250: Pre-VAD Implant Risk Factors Influence the Onset of Adverse Events (AEs) while on a VAD

Outflow cannula position for left ventricular assist device: A propensity score-matched study

OBJECTIVE

The clinical consequences of alternative outflow cannula positioning in patients undergoing left ventricular assist device implantation are unknown. We evaluated clinical outcomes in patients who underwent implantation with the outflow cannula implanted from the right side into the ascending aorta versus the left side of the pericardium.

METHODS

Fifty consecutive patients with terminal left heart failure underwent implantation using the Medtronic Heartware Ventricular Assist Device at Toronto General Hospital. Patients were divided between left and right outflow cannula positioning during implantation where anastomosis occurred in the ascending aorta. Propensity score matching using exact matching on the following pre-specified covariates: Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support score, previous cardiac surgery, and preoperative inotrope use.

RESULTS

Fifty consecutive patients (25 left implantation and 25 right implantation) were included in the unmatched cohort and 45 patients (25 left implantation and 20 right implantation) were included in the matched cohort. No significant differences in baseline demographics. Pump thrombosis occurred in 10% (n = 2) receiving right-sided implantation and 8% (n = 2) with left implantation (p = 1.00). Postoperative stroke occurred in 10% (2/20) with right implantation and 16% (4/25) with left implantation (p = .88). No difference in 1-year mortality between right 20% (5/25) and left 25% (5/20) implantation (p = .97).

CONCLUSION

No observed difference in mortality when adjusting for competing risk of heart transplantation. There was also no difference in stroke, pump thrombosis, driveline infection. Larger studies are required to confirm these findings. These preliminary data support the use of left-sided anastomoses to facilitate subsequent re-entry during heart transplantation.

Role of Cardiac Rehabilitation After Ventricular Assist Device Implantation

Patients with heart failure suffered by a complex syndrome, where the filling of the ventricle or ejection of the blood is impaired. In this setting, the exercise capacity decreases for many reasons, one of them being the insufficient oxygen transfer due to reduced cardiac output and anemia. Ventricular assist device has emerged as a durable and safe therapy for patients with end-stage heart failure. The benefits of cardiac rehabilitation in ventricular assist device patients are enormous: the first aim is to progressively reduce the physical and functional impairments of these patients, so that they will be able to resume meaningful daily activities.

Multicentre clinical trial experience with the HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device: 30-day outcomes

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to describe the operative experience and 30-day outcomes of patients implanted with the HeartMate 3 Left Ventricular Assist System (LVAS) during the Conformité Européenne (CE) Mark clinical trial.

METHODS

Adult patients met inclusion and exclusion criteria defining advanced-stage heart failure and included the indications of bridge to transplant and destination therapy. Operative parameters, outcomes, adverse events, physical status and quality-of-life parameters were assessed in the first 30 days after LVAS implant.

RESULTS

Fifty patients were implanted with the HeartMate 3 at 10 centres in 6 countries. The 30-day survival rate was 98%. The median operative and cardiopulmonary bypass times were 200 (range: 95-585) min and 84 (range: 47-250) min, respectively. Patients required transfusion with packed red blood cells (3.6 ± 2.3 units), fresh frozen plasma (6.5 ± 5 units) and platelets (2 ± 1 units). Six patients (12%) required reoperation for postoperative bleeding and 10 patients (20%) did not require blood transfusion. The median intensive care time was 6 days (range: 1-112 days) and the total hospital stay was 28 days (range: 14-116 days). The most common adverse events were bleeding (15, 30%), arrhythmia (14, 28%) and infection (10, 20%). There were 2 (4%) strokes.

CONCLUSIONS

The 30-day outcomes following implantation of the HeartMate 3 demonstrates excellent survival with low adverse event rates. The LVAD performed as intended with no haemolysis or device failure.

CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER

NCT02170363. HeartMate 3™ CE Mark Clinical Investigation Plan (HM3 CE Mark).

Advances and future directions for mechanical circulatory support

Although cardiac transplant remains the gold standard for the treatment of end-stage heart failure, limited donor organ availability and growing numbers of eligible recipients have increased the demand for alternative therapies. Limitations of first-generation left ventricular assist devices for long-term support of patients with end-stage disease have led to the development of newer second-generation and third-generation pumps, which are smaller, have fewer moving parts, and have shown improved durability, allowing for extended support. The HeartMate II (second generation) and HeartWare (third generation) are 2 devices that have shown great promise as potential alternatives to transplantation in select patients.

Clinical management of continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices in advanced heart failure

Continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) have emerged as the standard of care for advanced heart failure patients requiring long-term mechanical circulatory support. Evidence-based clinical management of LVAD-supported patients is becoming increasingly important for optimizing outcomes. In this state-of-art review, we propose key elements in managing patients supported with the new continuous-flow LVADs. Although most of the presented information is largely based on investigator experience during the 1,300-patient HeartMate II clinical trial, many of the discussed principles can be applied to other emerging devices as well. Patient selection, pre-operative preparation, and the timing of LVAD implant are some of the most important elements critical to successful circulatory support and are principles universal to all devices. In addition, proper nutrition management and avoidance of infectious complications can significantly affect morbidity and mortality during LVAD support. Optimizing intraoperative and peri-operative care, and the monitoring and treatment of other organ system dysfunction as it relates to LVAD support, are discussed. A multidisciplinary heart failure team must be organized and charged with providing comprehensive care from initial referral until support is terminated. Preparing for hospital discharge requires detailed education for the patient and family or friends, with provisions for emergencies and routine care. Implantation techniques, troubleshooting device problems, and algorithms for outpatient management, including the diagnosis and treatment of related problems associated with the HeartMate II, are discussed as an example of a specific continuous-flow LVAD. Ongoing trials with other continuous-flow devices may produce additional information in the future for improving clinical management of patients with these devices.