Search

Patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) who require intermittent hemodialysis (iHD) are considered to have a poor prognosis despite a paucity of supportive evidence, mostly from small single-center cohorts and extrapolations from studies of patients who received continuous renal replacement therapy but no iHD. We conducted a systematic review and individual-participant-data meta-analysis of the literature including our single-center cohort to examine the outcomes of patients initiated on iHD following LVAD implantation. Sixty-four patients from 5 cohorts met selection criteria (age 57.5 [46-64.5] years, 87% HeartMate II, mostly bridge to transplantation). Follow-up after iHD initiation was 87.5 (38.5-269.5) days, although it was considerably longer in our center than in other cohorts (601.5 [93-1559] days vs 65 [26-180] days, P = 0.0007). The estimated median survival was 308 (76-912.5) days and varied significantly among cohorts, ranging from 60 (57-65) to 838 (103-1872) days (P = 0.0096). Twelve (18.8%) patients achieved either heart transplantation (HT) or remission during follow-up. Patients who received HT had an 8-fold longer estimated median survival (1972 [799-1972] days vs 244 [64-838] days, P = 0.0112). Being from a more recent cohort was associated with better 1-year survival. Renal recovery occurred in eight patients (13.1%) at 30 days and its cumulative incidence increased to 73% (27/37 patients with available data) at 1 year. Most patients initiated on iHD after LVAD experienced renal recovery within the first year after implantation. Improved survival was observed for patients who received HT and in those from more recent cohorts. Some patients were able to survive on LVAD and iHD support for several years., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: AdSdA owns stocks of TransMedics Group Inc. CJL has served as a speaker and consultant for AstraZeneca for their SGLT2I and serves on the DSMB for NovoNordisk for the DEFINE 3 trial with CagriSema. All other authors have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Coronary angiography remains the gold standard post-transplant screening test for cardiac allograft vasculopathy. This procedure has traditionally been performed via femoral approach. Data on safety and efficacy of radial approach in cardiac transplant patients remains scarce. Single center retrospective study including all cardiac transplant patients who underwent coronary angiography via transradial approach (TRA) or transfemoral approach (TFA). Safety and efficacy outcomes were compared between the 2 groups. Primary end points included major bleeding, vascular complications, crossover to femoral approach, contrast use and radiation exposure. A total of 201 patients were included. 96 patients (47.8%) underwent angiography via TRA. At baseline, no significant differences with regards to age, gender, or traditional risk factors such as HTN, DM, hyperlipidemia were noted between the 2 groups. Most patients underwent intravascular ultrasound (n = 179, 89%) with no statistically significant differences between the 2 groups (TRA: 90.6% vs TFA: 87.6%, P = 0.5). Additionally, there were no statistically significant differences in radiation exposure, amount of contrast use and fluoroscopy time between the 2 groups. Although there were trends toward increased bleeding among TFA group, these were not statistically significant and were mostly driven by access site hematomas. Use of TRA increased over time and Conversion from TRA to TFA was low (n = 4, 4.2%). Coronary angiography via the radial approach in cardiac transplant recipients is feasible, safe and is associated with low a risk of bleeding with no significant increase in radiation exposure when compared to the traditional femoral approach., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Induction with lymphocyte-depleting antibodies may improve allograft outcomes in heart transplant recipients who are at high immunologic risk for rejection. Methods: We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study that compared outcomes between adult patients receiving rabbit antithymocyte globulin (rATG) induction vs no induction from 2011 through 2017. Key exclusion criteria were patients who did not receive tacrolimus and mycophenolate and patients who did not meet high immunologic risk criteria. Results: A total of 50 patients were included in the analysis. At 1 year, the composite primary outcome of -2R rejection as defined by the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation, any treated rejection, development of cardiac allograft vasculopathy, or graft loss was not different between groups (P=0.474). Serious infections were also similar between groups (P=0.963). In accordance with institutional guidelines, prednisone exposure was decreased in the rATG induction group at 1 month (24.04 mg ± 13.74 vs 35.18 mg ± 16.95; P=0.014). Conclusion: These results suggest that while rATG induction does not improve heart allograft outcomes, it may enable reducing early corticosteroid exposure in patients at high immunologic risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We analyzed in detail the outcomes of eight patients with ventricular assist devices (VADs) and obesity who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) at a single heart transplant (HT) center. This comprehensive analysis included body mass index (BMI) trends from VAD implantation to the time of LSG; BMI and percentage of excess BMI lost during follow-up; adverse outcomes; and changes in echocardiographic parameters, fasting lipids, unplanned hospitalizations, and functional status. We also identified the patients who achieved the following outcomes: listing for HT, HT, 50% excess BMI loss, and BMI < 35 kg/m2. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy seems to be a reasonable and effective intervention to help patients with VADs and obesity to decrease excess BMI and become candidates for HT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Right ventricular failure continues to be the Achilles heel in the management of heart failure patients. Traditionally, either high doses of inotropes and inhaled nitric oxide or jerry-rigged temporary mechanical devices have been used to support failing right ventricles. No durable implantable right ventricular assist device has been developed to address this long-standing concern. Because of this vacuum of innovation, surgeons have started using the third-generation LVADs to support the right ventricle. The HeartMate 3 (Abbott) LVAD is a safe and effective therapy for the management of biventricular failure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]