Aortic Insufficiency After Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation: Predictors and Outcomes

Safety and efficacy of aortic valvuloplasty for de novo aortic insufficiency in patients with a left-ventricular assist device

OBJECTIVES

Progression of aortic insufficiency during left-ventricular assist device (LVAD) support is a crucial topic. One treatment option is aortic valvuloplasty (AVP); however, there is controversy regarding its safety and efficacy. We investigated the safety and efficacy of AVP using the coaptation stitch method (Park's stitch) performed for de novo aortic insufficiency.

METHODS

Between 2013 and 2020, 175 consecutive patients underwent LVAD implantation, of which 7 patients [men, 2 (28.6%); median age, 55 years] underwent late-stage AVP. Two patients underwent AVP within 2 weeks, and the remaining six patients underwent AVP 3, 19, 24, 28, 42, and 49 months, respectively, after LVAD implantation.

RESULTS

Preoperatively, the degree of aortic insufficiency was moderate in 6 (85.7%) patients and severe in 1 (14.3%) patient. AVP was technically successful in 6 (85.7%) patients, while one case of failed plasty was subsequently treated with bioprosthetic valve replacement. A 1-year post-AVP right heart catheterization study revealed a median pulmonary artery wedge pressure of 10.0 mmHg. No deaths or heart failure admissions occurred during the follow-up (median, 38.0 months). There was no aortic insufficiency in 2 (28.6%) patients; however, trivial AI was observed in 3 (42.8%) patients, and mild AI was observed in 1 (14.3%) patient 2 years postoperatively. However, at the 3-year follow-up, two patients developed an increase in AI grade from trivial to mild.

CONCLUSIONS

AVP using Park's stitch was safe. It is critical to carefully observe the aortic valve during AVP surgery to ensure that AVP is appropriate.

Evolution of Mechanical Circulatory Support for advanced heart failure

This comprehensive review highlights the significant advancements in Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD) therapy, emphasizing its evolution from the early pulsatile flow systems to the cutting-edge continuous-flow devices, particularly the HeartMate 3 (HM3) LVAD. These advancements have notably improved survival rates, reduced complications, and enhanced the quality of life (QoL) for patients with advanced heart failure. The dual role of LVADs, as a bridge-to-transplantation and destination therapy is discussed, highlighting the changing trends and policies in their application. The marked reduction in hemocompatibility-related adverse events (HRAE) with the HM3 LVAD, compared to previous models signifies ongoing progress in the field. Challenges such as managing major infections are discussed, including innovative solutions like energy transfer systems aimed at eliminating external drivelines. It explores various LVAD-associated complications, including HRAE, infections, hemodynamic-related adverse events, and cardiac arrhythmias, and underscores emerging strategies for predicting post-implantation outcomes, fostering a more individualized patient care approach. Tools such as the HM3 risk score are introduced for predicting survival based on pre-implant factors, along with advanced imaging techniques for improved complication prediction. Additionally, the review highlights potential new technologies and therapies in LVAD management, such as hemodynamic ramp tests for optimal speed adjustment and advanced remote monitoring systems. The goal is to automate LVAD speed adjustments based on real-time hemodynamic measurements, indicating a shift towards more effective, patient-centered therapy. The review concludes optimistically that ongoing research and potential future innovations hold the promise of revolutionizing heart failure management, paving the way for more effective and personalized treatment modalities.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement for aortic insufficiency in a patient with aortic root Thrombus and left ventricular assist device: A risk worth taking?

A 61-year-old man with end-stage ischemic cardiomyopathy post HeartMate 3 (Abbott laboratories, Chicago, Illinois, USA) left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implant was hospitalized after he had recurrent ventricular tachycardia requiring implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks. His transthoracic echocardiogram and computed tomography angiography of the chest showed presence of trace aortic insufficiency (AI) and aortic root thrombus (ART) of non-coronary cusp without obstruction of right or left coronary artery ostium despite therapeutic international normalized ratio. He presented again 3 months later with worsening heart failure signs and symptoms. Transesophageal echocardiogram showed progression to severe AI and persistent ART. Despite hemodynamically guided LVAD speed optimization, inotropic support, and diuresis, the patient continued to deteriorate with worsening renal function. The patient was not a transplant candidate due to frailty. After multi-disciplinary discussion he underwent successful 29-Sapien S3 (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA) transcatheter aortic valve replacement utilizing distal protection filters in bilateral internal carotid arteries for stroke prevention. This case provides novel insight to physicians treating LVAD patients regarding management of severe AI in the setting of ART.

Learning objective

We report a rare approach employed for management of aortic insufficiency (AI) in a patient who also had an aortic root thrombus and left ventricular assist device (LVAD) that traditionally requires cardiac transplantation. Our patient had a favorable outcome with a minimally invasive transcatheter aortic valve replacement. With this case, we hope to generate awareness amongst physicians treating patients about management alternatives and approach of a commonly encountered, life-threatening complication of AI in patients with LVAD.

Reciprocal interferences of the left ventricular assist device and the aortic valve competence

Patients suffering from end-stage heart failure tend to have high mortality rates. With growing numbers of patients progressing into severe heart failure, the shortage of available donors is a growing concern, with less than 10% of patients undergoing cardiac transplantation (CTx). Fortunately, the use of left ventricular assist devices (LVADs), a variant of mechanical circulatory support has been on the rise in recent years. The expansion of LVADs has led them to be incorporated into a variety of clinical settings, based on the goals of therapy for patients ailing from heart failure. However, with an increase in the use of LVADs, there are a host of complications that arise with it. One such complication is the development and progression of aortic regurgitation (AR) which is noted to adversely influence patient outcomes and compromise pump benefits leading to increased morbidity and mortality. The underlying mechanisms are likely multifactorial and involve the aortic root-aortic valve (AV) complex, as well as the LVAD device, patient, and other factors, all of them alter the physiological mechanics of the heart resulting in AV dysfunction. Thus, it is imperative to screen patients before LVAD implantation for AR, as moderate or greater AR requires a concurrent intervention at the time of LVADs implantation. No current strict guidelines were identified in the literature search on how to actively manage and limit the development and/or progression of AR, due to the limited information. However, some recommendations include medical management by targeting fluid overload and arterial blood pressure, along with adjusting the settings of the LVADs device itself. Surgical interventions are to be considered depending on patient factors, goals of care, and the underlying pathology. These interventions include the closure of the AV, replacement of the valve, and percutaneous approach via percutaneous occluding device or transcatheter aortic valve implantation. In the present review, we describe the interaction between AV and LVAD placement, in terms of patient management and prognosis. Also it is provided a comprehensive echocardiographic strategy for the precise assessment of AV regurgitation severity.

Key questions about aortic insufficiency in patients with durable left ventricular assist devices

The development of the latest generation of durable left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) drastically decreased adverse events such as pump thrombosis or disabling strokes. However, time-related complications such as aortic insufficiency (AI) continue to impair outcomes following durable LVAD implantation, especially in the context of long-term therapy. Up to one-quarter of patients with durable LVAD develop moderate or severe AI at 1 year and its incidence increases with the duration of support. The continuous regurgitant flow within the left ventricle can compromise left ventricular unloading, increase filling pressures, decrease forward flow and can thus lead to organ hypoperfusion and heart failure. This review aims to give an overview of the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and clinical consequences of AI in patients with durable LVAD.

Concomitant or late aortic valve intervention and its efficacy for aortic insufficiency associated with continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implantation

Moderate to severe aortic insufficiency (AI) in patients who underwent continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD) implantation is a significant complication. According to the INTERMACS registry analysis, at least mild AI occurs in 55% of patients at 6 months after CF-LVAD implantation and moderate to severe AI is significantly associated with higher rates of re-hospitalization and mortality. The clinical implications of these data may underscore consideration of prophylactic aortic valve replacement, or repair, at the time of CF-LVAD implantation, particularly with expected longer duration of support and in patients with preexisting AI that is more than mild. More crucially, even if a native aortic valve is seemingly competent at the time of VAD implantation, we frequently find de novo AI as time goes by, potentially due to commissural fusion in the setting of inconsistent aortic valve opening or persistent valve closure caused by CF-LVAD support, that alters morphological and functional properties of innately competent aortic valves. Therefore, close monitoring of AI is mandatory, as the prognostic nature of its longitudinal progression is still unclear. Clearly, significant AI during VAD support warrants surgical intervention at the appropriate timing, especially in patients of destination therapy. Nonetheless, such an uncertainty in the progression of AI translates to a lack of consensus regarding the management of this untoward complication. In practice, proposed surgical options are aortic valve replacement, repair, closure, and more recently transcatheter aortic valve implantation or closure. Transcatheter approach is of course less invasive, however, its efficacy in terms of long-term outcome is limited. In this review, we summarize the recent evidence related to the pathophysiology and surgical treatment of AI associated with CF-LVAD implantation.

Concomitant aortic valve repair for aortic insufficiency and implantation of left ventricle mechanical support

Background

Moderate to severe aortic valve insufficiency (AI) in patients undergoing left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation is a significant complication which occurs in up to 10.7% of patients in the INTERMACS database and has profound consequences for survival. Preoperative Impella use is associaed with greater post‐LVAD AI.

Case Presentation

56 y/o Caucasian female with acute exacerbation of chronic congestive heart failure who needed urgent Impella placement followed by elective Heartmate III LVAD.

Conclusion

Patients who have aortic valve regurgitation at the time of implantation have been handled by several methods, including aortic valve leaflets approximation, to aortic valve replacement or even valve closure. We report a case of geometric ring annuloplasty for repair of a regurgitant aortic valve during destination LVAD implantation.

Left Ventricular Assist Device-Related Complications

Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) has emerged as a safe, durable, and revolutionary therapy for end-stage heart failure patients. Despite the appearance of newer-generation devices that have improved patient outcomes, the burden of adverse events remains significant. Although the survival rate for patients with LVAD is appreciated to be 81% at 1 year and 70% at 2 years, the incidence of adverse events is also high. Over time, both early and late postimplant complications have diminished in terms of prevalence and impact; however, complications, such as infections, bleeding, right heart failure, pump thrombosis, aortic insufficiency, or stroke, continue to represent a challenge for the practitioner. Therefore, the aim of this review is to highlight the most recent data regarding the current use of LVAD in the treatment of end-stage heart failure, with a specific focus on LVAD-related complications, in order to improve device-related outcomes. It will also revise how to mitigate the risk and how to approach specific adverse events. Withal, understanding the predisposing risk factors associated with postimplant complications, early recognition and appropriate treatment help to significantly improve the prognosis for patients with end-stage heart failure.