Minimally invasive surgery improves outcome of left ventricular assist device surgery in cardiogenic shock

Outcomes After Heartmate 3 Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation Using a 10 mm Outflow Graft

The presence of adhesions and patent bypass grafts may create challenges for standard 14 mm outflow graft placement during left ventricular assist device implantation. We retrospectively describe our experience using a 10 mm Bioline Fusion graft (Getinge, Goteborg, Sweden) as the outflow graft in patients undergoing primary Heartmate 3 (Abbott, Abbott Park, IL) implantation. One hundred one patients underwent Heartmate 3 left ventricular assist device implantation, 80% via a thoracotomy approach, with the standard 14 mm outflow graft (78) or a 10 mm Bioline Fusion outflow graft (23). Initial postoperative rotor speed-to-flow ratio (the revolutions per minutes (RPMs) required to achieve a given flow) was significantly higher in 10 mm graft patients (1,472 vs. 1,283 RPM/L/min; p = 0.03), suggesting elevated resistance in the smaller graft. Furthermore, the initial postoperative vasoactive-inotrope score was higher in the 10 mm graft patients (24.1 vs. 17.6; p = 0.022). Postoperative outcomes were similar between groups. In conclusion, the use of a 10 mm graft was associated with higher RPMs needed to generate a given flow and a higher vasoactive-inotrope score, but these differences were not associated with increased right ventricular failure or mortality.

The Results of Minimally Invasive Implantation of the HeartMate 3 LVAD Left Ventricular Assist Device

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety, feasibility and effectiveness of minimally invasive HeartMate 3 LVAD implantation.

METHODOLOGY

Forty-seven patients who underwent the HeartMate 3 LVAD implantation by sternotomy and 26 ones who had implantation via minimally invasive method were analyzed. The observation lasted from November 2016 to May 2020.

RESULTS

ECMO as a bridge to LVAD, was more usual in the sternotomy group (11% vs 0%, P = .03). In the minimally invasive group, a history of previous cardiac surgery was more common (54% vs 12%, P < .001), this was the main indication for a minimally invasive approach in our institution. Patients undergoing a minimally invasive implantation had a significantly longer duration of surgery (Med. = 367.5 min vs Med. = 265.0 minutes, P < .001), and significantly higher intraoperative use of fresh frozen plasma (FFP) and platelet concentrates (PCs). There was no significant difference in the number of postoperative bleedings requiring surgical intervention. Postoperative wound infections were observed significantly more often in the sternotomy group (6% vs 0.0%, P < .001). There was no significant difference in survival between groups in the first 180 days after surgery. A slightly lower percentage of patients reached 2-year postsurgery survival in the group undergoing sternotomy, but this finding was not statistically significant. The mean survival time among sternotomy patients was 430.0 days (+/- 291.77 days) vs 633.15 days (+/- 426.84) in minimally invasive group.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive implantation of the HeartMate 3 LVAD may be an alternative method of LVAD implantation in a selected group of patients.

Hemodynamical Evaluation of a New Surgically Implanted Pulsatile Right Ventricular Assist Device Driven by a Conventional Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump Console

Severe right heart failure, often overlooked and challenging to manage, has prompted a growing interest in innovative approaches to provide functional support. This study uses experimentation in large porcine models to introduce a novel prototype of a pulsatile mechanical circulatory support device and document its effects when deployed as a right ventricular assist device (RVAD). The pulsatile ventricular assist platform (pVAP), featuring a membrane pump driven by an intra-aortic balloon pump console, actively generates pulsatile flow to propel right ventricular blood into the pulmonary artery. This novel prototype demonstrates promising potential in addressing the challenges of right heart failure management. After preliminary in vitro assessments, the pVAP was tested on seven porcine models in a healthy state and after the induction of right ventricular failure. During the procedure, a set of standard (ie, standard-of-care) hemodynamic measurements was obtained. Additionally, invasive pressure-volume loop analysis was employed to examine left ventricular hemodynamics. Results indicated that activation of the pVAP during right ventricular failure significantly improved systemic hemodynamics and enhanced left ventricular function. This study sheds light on the potential of the pVAP in managing right heart failure.

Less Invasive Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation Is Safe and Feasible in Patients With Smaller Body Surface Area

OBJECTIVE

Smaller body surface area (BSA) frequently precludes patients from left ventricular assist device (LVAD) therapy. We sought to investigate the clinical outcomes in patients with small BSA undergoing less invasive LVAD implantation.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of 216 patients implanted with HeartMate 3 LVAD (Abbott, Chicago, IL) via less invasive surgery at our institution. Patients were dichotomized based on their preimplant BSA for comparison between small BSA (≤1.8 m2) and normal/large BSA (>1.8 m2). We analyzed patient perioperative characteristics and outcomes.

RESULTS

In our study, small BSA was found in 32 patients (14.8%), while 184 patients (85.2%) had normal/large BSA. Women were more prevalent in the small BSA group (50.0% vs 13.0%, P < 0.001). Preoperative and intraoperative data showed comparable results. Major complications and hospital length of stay did not differ by BSA group. Patients with smaller BSA had significantly decreased pump parameters at discharge, including LVAD flow (4.11 ± 0.49 vs 4.60 ± 0.54 L/min, P < 0.001) and pump speed (5,200 vs 5,400 rpm, P < 0.001). Survival to discharge and within 6 months after implantation were similar between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study results suggest that less invasive HeartMate 3 implantation can be safely performed and demonstrates equivalent outcomes in patients with smaller body habitus. Randomized trials are required to confirm our data.

Sex disparities in left ventricular assist device implantation outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of over 50 000 patients

BACKGROUND

Left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) represent an important therapeutic option for patients progressing to end-stage heart failure. Women have been historically underrepresented in LVAD studies, and have been reported to have worse outcomes despite technological optimisation. We aimed to systematically explore the evidence on sex disparities in the use and outcomes of LVAD implantation.

METHODS

A systematic database search with meta-analysis was conducted of comparative original articles of men versus women undergoing LVAD implantation, in EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane database and Google Scholar, from inception to July 2022. Primary outcomes were stroke (haemorrhagic and ischaemic) and early/overall mortality. Secondary outcomes were LVAD thrombosis, right VAD implantation, major bleeding, kidney dysfunction, and device/driveline infection.

RESULTS

Our search yielded 137 relevant studies, including 22 meeting the inclusion criteria with a total of 53 227 patients (24.2% women). Overall mortality was higher in women (odds ratio [OR] 1.35, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-1.62, p = 0.02), as was overall stroke (OR 1.32, 95%CI 1.06-1.66, p = 0.01), including ischemic (OR 1.80, 95%CI 1.22-2.64, p = 0.003) and haemorrhagic (OR 1.72, 95%CI 1.09-2.70, p = 0.02). Women had more frequent right VAD implantation (OR 2.11, 95%CI 1.24-3.57, p = 0.006) and major bleeding (OR 1.40, 95%CI 1.06-1.85, p = 0.02). Kidney dysfunction, LVAD thrombosis, and device/driveline infections were comparable between sexes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis suggests that women face a greater risk of adverse events and mortality post-LVAD implantation. Although the mechanisms remain unclear, the difference in outcomes is thought to be multifactorial. Further research, that includes comprehensive pre-operative characteristics and post-operative outcomes, is encouraged.

Transversus thoracic plane block and rectus sheath block for left ventricular assist device implantation via full median sternotomy: A case report

BACKGROUND

Traditionally, pain management after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation via median sternotomy have been based on intravenous opioids but, in the era of enhanced recovery after surgery, a multimodal opioid-sparing analgesia could represent a valid alternative reducing opioids related side effects.

CASE REPORT

We described the successfully use of an opioid-sparing regimen for pain management after LVAD implantation via median sternotomy based on two ultrasound-guided fascial plane wall blocks. Bilateral ultrasound-guided transversus thoracic plane block was performed to manage sternotomy pain; additionally, unilateral left ultrasound-guided rectus sheath block was performed to provide somatic pain relief for left abdominal wall structures superficial to the peritoneum within which the LVAD driveline was inserted. The patient was extubated on Day 1 and good quality analgesia (numerical rating scale <3) was obtained, without using nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs or opioids. The patient was discharged from Intensive Care Unit on Day 3 and during hospitalization (lasted 24 days) there was no need for rescue analgesia administration.

Heart Transplant and Ventricular Assist: Cardiac Surgery and Heart Failure Perspective

For nearly 60 years, there have been two surgical treatment options for individuals with severe advanced heart failure: heart transplantation or implantation of a left ventricular assist device. As these fields have advanced in parallel, improvements in surgical technique, device development, and patient selection have improved outcomes for both therapies. Development of a comprehensive approach to the management of the most severe forms of advanced heart failure requires a deep understanding of both heart transplantation and durable ventricular assistance, including recent advancements in both fields. This article will review the substantial progress in the fields of heart transplantation and mechanical left ventricular assistance, including recent changes to organ allocation prioritization and left ventricular assist device evaluation, both of which have dramatically influenced practice in these fields.

Study results suggest less invasive HeartMate 3 implantation is a safe and effective approach for obese patients

BACKGROUND

Historically, obesity was considered a relative contraindication to left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation with less invasive surgery (LIS). The present study aimed to compare the outcomes of obese patients who underwent LVAD implantation through LIS with those who received full sternotomy (FS) implantation.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all patients implanted with HeartMate 3 LVAD in our institution between September 2015 and June 2020. Obese patients (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m²) were included and dichotomized based on surgical approach into the FS or LIS cohort.

RESULTS

Of 231 implanted patients, 107 (46%) were obese and included in the study. FS was performed in 26 (24%) patients and LIS approach in 81 (76%) patients. Preoperative patient characteristics were similar between the cohorts. Postoperatively, patients in LIS cohort had less bleeding (p = 0.029), fewer transfusions (p = 0.042), shorter duration of inotropic support (p = 0.049), and decreased incidence of severe RV failure (11.1% vs 30.8%, p = 0.028). Survival to discharge for the obese population was 87.5% overall and did not differ based on an approach (91.4% LIS vs 76.9% FS, p = 0.079). More LIS patients were discharged home (60.0% vs 82.4%, p = 0.041) rather than to rehabilitation center.

CONCLUSION

Our results showed that the LIS approach in obese patients is associated with fewer postoperative complications and a trend towards better short-term survival. These results suggest that less invasive LVAD implantation is a safe and effective approach for obese patients. Future prospective randomized trials are required to substantiate these results.

Left ventricular assist device implantation in patients with left ventricular thrombus

An intra-cavitary left ventricular (LV) thrombus is a relative contraindication to LV assist device (LVAD) implantation based on increased thromboembolic risks. Herein, we present our experience with LVAD patients with or without preoperative diagnosis of LV-thrombus. We retrospectively investigated 563 patients who received LVAD implantation between 2004 and 2018. Diagnosis of LV-thrombus was verified with computed tomography scan, magnetic resonance imaging, echocardiography, or intraoperative LV inspection. The primary endpoint was 30-day survival free of stroke and pump thrombosis. Overall, 72 patients (12.8%) had a diagnosis of LV-thrombus. They were younger (51 years; IQR:41-59), affected by severely reduced ejection fraction (15%; IQR:10-20), more often presenting with dilated cardiomyopathy (61.8%) and INTERMACS profile 1 (33.3%). Preoperative atrial fibrillation was frequent in patients without LV-thrombus (38.9%). Conventional sternotomy was the preferred approach in LV-thrombus patients (77.8%), based on more HMII implantations in these patients (41.7%). Survival free of strokes and pump thrombosis at 30 days was comparable (P = .5751) between patients with (83.3%) or without LV-thrombus (80.9%). LVAD implantation in patients with preoperative LV-thrombus is safe and feasible. When managed through correct diagnostic and intraoperative strategies including accurate inspection of the LV cavity, these patients show similar 30-day outcomes compared to patients without LV-thrombus.

Thoracotomy versus sternotomy? The effect of surgical approach on outcomes after left ventricular assist device implantation: A review of the literature and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Thoracotomy approaches to left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation may reduce surgical morbidity and, through preservation of the pericardial restraint over the right heart, may reduce the incidence of right ventricular failure (RVF).

METHODS

A meta-analysis of all original studies describing the effect of the surgical approach on postoperative outcomes after LVAD implantation was performed. Postoperative outcomes analyzed.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included with 692 patients undergoing a sternotomy and 373 a thoracotomy approach. Patients undergoing a thoracotomy approach had a higher comorbid status (INTERMACS 1-2: 56% vs. 44%; p = .0004), but were less likely to undergo a concomitant procedure (4% vs. 15%; p = .0002) than patients undergoing a sternotomy approach. Patients undergoing a thoracotomy approach demonstrated a reduced incidence of RVF (OR, .47; CI, .23-.97; p = .04), reexploration for bleeding (OR, .55; CI, .32-.94; p = .03), perioperative blood transfusion (SMD, -.30; CI, -.49 to -.11; p = .002), LOS (-5.57; -10.56 to -.59; p = .03), and mortality (OR, .57; CI, .33-.98; p = .04), but no difference in RVAD requirement or stroke were noted. Metaregression demonstrated that the performance of a concomitant procedure did not modify the effect of the surgical approach on the primary endpoints of RVF or RVAD requirement.

CONCLUSIONS

In the current meta-analysis including over 1000 patients undergoing LVAD implantation, a thoracotomy approach was associated with a reduced incidence of RVF (but not RVAD requirement), bleeding, LOS, and mortality. No difference in stroke rates was noted. These findings not only offer additional support as to the feasibility of a thoracotomy approach for LVAD implantation but also suggest a potential superiority over a sternotomy approach.

Minimally invasive versus conventional continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implantation for heart failure: a meta-analysis

Many studies have reported various minimally invasive techniques for continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implantation. There is no consensus on whether minimally invasive techniques can bring more benefits for patients compared with the conventional technique, due to the limited number of patients and diverse results in current studies. Our meta-analysis mainly discussed the comparison of minimally invasive and conventional techniques. We searched controlled trials from PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases until Dec 11, 2020. Perioperative and postoperative outcomes were analyzed among 10 included studies. The protocol has been registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020221532). There were no statistical differences in the 30-day mortality (OR 0.57; 95% CI 0.29 to 1.14), 6-month mortality (OR 0.66; 95% CI 0.41 to 1.05), neurological dysfunction (OR 1.10; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.76), major infection (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.36 to 1.28), and pump thrombus (OR 1.49; 95% CI 0.63 to 3.52) among the cohorts. Minimally invasive techniques were associated with lower incidences of major bleeding (OR 0.39; 95% CI 0.22 to 0.68), severe right heart failure (OR 0.43; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.81), and less blood-product utilization (SMD -0.44). Sensitivity analysis suggested that minimally invasive techniques were associated with a lower incidence of respiratory failure (OR 0.50; 95% CI 0.26 to 0.96) and shorter mechanical ventilation time (SMD -0.53). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that patients, implanted with a centrifugal pump by minimally invasive techniques, were associated with a shorter length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay (SMD -0.27) and hospital stay (SMD -0.42), and less blood-product utilization (SMD -0.26). In conclusion, minimally invasive techniques can reduce the risks of major bleeding, severe right heart failure, and blood-product utilization, as well as have positive impacts on reducing mechanical ventilation time and the risk of respiratory failure. Minimally invasive centrifugal pump implantation can reduce the length of ICU and hospital stay.

Sex differences in outcomes following less-invasive left ventricular assist device implantation

Background

Worse outcomes in women compared to men undergoing left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation remain an underestimated problem in heart failure (HF) patients. With device miniaturization, less-invasive LVAD implantation techniques have gained relevance, but their impact on outcomes in women is unknown. This study investigates sex-related differences in patients undergoing LVAD implantation through less-invasive procedures.

Methods

This retrospective single-center cohort study included patients who underwent isolated LVAD implantation between 2011 and 2018 through less-invasive techniques. Propensity score matching (PSM) was utilized to balance preoperative heterogeneity. Primary endpoint was two-year survival, and secondary endpoints included long-term survival, surgical outcomes and postoperative adverse events.

Results

Baseline analysis of 191 patients (females 18.3%) showed differences in terms of age [female (median, 52; IQR, 47-61); male (median, 58.5; IQR, 49-66); P=0.005], underlying diagnosis (P<0.001), INTERMACS profile (P=0.009), history of previous cardiac surgery (P=0.049) and preoperative creatinine values [female (median, 110; IQR, 71-146); male (median, 126; IQR, 9-168); P=0.049]. Over a follow-up of 460.68 patient-years, Kaplan-Meyer analysis showed better survival in females (P=0.027) and a similar probability of cardiac transplantation (P=0.288). After PSM, females showed higher needs for intraoperative fresh frozen plasma (P=0.044) and platelets (P=0.001) but comparable postoperative outcomes. No sex-related differences were noticed regarding two-year outcomes, long-term survival and adverse events. LVAD-related infections remained the most common complication with males experiencing more pump infections than women (P=0.050).

Conclusions

Patients receiving less-invasive LVAD implantation do not show significant sex-related differences in short and long-term outcomes and survival. Prospective studies are needed to evaluate the role of less-invasive techniques in reducing sex-based disparities after LVAD implantation.

Lateral Thoracotomy for Ventricular Assist Device Implantation: A Meta-Analysis of Literature

The use of lateral thoracotomy (LT) for implanting left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) is worldwide increasing, although the available evidence for its positive effects compared with conventional sternotomy (CS) is limited. This systematic review and meta-analysis analyzes the outcomes of LT compared with CS in patients undergoing implantation of a centrifugal continuous-flow LVAD. Four databases and 1,053 publications were screened until December 2019. Articles including patients undergoing implantation of a centrifugal continuous-flow LVAD through LT were included. A meta-analysis to compare LT and CS was performed to summarize evidences from studies including both LT and CS patients extracted from the same population. Primary outcome measure was in-hospital or 30-day mortality. Eight studies reporting on 730 patients undergoing LVAD implantation through LT (n = 242) or CS (n = 488) were included in the meta-analysis. Left thoracotomy showed lower in-hospital/30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR]: 0.520, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.27-0.99, p = 0.050), shorter intensive care unit (ICU) stay (mean difference [MD]: 3.29, CI: 1.76-4.82, p < 0.001), lower incidence of severe right heart failure (OR: 0.41; CI: 0.19-0.87, p = 0.020) and postoperative right ventricular assist device (RVAD) implantation (OR: 0.27, CI: 0.10-0.76, p = 0.010), fewer perioperative transfusions (MD: 0.75, CI: 0.36-1.14, p < 0.001), and lower incidence of renal failure (OR: 0.45, CI: 0.20-1.01, p = 0.050) and device-related infections (OR: 0.45, CI: 0.20-1.01, p = 0.050), respectively. This meta-analysis demonstrates that implantation of a centrifugal continuous-flow LVAD system via LT benefits from higher short-term survival, less right heart failure, lower postoperative RVAD need, shorter ICU stay, less transfusions, lower risk of device-related infections and kidney failure. Prospective studies are needed for further proof.

Ventricular assist devices implantation: surgical assessment and technical strategies

Along with the worldwide increase in continuous left ventricular assist device (LVAD) strategy adoption, more and more patients with demanding anatomical and clinical features are currently referred to heart failure (HF) departments for treatment. Thus surgeons have to deal, technically, with re-entry due to previous cardiac surgery procedures, porcelain aorta, peripheral vascular arterial disease, concomitant valvular or septal disease, biventricular failure. New surgical techniques and surgical tools have been developed to offer acceptable postoperative outcomes to all mechanical circulatory support recipients. Several less invasive and/or thoracotomic approaches for surgery combined with various LVAD inflow and outflow graft alternative anastomotic sites for system placement have been reported and described to solve complex clinical scenarios. Surgical techniques have been upgraded with further technical tips to preserve the native anatomy in case of re-entry for heart transplantation, myocardial recovery or device explant. The current continuous-flow miniaturized and intrapericardial devices provide versatility and technical advantages. However, the surgical planning requires a careful multidisciplinary evaluation which must be driven by a dedicated and well-trained Heart Failure team. Biventricular assist device (BVAD) implantation by adoption of the newer radial pumps might be a challenge. However, the results are encouraging thus remaining a valid option. This paper reviews and summarizes LVAD preoperative assessment and current surgical techniques for implantation.

Minimally Invasive Left Ventricular Assist Device Insertion Facilitates Subsequent Heart Transplant

OBJECTIVE

We have observed that minimally invasive left ventricular assist device (LVAD) insertion leads to more facile re-entry and easier cardiac transplantation. We hypothesize minimally invasive LVAD implantation results in improved outcomes at the time of subsequent heart transplant.

METHODS

All adults undergoing cardiac transplantation between October 2015 and March 2019 at our institution were retrospectively reviewed. Those bridged to transplantation with a HeartWare HVAD were identified and divided into 2 cohorts based upon the surgical approach: those who underwent HVAD placement by conventional sternotomy versus minimally invasive insertion via lateral thoracotomy and hemisternotomy (LTHS). Patient demographics, as well as perioperative transplant outcomes, including survival, length of stay (LOS), blood utilization, ischemic time, bypass time, and postoperative extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) were compared between cohorts.

RESULTS

Forty-two patients were bridged to heart transplant with a HVAD implanted via either sternotomy (n = 22) or LTHS technique (n = 20). Demographics were similar between groups. There was 1 predischarge death in the sternotomy group and none in the LTHS group. Body surface area, cardiopulmonary bypass time, ischemic time, ECMO utilization, and reoperation for bleeding were similar. Red blood cell units transfused were significantly lower in the LTHS cohort (3.0 [1.0-5.0] vs 6.0 [2.5-10.0] P = 0.046). The LTHS cohort had a significantly shorter hospital LOS (12.0 [11.0-28.0] vs 22.5 [15.7-41.7] P = 0.022) with a trend toward shorter intensive care unit LOS (6.0 [5.0-10.5] vs 11.0 [6.0-21.5] days P = 0.057).

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive HVAD implantation improves outcomes at subsequent heart transplantation, resulting in shorter LOS and less red cell transfusion. Larger multi-institutional studies are necessary to validate these findings.

Expert Consensus Paper: Lateral Thoracotomy for Centrifugal Ventricular Assist Device Implant

BACKGROUND

The increasing prevalence of heart failure has led to the expanded use of left ventricle assist devices (VADs) for end-stage heart failure patients worldwide. Technological improvements witnessed the development of miniaturized VADs and their implantation through less traumatic non-full sternotomy approaches using a lateral thoracotomy (LT). Although adoption of the LT approach is steadily growing, a lack of consensus remains regarding patient selection, details of the surgical technique, and perioperative management. Furthermore, the current literature does not offer prospective randomized studies or evidence-based guidelines for LT-VAD implantation.

METHODS

A worldwide group of LT-VAD experts was convened to discuss these key topics openly. After a PubMed search and review with all authors, a consensus was reached and an expert consensus paper on LT-VAD implantation was developed.

RESULTS

This document aims to guide clinicians in the selection of patients suitable for LT approaches and preoperative optimization. Details of operative techniques are described, with an overview of hemisternotomy and bilateral thoracotomy approaches. A review of the best surgical practices for placement of the pump, inflow cannula, and outflow graft provides advice on the best surgical strategies to avoid device malpositioning while optimizing VAD function. Experts' opinions on cardiopulmonary bypass, postoperative management, and approaches for pump exchange and explant are presented. This review also emphasizes the critical need for multidisciplinary teams and specific training.

CONCLUSIONS

This expert consensus review provides a compact guide to LT for VAD implantation, from patient selection through intraoperative tips and postoperative management.

A Minimally Invasive Approach to Left Ventricular Assist Device Insertion Facilitates Subsequent Explant

A minimally invasive approach to left ventricular assist device (LVAD) insertion may benefit patients at the time of implant, but whether the approach to LVAD insertion influences the outcome of subsequent cardiovascular reoperations is unknown. Here we present the case of a 50-year-old male who underwent LVAD insertion through a minimally invasive approach and subsequently had left ventricular recovery. LVAD explant was performed without the use of any blood products or inotropic support. This case demonstrates that a minimally invasive approach to LVAD insertion may also facilitate subsequent device explant.

Association of previous cardiac surgery with outcomes in left ventricular assist device patients

OBJECTIVES

History of prior cardiac surgery has traditionally been considered a risk factor for subsequent cardiac procedures. The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of patients implanted with a left ventricular assist device via redo sternotomy.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data were reviewed for all patients implanted with a continuous-flow left ventricular assist device at a single institution from December 2006 through June 2018. Patients were separated into 2 cohorts: those with a history of prior cardiac surgery (redo sternotomy) and those undergoing primary sternotomy at the time of left ventricular assist device implantation. The primary outcome was overall survival.

RESULTS

Of the 321 patients included in the study, 77 (24%) were implanted via redo sternotomy and 244 (76%) via primary sternotomy. The redo sternotomy cohort was generally older (59 ± 10 vs 57 ± 12 years, P = 0.050) and had a higher incidence of ischaemic disease (70% vs 49%, P = 0.002). The Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrated that overall survival was not significantly different between the redo sternotomy and primary sternotomy groups (6-month survival: 86% vs 92%; 5-year survival: 53% vs 51%; log-rank P = 0.590 for overall difference during follow-up). The propensity score analysis consistently showed that redo sternotomy was not significantly associated with mortality risk (hazard ratio 1.19, 95% confidence interval 0.73-1.93; P = 0.488). Redo sternotomy patients were more likely to require rehospitalization during their first year postoperatively (P = 0.020) and spent less time out of the hospital during the first year (P = 0.046).

CONCLUSIONS

The redo sternotomy cohort represents a more technically challenging patient population, but overall survival similar to that of primary sternotomy patients can be achieved.

Outcomes with temporary mechanical circulatory support before minimally invasive centrifugal left ventricular assist device

BACKGROUND

Despite improved survival and morbidity after durable left ventricular assist device (dLVAD), outcomes for cardiogenic shock patients are suboptimal. Temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) can permit optimization before dLVAD. Excellent outcomes have been observed using minimally-invasive dLVAD implantation. However, some feel tMCS contraindicates this approach. To evaluate whether left thoracotomy/hemisternotomy (LTHS) dLVAD placement is safe in this setting, we compared patients who did and did not require tMCS.

METHODS

Outcomes for patients receiving dLVADs via LTHS were compared among those bridged with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), or no tMCS. We evaluated demographics, comorbidities, laboratory and hemodynamic data, and intraoperative and postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

Eighty-three patients underwent LTHS dLVAD placement. Fifty did not require tMCS, while 22 (26%) required IABP, and 11 (13%) ECMO. Non-tMCS patients were primarily Intermacs 3 (56%), while IABP recipients were mainly Intermacs 2 (45%). All patients with ECMO were Intermacs 1. Patients with tMCS had worse end-organ function. Operative outcomes were similar except more concomitant procedures and red-cell transfusions in patients with ECMO. Intensive care unit and hospital length of stay and inotrope duration were also similar. There were no differences in bleeding, stroke, and infection rates. Three- and 12-month survival were: no tMCS: 94%, 86%; IABP: 100%, 88%; and ECMO: 81%, 81% (P = .45).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with cardiogenic shock can safely undergo LTHS dLVAD implantation after stabilization with ECMO or IABP. Outcomes and complications in these patients were comparable to a less severely ill cohort without tMCS.

Minimally invasive surgery for left ventricular assist device implantation is safe and associated with a decreased risk of right ventricular failure

Background

Right ventricular failure (RVF) after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation is associated with significant mortality and morbidity. The objective of this study was to determine pre- and postoperative risk factors associated with the occurrence of RVF after LVAD implantation.

Methods

This retrospective study included 68 patients who received LVADs between 2010 and 2018 either for bridge to transplant (40 patients, 58.8%) or bridge to destination therapy (28 patients, 41.2%). RVF after LVAD implantation was defined according to the INTERMACS classification. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of RVF. The secondary endpoints were hospital mortality and morbidity and long-term survival.

Results

The majority of patients (61.8%) had an INTERMACS profile 1 (36.8%) or 2 (25.0%). The LVAD was implanted either by sternotomy (37 patients, 54.4%) or thoracotomy (31 patients, 45.6%). RVF after LVAD implantation was observed in 32 patients (47.1%). In univariate analysis, an elevated serum glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase (SGOT) (P=0.028) and a high preoperative vasoactive inotropic score (VIS) (P=0.028) were significantly associated with an increased risk of RVF, whereas the implantation of LVAD through a thoracotomy approach was associated with a significant reduction in this risk (P=0.006). The multivariate analysis demonstrated that only the thoracotomy approach was significantly associated with decreased risk of RVF (odds ratio =0.33, 95% confidence interval: 0.17–0.96; P=0.042). Hospital mortality was 53.1% and 5.6% in the RVF and control groups, respectively (P<0.0001). The incidence of stroke and postoperative acute renal failure were significantly increased in the RVF group compared with the control group. The survival after LVAD implantation was 33.5%±9.0% and 85.4%±6.0% at 1 year in the RVF and control groups, respectively (P<0.0001).

Conclusions

LVAD implantation by thoracotomy significantly reduced the risk of postoperative RVF. This surgical approach should, therefore, be favored.

Cost of Thoracotomy Approach: An Analysis of the LATERAL Trial

BACKGROUND

Less invasive techniques for left ventricular assist device implantation have been increasingly prevalent over past years and have been associated with improved clinical outcomes. The procedural economic impact of these techniques remains unknown. We sought to study and report economic outcomes associated with the thoracotomy implantation approach.

METHODS

The LATERAL clinical trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of the thoracotomy approach for implantation of the HeartWare centrifugal-flow ventricular assist device system (HVAD). We collected UB-04 forms in parallel to the trial, allowing analysis of index hospitalization costs. All charges were converted to costs using hospital-specific cost-to-charge ratios and were subsequently compared with Medicare cost data for the same period (2015-2016). Because thoracotomy implants were off-label for all left ventricular assist devices during that period, the Medicare cohort was assumed to consist predominately of traditional sternotomy patients.

RESULTS

Thoracotomy patients demonstrated decreased costs compared with sternotomy patients during the index hospitalization. Mean total index hospitalization costs for thoracotomy were $204,107 per patient, corresponding to 21.6% reduction (P < .001) and $56,385 savings per procedure compared with sternotomy. Across almost all cost categories, thoracotomy implants were less costly.

CONCLUSIONS

In LATERAL, a clinical trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of the thoracotomy approach for HVAD, costs were lower than those reported in Medicare patient claims occurring over the same period. Because Medicare data can be presumed to consist of predominately sternotomy procedures, thoracotomy appears less expensive than traditional sternotomy.

Minimally invasive left ventricular assist device implantation: optimizing device design for this approach

Introduction: The global heart failure (HF) burden is expected to increase due to aging populations, increasing number of end-stage HF patients and adverse lifestyle changes. Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices such as left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have become a promising treatment option for short-term and long-term circulatory support of end-stage HF patients.Areas covered: Recent developments in MCS technology have been focused on miniaturization leading to the development of minimally invasive surgical procedures for LVAD implantation. This helps overcome possible postoperative complications such as major incisions and poor outcomes due to infections, right heart failure, and bleeding. This article discusses clinical and technological developments in the field of minimally invasive procedures for LVAD implantation.Expert opinion: Most patients might benefit from minimally invasive LVAD implantation performed through a limited left lateral thoracotomy associated with an upper hemisternotomy or a right anterior thoracotomy. The thoracotomy approach can also be considered in case of pump exchange or pump explant. The success of these techniques is mainly based on the optimization of LVAD pump design, inflow cannula insertion, and outflow graft as well as driveline exit sites. The future direction of the LVAD field is likely to include less-invasive approaches and smartificial technologies.

Complete Sternal-Sparing Approach Improves Outcomes for Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation in Patients With History of Prior Sternotomy

Objective

Early reports of less invasive techniques for left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation have demonstrated promising results. We sought to investigate the safety and feasibility of implementing the complete sternal-sparing (CSS) approach for LVAD implantation in patients with a history of prior cardiac operation.

Methods

This was a retrospective review of prospectively collected data for all patients implanted with a fully magnetically levitated LVAD from April 2017 through December 2018. Patients were dichotomized based on surgical approach: CSS or full median sternotomy (FS). Perioperative complications and overall survival were compared between cohorts.

Results

Of the 29 eligible patients, 15 (52%) were implanted via the CSS approach and 14 (48%) via FS. Preoperative characteristics were similar between cohorts. Overall survival to discharge was 93% for CSS compared to 71% for FS ( P = 0.169). The CSS cohort demonstrated fewer postoperative complications, including fewer cases of severe right ventricular failure ( P = 0.006) and less blood product utilization ( P = 0.015). Median hospital length of stay was significantly shorter for the CSS cohort (median 13 vs 32.5 days, P = 0.016). Neither cohort had any 30-day readmissions.

Conclusions

Early data suggest that the CSS technique is a safe and effective technique for patients with a history of prior sternotomy. Further studies are needed to validate this single-center experience.

Extracorporeal life support to ventricular assist device: potential benefits of sternal-sparing approach

Background

Advancements in left ventricular assist device (LVAD) technology have improved long-term survival for properly selected patients with advanced heart failure. However, the subset of patients in critical cardiogenic shock remain difficult to treat with persistently high patient morbidity and mortality. The goal of this study is to describe our institutional experience utilizing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) as a bridge to LVAD for patients in cardiogenic shock comparing the less invasive complete sternal-sparing (CSS) surgical technique to median sternotomy.

Methods

Data was collected as a single center retrospective review of patients implanted with a continuous-flow LVAD directly off ECMO from 2012 to 2018. Patients were stratified by LVAD surgical technique. The primary outcome was survival to discharge. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications, resource utilization and survival at 6-months.

Results

Of the 37 patients implanted directly off ECMO, 26 (70%) patients were implanted via median sternotomy and 11 (30%) patients by the CSS approach. Median time on ECMO support was 8 days (range, 2-29 days). Preoperative characteristics were similar between groups. Survival to discharge was 78% overall (73% vs. 91% CSS, P=0.391). The CSS cohort had fewer postoperative complications, including fewer transfusions (P=0.044) and trend towards less right ventricular (RV) failure (62% vs. 27% CSS, P=0.079). Both cohorts required similar median length of stay (LOS) in the intensive care unit (ICU) (11 vs. 12 days, P=0.695) and similar overall hospital LOS (34 vs. 22 days, P=0.242). Overall survival was 74% at six months (68% vs. 89% CSS, P=0.386).

Conclusions

VA ECMO can be used effectively as a bridge-to-LVAD for patients in cardiogenic shock. The less invasive CSS approach demonstrates potential advantages to median sternotomy. Further study is needed to better understand the benefits of less invasive surgical techniques.

Mechanical circulatory support for the right ventricle in combination with a left ventricular assist device

Introduction: Right heart failure (RHF) in patients with a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) carries a poor prognosis although the treatment strategy including mechanical circulatory support for the failing right ventricle (RV) has not been well established. Areas covered: In this review, we describe an overview of RHF post-LVAD implant including natural history, prevalence, pathophysiology, outcomes, and challenges to predict RHF post-LVAD implant. Then, we focus on right ventricular assist devices (RVADs) and their clinical outcomes. Recently developed percutaneous RVADs are the major advance in this field. Finally, we discuss future perspectives to overcome limitations of the current treatment options. Expert opinion: In the absence of dedicated RVAD system RHF post-LVAD implant may have been undertreated. Now that dedicated percutaneous RVADs have emerged, surgeons are encouraged to use these new devices to improve outcomes of LVAD therapy. As experience accumulates, we should be able to establish the best possible strategy to treat early RHF post-LVAD implant. Late RHF is another form of RHF post-LVAD implant and has been underappreciated. Further research is mandatory to clarify the mechanism and risk factors. There are still unmet needs for a dedicated implantable RVAD for a subset of patients who need long-term RV support.

Noteworthy Cardiac Surgical Literature 2018: Value-Based Bundled Payments, Opioid Crisis and Cardiac Surgery, Percutaneous Suction Thrombectomy for Intracardiac/Caval Thrombus and Vegetations, and Minimally Invasive Left Ventricular Assist Device Placement

There has been tremendous evolution in the care of cardiac surgical patients in 2018. In this article, 4 topics of considerable impact on cardiac surgical care in the current landscape are reviewed based on recent publications. The first topic reviews the recent paradigm shift to value-based payments and the potential role of bundled payments on health care and physician reimbursement. The second topic highlights the impact of the opioid crisis on cardiac surgery. The third topic demonstrates the increasing utilization and expanding role of novel percutaneous suction thrombectomy technique in the extraction of caval and right-sided intracardiac thrombi and vegetations with veno-venous bypass. The final topic reviews the current trend of minimally invasive left ventricular assist device placement. Each of these topics addresses the contemporary issues in cardiac surgery with the reasoning for evolution in our current practices in 2018.