Search

Objectives: This study examined patient outcomes after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation across a range of center surgical volumes., Background: In order for a center to qualify for reimbursement, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) requires it to implant ≥10 LVADs or total artificial hearts over a 3-year period. The impact of center LVAD surgical volumes on patient outcomes has not been thoroughly scrutinized., Methods: Center volumes were provided for 7,416 patients undergoing LVAD implantation who were enrolled in INTERMACS (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support). Center LVAD volume was categorized as either very low (≤10 implants/year, n = 617), low (11 to 30 implants/year, n = 2,561), medium (31 to 50 implants/year, n = 2,458), or high (>50 implants/year, n = 1,750). The main outcome of interest was patient survival based on center volume derived from Kaplan-Meier and multivariate Cox regression., Results: Overall survival was associated with center volume (p = 0.003), as follows: 71 ± 1.8% (very low volume), 81 ± 0.8% (low volume), 83 ± 0.8% (medium volume), and 79 ± 1.0% (high volume) at 1 year. Compared with medium volume centers, the 90-day mortality was higher in very low volume (odds ratio [OR]: 1.35; p = 0.04) and high volume (OR: 1.28; p = 0.018) VAD centers. The adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for mortality were 1.32 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.11 to 1.56), 1.07 (95% CI: 0.95 to 1.21), and 1.17 (95% CI: 1.03 to 1.30) for very low, low, and high volume centers, respectively. Center volume did not predict mortality (p = 0.25; n = 3,688) in INTERMACS profile 1 patients (patients who had sustained cardiogenic shock) and profile 2 patients (patients with progressive hemodynamic decline despite inotropes)., Conclusions: Center volume correlates with post-VAD survival, with worse survival noted at very-low volume centers. These findings suggest that current U.S. VAD center standards warrant reconsideration., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The HeartWare HVAD System (Medtronic) is a durable implantable left ventricular assist device that has been implanted in approximately 20,000 patients worldwide for bridge to transplant and destination therapy indications. In December 2020, Medtronic issued an Urgent Medical Device Communication informing clinicians of a critical device malfunction in which the HVAD may experience a delay or failure to restart after elective or accidental discontinuation of pump operation. Moreover, evolving retrospective comparative effectiveness studies of patients supported with the HVAD demonstrated a significantly higher risk of stroke and all-cause mortality when compared with a newer generation of a commercially available durable left ventricular assist device. Considering the totality of this new information on HVAD performance and the availability of an alternate commercially available device, Medtronic halted the sale and distribution of the HVAD System in June 2021. The decision to remove the HVAD from commercial distribution now requires the use of the HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist system (Abbott, Inc) if a patient previously implanted with an HVAD requires a pump exchange. The goal of this document is to review important differences in the design of the HVAD and HeartMate 3 that are relevant to the medical management of patients supported with these devices, and to assess the technical aspects of an HVAD-to-HeartMate 3 exchange. This document provides the best available evidence that supports best practices. (J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2022;-:1–8) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To determine characteristics, outcomes, and clinical factors associated with death in patients with COVID-19 requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support. A multicenter, retrospective cohort study was conducted. The cohort consisted of adult patients (18 years of age and older) requiring ECMO in the period from March 1, 2020, to September 30, 2020. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality after ECMO initiation assessed with a time to event analysis at 90 days. Multivariable Cox proportional regression was used to determine factors associated with in-hospital mortality. Overall, 292 patients from 17 centers comprised the study cohort. Patients were 49 (interquartile range, 39-57) years old and 81 (28%) were female. At the end of the follow-up period, 19 (6%) patients were still receiving ECMO, 25 (9%) were discontinued from ECMO but remained hospitalized, 135 (46%) were discharged or transferred alive, and 113 (39%) died during the hospitalization. The cumulative in-hospital mortality at 90 days was 42% (95% confidence interval [CI], 36%-47%). Factors associated with in-hospital mortality were age (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.31; 95% CI, 1.06-1.61 per 10 years), renal dysfunction measured according to serum creatinine level (aHR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.01-1.45), and cardiopulmonary resuscitation before ECMO placement (aHR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.01-3.46). In patients with severe COVID-19 necessitating ECMO support, in-hospital mortality occurred in fewer than half of the cases. ECMO might serve as a viable modality for terminally ill patients with refractory COVID-19. A multicenter, retrospective cohort study of 292 patients with COVID-19 given extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in 17 centers across the United States from March 1, 2020 to September 30, 2020. Clinical characteristics and outcomes were entered into a Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) database. The primary outcome of cumulative in-hospital mortality at 90 days was 42% (95% confidence interval [CI], 36%-47%). [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In June 2021, HVAD System distribution ceased due to observational data demonstrating increased mortality and neurological events compared to another commercial device, and a device malfunction with delay or failure to restart, especially in certain subpopulations. To assess ongoing risk for patients on support following subsequent device recalls, the manufacturer's Intermacs HVAD System 2022 Quarterly Reports were queried to identify mortality and adverse events trends in a contemporary cohort of 3110 primary HVAD implantations since October 2017, stratified by year-of-implant. Mean duration of support was 21 ± 16 months, with 33% alive on original device, 25% transplanted, 6% undergoing device exchange, 4% recovered, and 32% expired. Kaplan–Meier and event-per-patient-year estimates for survival, freedom from device explant, stroke, and pump thrombus were similar across year-of-implant. Following market withdrawal and recent device recalls, there appears to be no increase in mortality, stroke, pump thrombus, or explant for HVAD-supported patients. Quarterly report monitoring is ongoing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Severe vascular disease is a relative contraindication to heart transplantation (HTx). We addressed the effect of vascular disease on HTx outcomes. Methods: This is a nonconcurrent cohort study of 402 patients who received HTx at our institution between 1985 and 2004. Pre-transplant vascular evaluation included carotid, lower extremity, and renal artery duplex studies, and CT angiogram when indicated. Patients with severe and nontreatable vascular disease were excluded. Patients were divided into Group 1: those with pre-transplant vasculopathy, and Group 2: those without pre-transplant vasculopathy. Group 1 had 24 patients with 25 vascular lesions: 1 aortic dissection, 2 abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA)''s, 5 carotid artery stenoses, 1 renal artery stenosis, and 16 peripheral vascular lesions. Interventions were performed to 15 lesions prior to HTx and to 2 lesions after HTx. Results: Median follow-up was 5.5 years. Group 1 had higher incidence of ischemic cardiomyopathy (p <0.001), hypertension (p =0.028), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (p =0.004), and smoking history (p <0.001). There were no differences in sex, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, stroke, or renal dysfunction. Multivariate analysis revealed odds of post-transplant death in Group 1 was 1.4 (95% CI: 0.48–4.1, p =0.54) times greater than that in Group 2. Cox proportional hazards model for survival showed a 50% increase in the hazard of death in patients with pre-transplant vasculopathy, but without statistical significance. Group 1 had higher incidence of post-transplant stroke (p =0.001) but no difference in allograft coronary atherosclerosis. Conclusions: Pre-transplant vascular disease seems to have negative effect on outcomes after HTx. Larger scale study is needed for further evaluation. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]