Guidance on the management of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) supported patients for the non-LVAD specialist healthcare provider: executive summary

Healthcare consumption of patients with left ventricular assist device: real-world data

BACKGROUND

A left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is a life-saving but intensive therapy for patients with end-stage heart failure. We evaluated the healthcare consumption in a cohort of LVAD patients in our centre over 6 years.

METHODS

All patients with a primary LVAD implantation at the University Medical Centre Utrecht in Utrecht, the Netherlands from 2016 through 2021 were included in this analysis. Subsequent hospital stay, outpatient clinic visits, emergency department visits and readmissions were recorded.

RESULTS

During the investigated period, 226 LVADs were implanted, ranging from 32 in 2016 to 45 in 2020. Most LVADs were implanted in patients aged 40-60 years, while they were supported by or sliding on inotropes (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support class 2 or 3). Around the time of LVAD implantation, the median total hospital stay was 41 days. As the size of the LVAD cohort increased over time, the total annual number of outpatient clinic visits also increased, from 124 in 2016 to 812 in 2021 (p = 0.003). The numbers of emergency department visits and readmissions significantly increased in the 6‑year period as well, with a total number of 553 emergency department visits and 614 readmissions. Over the years, the annual number of outpatient clinic visits decreased by 1 per patient-year follow-up, while the annual numbers of emergency department visits and readmissions per patient-year remained stable.

CONCLUSION

The number of patients supported by an LVAD has grown steadily over the last years, requiring a more specialised healthcare in this particular population.

Clinical Recommendations for Improving Palliative Nursing Care for Patients With a Left Ventricular Assist Device

Nurses who care for patients with a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) are highly skilled clinicians who manage unique technological demands and complex complications within this specialized patient population. There is a demonstrated need and benefit for palliative care for patients with a LVAD, yet palliative consults are often underused, and the quality of consultation for these patients is poorly understood. Rarely, if at all, do nurses receive formal training on how to navigate the palliative care needs of patients with a LVAD, which includes preparedness planning, caregiver support, device/body image acceptance, and end-of-life care. In addition, there is a need for literature to address specifically how nurses in their role and scope of practice can improve palliative care for patients with a LVAD. The purpose of this article was to present recommendations to equip palliative care nurses to best serve the needs of patients with a LVAD, wherein they can partner with and advance their colleagues in cardiology to improve their delivery of primary palliative care.

Right heart failure with left ventricular assist devices: Preoperative, perioperative and postoperative management strategies. A clinical consensus statement of the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC

Right heart failure (RHF) following implantation of a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is a common and potentially serious condition with a wide spectrum of clinical presentations with an unfavourable effect on patient outcomes. Clinical scores that predict the occurrence of right ventricular (RV) failure have included multiple clinical, biochemical, imaging and haemodynamic parameters. However, unless the right ventricle is overtly dysfunctional with end-organ involvement, prediction of RHF post-LVAD implantation is, in most cases, difficult and inaccurate. For these reasons optimization of RV function in every patient is a reasonable practice aiming at preparing the right ventricle for a new and challenging haemodynamic environment after LVAD implantation. To this end, the institution of diuretics, inotropes and even temporary mechanical circulatory support may improve RV function, thereby preparing it for a better adaptation post-LVAD implantation. Furthermore, meticulous management of patients during the perioperative and immediate postoperative period should facilitate identification of RV failure refractory to medication. When RHF occurs late during chronic LVAD support, this is associated with worse long-term outcomes. Careful monitoring of RV function and characterization of the origination deficit should therefore continue throughout the patient's entire follow-up. Despite the useful information provided by the echocardiogram with respect to RV function, right heart catheterization frequently offers additional support for the assessment and optimization of RV function in LVAD-supported patients. In any patient candidate for LVAD therapy, evaluation and treatment of RV function and failure should be assessed in a multidimensional and multidisciplinary manner.

Validity and reliability of the self-care behaviour scale for patients with left ventricular assist device

AIMS

To evaluate the validity and reliability of the self-care behaviour scale for patients with left ventricular assist devices.

DESIGN

Methodological study.

METHODS

The English version of the scale was translated into Korean, and it was then back-translated into English. Survey data were collected from 32 patients with left ventricular assist device in South Korea, and construct validity, content validity and reliability were analysed.

RESULTS

The original self-care behaviour scale comprises three domains and 33 items, whereas the Korean self-care behaviour scale comprises 27 items and five domains: device management, wound management, symptom monitoring, activated healthcare system and self-care management. Cronbach's alpha for the overall scale was 0.94, and that for the five domains ranged from 0.36 to 0.90. The intraclass correlation coefficient for the overall scale was 0.89, and the five domains ranged from 0.71 to 0.88.

CONCLUSION

The newly evaluated scale would be valid and reliable in measure self-care behaviour for patients with a left ventricular assist device.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE

Patients can manage the left ventricular assist device on their own based on evidence and use it as a tool for effective communication with medical professionals.

Quality Improvement in Anesthetic Management of Patients with Left Ventricular Assist Device Support Presenting for Non-Cardiac Surgery: A Single Center Experience

With the growing number of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) recipients requiring non-cardiac surgery and the limited availability of cardiac anesthesiologists, our study reviewed non-cardiac surgeries in HeartMate III patients with LVAD at our institution. We focused on anesthesiologist roles, detailing patient characteristics, anesthetic management, and outcomes and identifying improvement opportunities in this specialized care setting. A retrospective chart review was conducted of all patients with LVAD who underwent non-cardiac surgery at our institution between 2017 and 2022. Patient demographics, surgical characteristics, anesthetic management, and 30-day mortality rates were also assessed. A total of 23 patients were identified, with 17 (73.9%) males and a median age of 61 [53.5, 67.5] years. Cardiac anesthesiologists were present in nine (39.1%) cases. Elective surgeries were more common (73.9%), with intermediate-risk surgeries accounting for 52.2% of all surgeries. General anesthesia was administered to 18 patients (78.3%), with a median duration of 40 [24, 63.5] min. A single patient required reoperation because of bleeding, and two patients (8.7%) experienced 30-day mortality. Despite guidelines lacking detail, involving non-cardiac anesthesiologists in certain cases is essential. Sharing our experience aims to enhance the evolving discourse on non-cardiac surgeries for patients with LVAD, improving their outcomes and safety.

Calcium channel blockers and clinical outcomes in patients with continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices

AIMS

Current guidelines suggest calcium channel blockers (CCBs) as the second or third option for blood pressure management in patients with left ventricular assist device (LVAD). However, the clinical outcomes of patients with LVAD who receive CCBs remain unclear. Our study aims to analyse the association of CCBs with clinical outcomes in patients after LVAD implantation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This is a retrospective analysis based on the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) from 2006 to 2017, and adult patients who were alive with LVAD and CCB treatment information at 6 months after implantation were included. Among 10 717 patients, 1369 received CCBs 6 months after implantation, and there was an increasing trend of CCB use after LVAD. Patients receiving CCB therapy at 6 months had a similar 5 year survival rate to those not receiving CCB [49.6%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 47.5-51.7% vs. 51.1%, 95% CI: 45.3-56.7%]. In both Cox and competing risk regressions after adjusting for confounding factors, CCB treatment at 6 months after implantation was not associated with long-term mortality [hazard ratio (HR): 1.03, 95% CI: 0.91-1.17, P = 0.624 and subdistribution HR (SHR): 1.07, 95% CI: 0.95-1.22, P = 0.260]. Consistently, in time-varying models, CCB treatment was not linked to long-term mortality (HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.87-1.09, P = 0.682 and SHR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.94-1.18, P = 0.359). This null association remained in subgroup analysis according to device strategy and propensity-matching analyses. Neurological dysfunction, stroke, bleeding, rehospitalization, and renal dysfunction were more likely to occur among those with CCB when compared with those without CCB treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with LVAD, CCB therapy fails to show benefits in long-term survival and is associated with increased incidences of neurological dysfunction, bleeding, renal dysfunction, and rehospitalization.

When Direct Oral Anticoagulants Should Not Be Standard Treatment: JACC State-of-the-Art Review

For most patients, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are preferred over vitamin K antagonists for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation and for venous thromboembolism treatment. However, randomized controlled trials suggest that DOACs may not be as efficacious or as safe as the current standard of care in conditions such as mechanical heart valves, thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome, and atrial fibrillation associated with rheumatic heart disease. DOACs do not provide a net benefit in conditions such as embolic stroke of undetermined source. Their efficacy is uncertain for conditions such as left ventricular thrombus, catheter-associated deep vein thrombosis, cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, and for patients with atrial fibrillation or venous thrombosis who have end-stage renal disease. This paper provides an evidence-based review of randomized controlled trials on DOACs, detailing when they have demonstrated efficacy and safety, when DOACs should not be the standard of care, where their safety and efficacy are uncertain, and areas requiring further research.

Durable ventricular assist device in Spain (2007-2020). First report of the REGALAD registry

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

This report presents the clinical characteristics, outcomes and complications of all consecutive patients implanted with a long-term mechanical circulatory support device in Spain between 2007 and 2020.

METHODS

Analysis of the Spanish Registry of durable ventricular assist devices (REGALAD) including data form Spanish centers with a mechanical circulatory support program.

RESULTS

During the study period, 263 ventricular assist devices were implanted in 22 hospitals. The implanted device was an isolated continuous-flow left ventricular assist device in 182 patients (69%), a pulsatile-flow device (58 isolated left ventricular and 21 biventricular) in 79 (30%), and a total artificial heart in 2 patients (1%). The strategy of the implant was as bridge to heart transplant in 78 patients (30%), bridge to candidacy in 110 (42%), bridge to recovery in 3 (1%) and destination therapy in 72 patients (27%). Overall survival at 6, 12 and 24 months was 79%, 74% and 69%, respectively, and was better in continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (84%, 80%, and 75%). The main adverse events related to this therapy were infections (37% of patients), bleeding (35%), neurological (29%), and device malfunction (17%).

CONCLUSIONS

Durable ventricular assist devices have emerged in Spain in the last few years as a useful therapy for patients with advanced heart failure. As in other international registries, the current trend is to use continuous-flow intracorporeal left ventricular devices, which are associated with better results. Adverse events continue to be frequent and severe.

Heart failure: an update from the last years and a look at the near future

In the last years, major progress occurred in heart failure (HF) management. Quadruple therapy is now mandatory for all the patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction. Whilst verciguat is becoming available across several countries, omecamtiv mecarbil is waiting to be released for clinical use. Concurrent use of potassium-lowering agents may counteract hyperkalaemia and facilitate renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor implementations. The results of the EMPagliflozin outcomE tRial in Patients With chrOnic heaRt Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (EMPEROR-Preserved) trial were confirmed by the Dapagliflozin in Heart Failure with Mildly Reduced or Preserved Ejection Fraction (DELIVER) trial, and we now have, for the first time, evidence for treatment of also patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction. In a pre-specified meta-analysis of major randomized controlled trials, sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors reduced all-cause mortality, cardiovascular (CV) mortality, and HF hospitalization in the patients with HF regardless of left ventricular ejection fraction. Other steps forward have occurred in the treatment of decompensated HF. Acetazolamide in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure with Volume Overload (ADVOR) trial showed that the addition of intravenous acetazolamide to loop diuretics leads to greater decongestion vs. placebo. The addition of hydrochlorothiazide to loop diuretics was evaluated in the CLOROTIC trial. Torasemide did not change outcomes, compared with furosemide, in TRANSFORM-HF. Ferric derisomaltose had an effect on the primary outcome of CV mortality or HF rehospitalizations in IRONMAN (rate ratio 0.82; 95% confidence interval 0.66-1.02; P = 0.070). Further options for the treatment of HF, including device therapies, cardiac contractility modulation, and percutaneous treatment of valvulopathies, are summarized in this article.

A multidisciplinary approach for the emergency care of patients with left ventricular assist devices: A practical guide

The use of a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) as a bridge-to-transplantation or destination therapy to support cardiac function in patients with end-stage heart failure (HF) is increasing in all developed countries. However, the expertise needed to implant and manage patients referred for LVAD treatment is limited to a few reference centers, which are often located far from the patient's home. Although patients undergoing LVAD implantation should be permanently referred to the LVAD center for the management and follow-up of the device also after implantation, they would refer to the local healthcare service for routine assistance and urgent health issues related to the device or generic devices. Therefore, every clinician, from a bigger to a smaller center, should be prepared to manage LVAD carriers and the possible risks associated with LVAD management. Particularly, emergency treatment of patients with LVAD differs slightly from conventional emergency protocols and requires specific knowledge and a multidisciplinary approach to avoid ineffective treatment or dangerous consequences. This review aims to provide a standard protocol for managing emergency and urgency in patients with LVAD, elucidating the role of each healthcare professional and emphasizing the importance of collaboration between the emergency department, in-hospital ward, and LVAD reference center, as well as algorithms designed to ensure timely, adequate, and effective treatment to patients with LVAD.

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy after percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage for acute cholecystitis in a patient with a left ventricle assist device: A case report and brief review of the literature (with video)

For acute cholecystitis in patients with left ventricular assist devices, the use of percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage to calm inflammation before planned laparoscopic cholecystectomy may be helpful in safely adjusting anticoagulation and in performing safe laparoscopic cholecystectomy, as demonstrated in this case.

Antithrombotic and anticoagulation therapies in cardiogenic shock: a critical review of the published literature

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a complex multifactorial clinical syndrome, developing as a continuum, and progressing from the initial insult (underlying cause) to the subsequent occurrence of organ failure and death. There is a large phenotypic variability in CS, as a result of the diverse aetiologies, pathogenetic mechanisms, haemodynamics, and stages of severity. Although early revascularization remains the most important intervention for CS in settings of acute myocardial infarction, the administration of timely and effective antithrombotic therapy is critical to improving outcomes in these patients. In addition, other clinical settings or non-acute myocardial infarction aetiologies, associated with high thrombotic risk, may require specific regimens of short-term or long-term antithrombotic therapy. In CS, altered tissue perfusion, inflammation, and multi-organ dysfunction induce unpredictable alterations to antithrombotic drugs' pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Other interventions used in the management of CS, such as mechanical circulatory support, renal replacement therapies, or targeted temperature management, influence both thrombotic and bleeding risks and may require specific antithrombotic strategies. In order to optimize safety and efficacy of these therapies in CS, antithrombotic management should be more adapted to CS clinical scenario or specific device, with individualized antithrombotic regimens in terms of type of treatment, dose, and duration. In addition, patients with CS require a close and appropriate monitoring of antithrombotic therapies to safely balance the increased risk of bleeding and thrombosis.

Assessment of humoral and cellular immunity induced by the BNT162b2 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in healthcare workers, elderly people, and immunosuppressed patients with autoimmune disease

The development of vaccines to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection has mainly relied on the induction of neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) to the Spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, but there is growing evidence that T cell immune response can contribute to protection as well. In this study, an anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) antibody assay and an INFγ-release assay (IGRA) were used to detect humoral and cellular responses to the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 vaccine in three separate cohorts of COVID-19-naïve patients: 108 healthcare workers (HCWs), 15 elderly people, and 5 autoimmune patients treated with immunosuppressive agents. After the second dose of vaccine, the mean values of anti-RBD antibodies (Abs) and INFγ were 123.33 U/mL (range 27.55-464) and 1513 mIU/mL (range 145-2500) in HCWs and 210.7 U/mL (range 3-500) and 1167 mIU/mL (range 83-2500) in elderly people. No correlations between age and immune status were observed. On the contrary, a weak but significant positive correlation was found between INFγ and anti-RBD Abs values (rho = 0.354, p = 0.003). As to the autoimmune cohort, anti-RBD Abs were not detected in the two patients with absent peripheral CD19+B cells, despite high INFγ levels being observed in all 5 patients after vaccination. Even though the clinical relevance of T cell response has not yet been established as a correlate of vaccine-induced protection, IGRA testing has showed optimal sensitivity and specificity to define vaccine responders, even in patients lacking a cognate antibody response to the vaccine.