Outcomes of modular cable exchange in HeartMate 3 patients versus conventional driveline repair in HeartMate II patients

BACKGROUND

Driveline (DL) damages are a common difficulty among ventricular assist devices (VAD). Repairing the electrical fibers inside the DL on a running pump is hazardous and requires technical expertise, which is not easily available on site. A new feature of the HeartMate3 (Abbott, U.S.A.) LVAD is a modular driveline that allows an easy exchange of the DL cord. In this report we analyze our experiences with this feature.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of 302 patients who underwent either HeartMate II or HeartMate 3 implantation between February 2004 and September 2021. Patients were screened for driveline faults and need for exchange or repair of driveline or VAD exchange. Documented were baseline characteristics, reasons for DL or VAD exchange, and complications. Follow-up was three months after the procedure.

RESULTS

We present a cohort of 302 patients who underwent either HMII (n = 107;35.4%) or HM 3 (n = 195; 64.5%) implantation. Out of those, 40 patients (40/302; 13.2%) required driveline repair (DLRe) or exchange (DLEx). Out of 107 HMII patients, 9 showed severe DL damages (9/107; 8.4%). Six patients (6/9; 66.6%) underwent DLRe, two patients (2/6; 33.3%) required VAD exchange after DLRe, one patient (1/2;50%) experienced emergency VAD exchange after pump stop. The DLRe procedure in the other four patients (4/6; 66.6%) was successful. Due to damage to the internal driveline two patients (2/9; 22.2%) underwent emergency device exchange and one patient (1/9;11.1%) was listed for transplantation. 31 out 195 HM3 patients underwent exchange of the modular DL. In none of the cases, damages of the internal fibers were the reasons for the exchange. In 100% of the cases, damages of the external coating were the reason for DL exchange. In none of the cases, complications occurred after the exchange procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Driveline damages are a habitual, recurrent complication in VAD patients. The exchange of the modular driveline cable of the HM3 is feasible and safe compared to the conventional DL repair in HMII patients. Risky repair attempts and surgical LVAD exchange due to major damages of the electrical fibers can be avoided successfully by the new feature of HM3 driveline.

Is There a Sex Gap in Outcomes of Comparable Patients Supported with Left Ventricular Assist Devices?

OBJECTIVES

Historically, females were described as suffering from worse outcomes after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. However, females' preoperative conditions are unique, making direct comparisons with males challenging. This study aimed to select through propensity score (PS) matching two preoperatively comparable populations of females and males and test if any real sex-related difference exists regarding survival and adverse events after LVAD implantation.

METHODS

This retrospective single-center observational study investigated patients who received LVAD implantation between 2010 and 2018. PS matching was applied to balance preoperative heterogeneity between males and females. Primary endpoint was survival at follow-up. Secondary endpoints included perioperative outcomes and LVAD-related adverse events.

RESULTS

92 fully comparable females(n=46) and males(n=46) were selected after PS matching (median age:57 years, min-max:18-75). 26.1% of patients required preoperative mechanical circulatory support. Females needed more intraoperative fresh frozen plasma (p<0.001) and platelets transfusions (p=0.008) compared to males, but postoperative outcomes were comparable between groups. In-hospital, 1-year and 2-year survival were 78.3%, 69.6% and 65.2%, respectively, with no differences between groups. Survival probability remained comparable up to 8 years of follow-up(p=0.35). Overall, females showed a higher rate of strokes(p=0.039) compared to males in the follow-up time.

CONCLUSIONS

After reducing preoperative heterogeneity between females and males, survival after LVAD implantation does not differ based on sex. However, differences might exist in terms of higher transfusions and strokes in females. Reducing preoperative sex disparities and developing intraoperative and anticoagulation strategies which acknowledge sex-related variations might help abolishing differences in LVAD outcomes.

Flying after left ventricular assist device implantation

Literature on the air travel activities of patients supported by permanent mechanical assist devices is rare. To the best of our knowledge, no air travel guidelines or fitness prerequisites exist on whether and when ventricular assist device (VAD) patients are allowed to travel by plane after device implantation. In this study, we evaluated the topic of air travel after VAD implantation. This working group aimed to produce a report on air travel passengers supported by VADs, regarding their fitness to fly. Fifty left ventricular assist device (LVAD) patients were surveyed in a worldwide multicenter study. The single survey was performed with a multimethod design, including interviews conducted face-to-face, online, and on phone. Out of 50 patients, 97% described their traveling by aircraft as perfect and uneventful during the flight. Eighty-five percent of the study participants consulted their medical practitioner before the flight. No patient reported the occurrence of a severe condition associated with flying. LVAD alarms, especially low flow alarms, did not occur in any of the devices. Thirty-five percent of the surveyed patients, however, stated a major problem pertaining to the security check procedures at the airport. The results of this study suggest that commercial air travel is safe for stable patients on permanent VAD support and traveling can be resumed securely after VAD implantation. Conscientious preparation by packing necessary devices, fluids, medications, and careful preparation for the airport security check is recommended.

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.