Rate of thromboembolic and bleeding events in patients undergoing concomitant aortic valve surgery with left ventricular assist device implantation

Management of aortic valve insufficiency in patients with continuous-flow left ventricular assist device: a republication of the review published in Japanese Journal of Artificial Organs

Since 2011, implantable ventricular assist devices have been a standard treatment for severe heart failure alongside heart transplantation in Japan. However, the limited availability of donors has led to a prolonged wait for transplants, now averaging 1719 days, intensifying the issue of aortic insufficiency in patients with continuous flow ventricular assist devices. These devices limit the opening of the aortic valve, leading to sustained closure and increased shear stress, which accelerates valve degradation. Risk factors for aortic insufficiency include having a smaller body surface area, being of advanced age, and the presence of mild aortic insufficiency prior to device implantation. In patients presenting with mild or moderate aortic regurgitation at the time of ventricular assist device implantation, interventions such as aortic valve repair or bioprosthetic valve replacement are performed with the aim of halting its progression. The choice of surgical procedure should be tailored to each patient's individual condition. The management of de novo aortic insufficiency in patients with continuous flow ventricular assist devices remains challenging, with no clear consensus on when to intervene. Interventions for significant aortic insufficiency typically consider the patient's symptoms and aortic insufficiency severity. De novo aortic insufficiency progression in continuous flow ventricular assist devices patients necessitates careful monitoring and intervention based on individual patient assessments and valve condition. This review was created based on a translation of the Japanese review written in the Japanese Journal of Artificial Organs in 2023 (Vol. 52, No. 1, pp. 77-80), with some modifications.

Outcomes of concomitant aortic valve procedures and left ventricular assist device implantation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation is frequently employed in patients with end-stage heart failure. The outcomes of addressing the repair of all substantial aortic valvular disease at the time of LVAD implantation remain unclear. We sought to assess the clinical outcomes in patients undergoing LVAD implantation concomitant with aortic valve procedures (AVPs) compared with isolated LVAD implantation.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library from inception till June 2022. Primary outcomes included short-term mortality and long-term survival. Random effects models were used to compute mean differences and odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

A total of 14 observational studies (N = 52 693) met our inclusion criteria. Concomitant LVAD implantation and AVPs were associated with higher short-term mortality (OR = 1.61 [95% CI, 1.06-2.42]; p = 0.02) and mean CPBt (MD = 43.25 [95% CI, 22.95-63.56]; p < 0.0001), and reduced long-term survival (OR = 0.70 [95% CI, 0.55-0.88]; p = 0.003) compared with isolated LVAD implantation. No difference in the odds of cerebrovascular accident (OR = 1.05 [95% CI, 0.79-1.39]; p = 0.74) and mean length of hospital stay (MD = 2.89 [95% CI, -4.04 to 9.82]; p = 0.41) was observed between the two groups. On adjusted analysis, short-term mortality was significantly higher in the LVAD group with concurrent AVPs when compared with the isolated LVAD group (aHR = 1.50 [95% CI, 1.20-1.87]; p = 0.0004).

CONCLUSIONS

Concurrent AVPs were associated with higher short-term mortality and reduced long-term survival in patients undergoing LVAD implantation compared with isolated LVAD implantation.

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.