Percutaneous mitral valve repair assisted by a catheter-based circulatory support device in a heart transplant patient

Outcomes of left-sided heart valve surgery after heart transplantation: a systematic review

As the survival after heart transplantation (HTx) is steadily improving, an increasing number of patients with late cardiac pathologies such as valvular disease is expected to rise. Nevertheless, no guidelines for indication of redo cardiac surgery after HTx exists. The aim of the present systematic review is to describe the results reported in the literature of surgical management of severe aortic and/or mitral valve disease. A systematic review was conducted including studies reporting on adult patients with severe mitral or aortic valve pathology needing surgery after their previous HTx. Exclusion criteria consisted in surgery with no left heart valve surgery, concomitant valve surgery during heart transplant, transcatheter interventions, and heterotopic HTx. A total of 35 papers met our inclusion criteria out of 2755 potentially eligible studies with 44 mitral valve surgery patients and 20 aortic valve surgery patients. In the entire population, the mean time from HTx to reintervention was 6.19 ± 5.22 years. After a mean follow-up of 2.78 ± 3.54 years and 1.53 ± 2.26 years from reintervention, 65.6% mitral and 86.7% aortic patients were reported as alive, respectively. As guidelines on cardiac surgery after HTx are currently lacking, left-sided valvular cardiac reinterventions can be considered a possible therapeutic approach in carefully selected patients. These interventions may not only improve the patient's functional status and survival, but may ultimately reduce the need for re-transplantation due to the chronic shortage of donor hearts. However, the support of more robust data is warranted.

Mechanical Support Strategies for High-Risk Procedures in the Invasive Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory: A State-of-the-Art Review

Thanks to advancements in percutaneous cardiac interventions, an expanding patient population now qualifies for treatment through percutaneous endovascular procedures. High-risk interventions far exceed coronary interventions and include transcatheter aortic valve replacement, endovascular management of acute pulmonary embolism and ventricular tachycardia ablation. Given the frequent impairment of ventricular function in these patients, frequently deteriorating during percutaneous interventions, it is hypothesized that mechanical ventricular support may improve periprocedural survival and subsequently patient outcome. In this narrative review, we aimed to provide the relevant evidence found for the clinical use of percutaneous mechanical circulatory support (pMCS). We searched the Pubmed database for articles related to pMCS and to pMCS and invasive cath lab procedures. The articles and their references were evaluated for relevance. We provide an overview of the clinically relevant evidence for intra-aortic balloon pump, Impella, TandemHeart and ECMO and their role as pMCS in high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention, transcatheter valvular procedures, ablations and high-risk pulmonary embolism. We found that the right choice of periprocedural pMCS could provide a solution for the hemodynamic challenges during these procedures. However, to enhance the understanding of the safety and effectiveness of pMCS devices in an often high-risk population, more randomized research is needed.

Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support in Cardiogenic Shock Patients after Cardiac Procedures: Selection Algorithm and Weaning Strategies

Mechanical circulatory support has proven effective in managing postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock by stabilizing patients' hemodynamics and ensuring adequate organ perfusion. Among the available device modalities, the combination of extracorporeal life support and a microaxial flow pump for left ventricular unloading has emerged as a valuable tool in the surgical armamentarium. In this publication, we provide recommendations for the application and weaning of temporary mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock patients, derived from a consensus among leading cardiac centers in German-speaking countries.

Impact of preoperative mitral regurgitation on left ventricular assist device patients: propensity score-matched analysis of the EUROMACS dataset

OBJECTIVES

Mitral regurgitation (MR) is frequently observed in patients undergoing left ventricular assist device implantation. We investigated the impact of preoperative MR on left ventricular assist device patients.

METHODS

A retrospective propensity score-matched analysis of adult patients enrolled in the EUROMACS registry between 1 January 2011 and 30 November 2021 was performed. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the grade of preoperative MR: none-to-mild (MR 0-II) or moderate-to-severe (MR III-IV).

RESULTS

Following 1:1 propensity score matching, each group consisted of 914 patients. Incidence of postoperative temporary right ventricular support, reoperation for bleeding and dialysis was similar. MR III-IV demonstrated shorter median intensive care unit stay [14 days (6; 27.8) vs 10 days (5; 22), P = 0.004] and ventilation time [72 h (22, 320) vs 31 h (18, 150), P < 0.001]. Mortality was lower for MR III-IV patients [subdistribution hazard ratio: 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.59-0.73, P < 0.001]. The 1-year survival was 68.1% (95% CI: 65.1-71.3%) in MR 0-II and 75% (95% CI: 72.1-78%) in MR III-IV. A lower incidence of total complications [odds ratio (OR): 0.93 (0.89-0.98), P = 0.003] and trend towards a lower risk of neurological dysfunction (subdistribution hazard ratio: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.61-1.01, P = 0.063) and sustained ventricular tachycardia [OR: 0.93 (0.54-1.03), P = 0.074] were demonstrated for MR III-IV. The risk of fatal stroke and pump thrombosis was similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-to-severe MR in patients undergoing left ventricular assist device implantation is associated with better mid-term survival and lower incidence of total major adverse events and complications. The incidence of severe postoperative complications including fatal stroke and device thrombosis was similar.

Device profile of the Impella 5.0 and 5.5 system for mechanical circulatory support for patients with cardiogenic shock: overview of its safety and efficacy

INTRODUCTION

Trans-valvular micro-axial flow pumps such as Impella are increasingly utilized in patients with cardiogenic shock [CS]. A number of different Impella devices are now available providing a wide range of cardiac output. Among these, the Impella 5.0 and recently introduced Impella 5.5 pumps can provides 5.55 L/min of flow, enabling complete left ventricular support with more favorable hemodynamic effects on myocardial oxygen consumption and left ventricular unloading. These devices require placement of a surgical conduit graft for endovascular delivery, but are increasingly being used in patients with CS due to acutely decompensated heart failure [ADHF], acute myocardial infarction [AMI] and after cardiac surgery as a bridge to transplant or durable ventricular assist device surgery or myocardial recovery.

AREAS COVERED

This review focuses on the device profile and use of the Impella 5.0 and 5.5 systems in patients with CS. Specifically; we reviewed the published literature for Impella 5.0 device to summarize data regarding safety and efficacy.

EXPERT OPINION

The Impella 5.0 and 5.5 are trans-valvular micro-axial flow pumps for which the current data suggest excellent safety and efficacy profiles as approaches to provide circulatory support, myocardial unloading, and axillary placement enabling patient mobilization and rehabilitation.

ABBREVIATIONS

pMCS, Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices; CS, Cardiogenic shock; ADHF, Acute decompensated heart failure; AMI, Acute myocardial infarction; LVAD, Left ventricular assist deviceI; ABP, Intra-aortic balloon pump; VA-ECLS, Veno-arterial extracorporeal life support.