Development of tricuspid regurgitation and right ventricular performance after implantation of centrifugal left ventricular assist devices

Surgical Treatment of Tricuspid Valve Regurgitation in Patients Undergoing Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation: Interim analysis of the TVVAD trial

OBJECTIVES

Right heart failure remains a serious complication of left ventricular assist device therapy. Many patients presenting for left ventricular assist device implantation have significant tricuspid regurgitation. It remains unknown whether concurrent tricuspid valve surgery reduces postoperative right heart failure. The primary aim was to identify whether concurrent tricuspid valve surgery reduced the incidence of moderate or severe right heart failure within the first 6 months after left ventricular assist device implantation.

METHODS

Patients with moderate or severe tricuspid regurgitation on preoperative echocardiography were randomized to left ventricular assist device implantation alone (no tricuspid valve surgery) or with concurrent tricuspid valve surgery. Randomization was stratified by preoperative right ventricular dysfunction. The primary end point was the frequency of moderate or severe right heart failure within 6 months after surgery.

RESULTS

This report describes a planned interim analysis of the first 60 randomized patients. The tricuspid valve surgery group (n = 32) had mild or no tricuspid regurgitation more frequently on follow-up echocardiography studies compared with the no tricuspid valve surgery group (n = 28). However, at 6 months, the incidence of moderate and severe right heart failure was similar in each group (tricuspid valve surgery: 46.9% vs no tricuspid valve surgery: 50%, P = .81). There was no significant difference in postoperative mortality or requirement for right ventricular assist device between the groups. There were also no significant differences in secondary end points of functional status and adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of significant tricuspid regurgitation before left ventricular assist device is associated with a high incidence of right heart failure within the first 6 months after surgery. Tricuspid valve surgery was successful in reducing postimplant tricuspid regurgitation compared with no tricuspid valve surgery but was not associated with a lower incidence of right heart failure.

Durability of Tricuspid Valve Repair in Patients Undergoing Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation

Objectives: Benefits of tricuspid valve repair (TVR) in left ventricular assist device (LVAD) patients have been questioned. High TVR failure rates have been reported. Remaining or recurring TR was found to be a risk factor for right heart failure (RHF). Therefore, we assessed our experience. Methods: Since 12/2010, 195 patients have undergone LVAD implantation in our center. Almost half (n = 94, 48%) received concomitant TVR (LVAD+TVR). These patients were included in our analysis. Echocardiographic and clinical data were assessed. Median follow-up was 2.8 years (7 days-0.6 years). Results were correlated with clinical outcomes. Results: LVAD+TVR patients were 59.8 ± 11.4 years old (89.4% male) and 37.3% were INTERMACS level 1 and 2. Preoperative TR was moderate in 28 and severe in 66 patients. RV function was severely impaired in 61 patients reflected by TAPSE-values of 11.2 ± 2.9 mm (vs. 15.7 ± 3.8 mm in n = 33; p < 0.001). Risk for RHF according to EUROMACS-RHF risk score was high (>4 points) in 60 patients, intermediate (>2-4 points) in 19 and low (0-2 points) in 15. RHF occurred in four patients (4.3%). Mean duration of echocardiographic follow-up was 2.8 ± 2.3 years. None of the patients presented with severe and only five (5.3%) with moderate TR. The vast majority (n = 63) had mild TR, and 26 patients had no/trace TR. Survival at 1, 3 and 5 years was 77.4%, 68.1% and 55.6%, 30-day mortality was 11.7% (n = 11). Heart transplantation was performed in 12 patients (12.8%). Conclusions: Contrary to expectations, concomitant TVR during LVAD implantation may result in excellent repair durability, which appears to be associated with low risk for RHF.

Late Right Heart Failure After Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation: Contemporary Insights and Future Perspectives

Late right heart failure (RHF) is increasingly recognized in patients with long-term left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support and is associated with decreased survival and increased incidence of adverse events such as gastrointestinal bleeding and stroke. Progression of right ventricular (RV) dysfunction to clinical syndrome of late RHF in patients supported with LVAD is dependent on the severity of pre-existing RV dysfunction, persistent or worsening left- or right-sided valvular heart disease, pulmonary hypertension, inadequate or excessive left ventricular unloading, and/or progression of the underlying cardiac disease. RHF likely represents a continuum of risk with early presentation and progression to late RHF. However, de novo RHF develops in a subset of patients leading to increased diuretic requirement, arrhythmias, renal and hepatic dysfunction, and heart failure hospitalizations. The distinction between isolated late RHF and RHF due to left-sided contributions is lacking in registry studies and should be the focus of future registry data collection. Potential management strategies include optimization of RV preload and afterload, neurohormonal blockade, LVAD speed optimization, and treatment of concomitant valvular disease. In this review, the authors discuss definition, pathophysiology, prevention, and management of late RHF.

Concomitant tricuspid valve repair in left ventricular assist device implantation may increase the risk for temporary right ventricular support but does not impact overall outcomes

OBJECTIVES

Tricuspid valve repair in left ventricular assist device implantation continues to pose a challenge and may impact the occurrence of early and late right heart failure. We investigated the effects of concomitant tricuspid repair on clinical outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective, multicentre study enrolled adult patients who received continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices between 2005 and 2017 and compared those who received concomitant tricuspid valve repair to those who did not. Primary outcomes were early right heart failure necessitating temporary ventricular assist devices and right heart failure-related rehospitalizations requiring inotropic or diuretic treatment.

RESULTS

Out of 526 patients who underwent left ventricular assist device implantation, 110 (21%) received a concomitant tricuspid valve repair. Those patients were sicker, and most had moderate or severe tricuspid regurgitation. A significantly higher incidence of temporary right ventricular assist devices was observed in the group with concomitant tricupid valve repair (18% vs. 11%, P = 0.049), with a significantly elevated risk for temporary right heart assist device (sHR 1.68, 95% CI 1.04-2.72; P = 0.037). After adjusting for confounders, no significant differences were found in the incidence of and risk for most clinical outcomes, including right heart failure-related rehospitalizations (P = 0.891) and death (P = 0.563).

CONCLUSIONS

Concomitant tricuspid valve repair, when deemed necessary in left ventricular assist device implantation, may increase the risk of early right heart failure requiring a temporary right ventricular assist device but does not impact the incidence or risk of death or rehospitalizations due to late right heart failure.

Prediction, prevention, and management of right ventricular failure after left ventricular assist device implantation: A comprehensive review

Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are increasingly common across the heart failure population. Right ventricular failure (RVF) is a feared complication that can occur in the early post-operative phase or during the outpatient follow-up. Multiple tools are available to the clinician to carefully estimate the individual risk of developing RVF after LVAD implantation. This review will provide a comprehensive overview of available tools for RVF prognostication, including patient-specific and right ventricle (RV)-specific echocardiographic and hemodynamic parameters, to provide guidance in patient selection during LVAD candidacy. We also offer a multidisciplinary approach to the management of early RVF, including indications and management of right ventricular assist devices in this setting to provide tools that help managing the failing RV.

Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation in Cancer-Therapy-Related Heart Failure

Objectives: Cancer-therapy-related heart failure (CTrHF) due to cardiotoxic drugs or radiation is a growing cause of end-stage heart failure. Limited knowledge is available concerning the use of continuous-flow left-ventricular-assist devices (cfLVAD) in this setting. Methods: The files of all 1334 patients who underwent cfLVAD implantation between December 2008 and December 2020 were screened for the cause of heart failure. All patients with CTrHF were included in the analysis. Results: A total of 32 patients with a median age of 58 years (IQR: 46–65) were included in the study; 15 (47%) were male. The median time from the first diagnosis of heart failure (HF) to cfLVAD implantation was 6 months (IQR 2–24), and from cancer treatment to cfLVAD implantation 40 months (IQR 5–144). Malignancies comprised non-Hodgkin lymphoma (n = 12, 37%), breast cancer (n = 9, 28%), sarcoma (n = 5, 16%), leukemia (n = 5, 16%), and others (n = 1, 3%). In 24 patients, chemotherapy included anthracyclines (others n = 2, unknown n = 6). Chest radiation was performed in 13 patients (39%). Moreover, 71% were classified as INTERMACS profile 1 or 2. The 30-day survival rate after LVAD implantation was 88%. Rethoracotomy was necessary in nine (29%), and a temporary right ventricular assist device in seven (21%) patients. The median survival was 29 months. There was no significant difference in survival or right HF between patients with CTrHF and a matched control group. Conclusions: CfLVAD implantation is feasible in high-risk patients with CTrHF with or without prior chest radiation.

Tricuspid Valve Surgery in Patients Receiving Left Ventricular Assist Devices

BACKGROUND

 Tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is common and related to poor prognosis in patients after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. The concomitant tricuspid valve surgery (TVS) at the time of LVAD implantation on short and long-term outcomes are controversial in current evidence.

METHODS

 This is a single-center, observational, retrospective study. We enrolled patients with moderate-to-severe TR who received LVAD implantations from 2009 to 2020. Postoperative right ventricular failure (RVF), right ventricular assist device (RVAD) use, hospital mortality, new-onset renal replacement therapy (RRT), and acute kidney injury (AKI) were evaluated retrospectively.

RESULTS

 Sixty-eight patients were included, 36 with and 32 without concomitant TVS. Baseline characteristics did not differ between the two groups. Patients receiving TVS had significantly increased incidences of postoperative RVF (52.8 vs. 25.0%, p = 0.019), RVAD implantation (41.7 vs. 18.8%, p = 0.041), and new-onset RRT (22.2 vs. 0%, p = 0.004). No difference in the incidence of AKI and hospital mortality was detected. Besides, these associations remained consistent in patients who underwent LVAD implantation via median sternotomy. During a median follow-up of 2.76 years, Kaplan-Meier analysis and competing-risk analysis showed that TVS was not associated with better overall survival in patients after LVAD implantation compared with the no-TVS group.

CONCLUSION

 Our study suggests that concomitant TVS failed to show benefits in patients receiving LVAD implantation. Even worse, concomitant TVS is associated with significantly increased incidences of RVF, RVAD use, and new-onset of RRT. Considering the small sample size and short follow-up, these findings warrant further study.