups were well balanced with regard to preoperative baseline characteristics (standard difference <0.1). Patients in the CPB group required more blood transfusions (median 2 vs. 0 units, p = 0.031) during surgery and in the first 24 h afterwards. The median intensive care unit stay was longer in the CPB group (18 vs. 11 days, p = 0.021). The CPB group showed an absence of perioperative stroke and a smaller number of events per patient‐year for postoperative ischemic stroke (0.02 vs. 0.12, p = 0.003). 30‐day survival (87% vs. 87.1%) and 1‐year survival (80.3% vs. 74%) were similar in both groups (p = 0.78). Conclusion: Visual LV inspection on CPB may reduce the risk of postoperative ischemic stroke. Despite the negative effects of employing CPB in lieu of other intraoperative strategies, survival was similar in both groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Sufficient myocardial recovery with the subsequent explantation of a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) occurs in approximately 1–2% of the cases. However, follow‐up data about this condition are scarcely available in the literature. This study aimed to report the long‐term outcomes and clinical management following LVAD explantation. Methods and results: An analysis of the European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support was performed to identify all adult patients with myocardial recovery and successful explantation. Pre‐implant characteristics were retrieved and compared with the non‐recovery patients. The follow‐up data after explantation were collected via a questionnaire. A Kaplan–Meier analysis for freedom of the composite endpoint of death, heart transplantation, LVAD reimplantion, or heart failure (HF) relapse was conducted. A total of 45 (1.4%) cases with myocardial recovery resulting in successful LVAD explantation were identified. Compared with those who did not experience myocardial recovery, the explanted patients were younger (44 vs. 56 years, P < 0.001), had a shorter duration of cardiac disease (P < 0.001), and were less likely to have ischaemic cardiomyopathy (9% vs. 41.8%, P < 0.001). Follow‐up after explantation could be acquired in 28 (62%) cases. The median age at LVAD implantation was 43 years (inter‐quartile range: 29–52), and 23 (82%) were male. Baseline left ventricular ejection fraction was 18% (inter‐quartile range: 10–20%), and 60.7% of the patients had Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support Profile 1 or 2. Aetiologies of HF were dilated cardiomyopathy in 36%, myocarditis in 32%, and ischaemic in 14% of the patients, and 18% had miscellaneous aetiologies. The devices implanted were HeartMate II in 14 (50%), HVAD in 11 (39%), HeartMate 3 in 2 (7%), and 1 unknown with a median duration of support of 410 days (range: 59–1286). The median follow‐up after explantation was 26 months (range 0.3–73 months), and 82% of the patients were in New York Heart Association Class I or II. Beta‐blockers were prescribed to 85%, angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors to 71%, and loop diuretics to 50% of the patients, respectively. Freedom from the composite endpoint was 100% after 30 days and 88% after 2 years. Conclusions: The survival after LVAD explantation is excellent without the need for heart transplantation or LVAD reimplantation. Only a minority of the patients suffer from a relapse of significant HF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Early planned institution of temporary right ventricular assist device ( RVAD) support with the Centri Mag ( Levitronix LLC, Waltham, MA, USA) in left ventricular assist device ( LVAD) recipients was compared with permanent biventricular assist device ( BVAD) or total artificial heart ( TAH) support. Between 2007 and 2011, 77 patients (age range: 25-70 years) with preoperative evidence of biventricular dysfunction ( University of Pennsylvania score >50; University of Michigan score >5) were included. Forty-six patients (38 men; median age 54.5 years, range: 25-70 years) underwent LVAD placement combined with temporary RVAD support (group A); in 31 patients (25 men; median age 56.7 years, range: 28-68 years), a permanent BVAD or TAH implantation (group B) was performed. Within 30 days, 12 patients from group A (26.08%) and 14 patients from group B (45.1%) died on mechanical support ( P = 0.02). Thirty patients (65.2%) in group A were weaned from temporary RVAD support and three (6.5%) underwent permanent RVAD ( Heart Ware, Inc., Framingham, MA, USA) placement. A total of 26 patients (56.5%) were discharged home in group A versus 17 (54.8%) in group B ( P = 0.56). Three patients (8.5%) received heart transplantation in group A and six (19.3%) in group B ( P = 0.04). In group A, 90-day and 6-month survival was 54.3% ( n = 25) versus 51.6% ( n = 16) in group B ( P = 0.66). In group A, 1-year survival was 45.6% ( n = 21) versus 45.1% ( n = 14) in group B ( P = 0.81). The strategy of planned temporary RVAD support in LVAD recipients showed encouraging results if compared with those of a similar permanent BVAD/ TAH population. Weaning from and removal of the temporary RVAD support may allow patients to be on LVAD support only despite preoperative biventricular dysfunction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mechanical circulatory support systems for the treatment of acute and chronic heart failure are now available for use in several clinical situations and are designed for different indications and support times. In children, particularly in small infants, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and centrifugal pumps have been most widely used in the past. These systems are preferred for support after cardiac operations and for use in patients who have concomitant respiratory failure, but they are suitable for short-term application only and intensive care is obligatory. VADs are designed for long-term application and allow patients to be discharged home. Pneumatic pulsatile VADs have been available in pediatric sizes since 1992. Currently at our institution, 74 children have been supported with pediatric extracorporeal VADs for up to 14 months. In the past five yr, a notable rise in survival has been achieved by improvements in pump design and pre- and post-operative management. We have been able to discharge 78% of the infants under one yr old. In this review, our current VAD experience in children will be presented in the light of improvements in decision-making, device technology, and implantation techniques, and in coagulation monitoring and anticoagulation. Additionally, new developments in the field of pediatric assist devices will be presented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Ventricular assist device implantation has become an established therapy in adults and children for bridging to heart transplantation or to aid myocardial recovery. Recently, implantation of left ventricular assist devices as definitive therapy has been recognized as a better option than pharmacological treatment in patients who are not candidates for heart transplantation. This study presents our institution''s experience with five patients successfully supported by two different left ventricular assist devices for over 4 years. This unique experience shows that left ventricular assist device support can be extended beyond 4 years with good quality of life and low risk, making it a good alternative for non-transplant candidates. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Stroke after durable left ventricular assist device (d-LVAD) implantation portends high mortality. The incidence of ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke and the impact on stroke outcomes of temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) management among patients requiring bridge to d-LVAD with micro-axial flow-pump (mAFP, Abiomed) is unsettled., Methods: Consecutive patients, who underwent d-LVAD implantation after being bridged with mAFP at 19 institutions, were retrospectively included. The incidence of early ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke after d-LVAD implantation (<60 days) and association of pre-d-LVAD characteristics and peri-procedural management with a specific focus on tMCS strategies were studied., Results: Among 341 patients, who underwent d-LVAD implantation after mAFP implantation (male gender 83.6%, age 58 [48-65] years, mAFP 5.0/5.5 72.4%), the early ischemic stroke incidence was 10.8% and early hemorrhagic stroke 2.9%. The tMCS characteristics (type of mAFP device and access, support duration, upgrade from intra-aortic balloon pump, ECMELLA, ECMELLA at d-LVAD implantation, hemolysis, and bleeding) were not associated with ischemic stroke after d-LVAD implant. Conversely, the device model (mAFP 2.5/CP vs. mAFP 5.0/5.5: HR 5.6, 95%CI 1.4-22.7, p = 0.015), hemolysis on mAFP support (HR 10.5, 95% CI 1.3-85.3, p = 0.028) and ECMELLA at d-LVAD implantation (HR 5.0, 95% CI 1.4-18.7, p = 0.016) were associated with increased risk of hemorrhagic stroke after d-LVAD implantation. Both early ischemic (HR 2.7, 95% CI 1.9-4.5, p < 0.001) and hemorrhagic (HR 3.43, 95% CI 1.49-7.88, p = 0.004) stroke were associated with increased 1-year mortality., Conclusions: Among patients undergoing d-LVAD implantation following mAFP support, tMCS characteristics do not impact ischemic stroke occurrence, while several factors are associated with hemorrhagic stroke suggesting a proactive treatment target to reduce this complication., (© 2024 International Center for Artificial Organ and Transplantation (ICAOT) and Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background and Methods: Microaxial left ventricular assist devices are used increasingly for treating cardiogenic shock. We compared the short-term outcome of patients supported with different microaxial devices for cardiogenic shock. A retrospective propensity score-adjusted analysis was performed in cardiogenic shock patients treated with either the Impella CP (n = 64) or the Impella 5.0/5.5 (n = 62) at two tertiary cardiac care centers between 1/14 and 12/19., Results: Patients in the Impella CP group were significantly older (69.6 ± 10.7 vs. 58.7 ± 11.9 years, p = .001), more likely in INTERMACS profile 1 (76.6% vs. 50%, p = .003) and post-C-reactive protein (CPR) (36% vs. 13%, p = .006). The median support time was 2.0 days [0.0, 5.3] in the CP group vs. 8.5 days [4.3, 15.8] in the 5.0/5.5 group (p < .001). The unadjusted 30-day survival was significantly higher in the Impella 5.0/5.5 group (58% vs. 36%, p = .021, odds ratio [OR] for 30-day survival on Impella 5.0/5.5 was 3.68 [95% confidence interval [CI]: [1.46-9.90]], p = .0072). After adjustment, the 30-day survival was similar for both devices (OR: 1.23, 95% CI: [0.34-4.18], p = .744). Lactate levels above 8 mmol/L and preoperative CPR were associated with a significant mortality increase in both cohorts (OR: 10.7, 95% CI: [3.45-47.34], p < .001; OR: 13.2, 95% CI: [4.28-57.89], p < .001, respectively)., Conclusion: Both Impella devices offer a similar effect with regard to survival in cardiogenic shock patients. Preoperative CPR or lactate levels exceeding 8 mmol/L immediately before implantation have a poor prognosis on Impella CP and Impella 5.0/5.5., (© 2021 The Authors. Journal of Cardiac Surgery Published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Purpose: The use of ventricular assist devices (VADs) in patients with chronic end-stage or acute heart failure has led to improved survival. We present our experience since 1987., Subjects and Methods: Between July 1987 and December 2006, 1026 VADs were implanted in 970 patients. Most of them were men (81.9%). The indications were: cardiomyopathy (n = 708), postcardiotomy heart failure (n = 173), acute myocardial infarction (n = 36), acute graft failure (n = 45), a VAD problem (n = 6), and others (n = 2). Mean age was 46.1 (range 3 days to 78) years. In 50.5% of the patients the VAD implanted was left ventricular, in 47.9% biventricular, and in 1.5% right ventricular. There were 14 different types of VAD. A total artificial heart was implanted in 14 patients., Results: Survival analysis showed higher early mortality (p < 0.05) in the postcardiotomy group (50.9%) than in patients with preoperative profound cardiogenic shock (31.1%) and patients with preoperative end-stage heart failure without severe shock (28.9%). A total of 270 patients were successfully bridged to heart transplantation (HTx). There were no significant differences in long-term survival after HTx among patients with and without previous VAD. In 76 patients the device could be explanted after myocardial recovery. In 72 patients the aim of implantation was permanent support. During the study period 114 patients were discharged home. Currently, 54 patients are on a device., Conclusions: VAD implantation may lead to recovery from secondary organ failure. Patients should be considered for VAD implantation before profound, possibly irreversible, cardiogenic shock occurs. In patients with postcardiotomy heart failure, a more efficient algorithm should be developed to improve survival. With increased experience, more VAD patients can participate in out-patient programs.