Single-center experience of the bridge-to-bridge strategy using the Nipro paracorporeal ventricular assist device

Bridge from central extracorporeal life support is a risk factor of cerebrovascular accidents after durable left ventricular assist device implantation

A bridging strategy from extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is effective in salvage and a bridge to recovery or to a durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) for acute refractory heart failure. However, the correlation of this strategy with adverse events after durable LVAD implantation has not been fully investigated. This study enrolled 158 consecutive patients who had either the HeartMate II or HeartMate 3 and were implanted for bridge-to-transplantation. These devices were implanted as the primary mechanical support device in 115 patients, whereas the remaining 43 underwent LVAD implantation as the bridge from central ECLS. The primary study endpoint was all-cause mortality and cerebrovascular accidents (CVAs) after durable LVAD implantation, and the secondary endpoints were adverse events. Overall survival was not significantly different between the two groups. In contrast, the probability of CVAs was significantly greater in the bridge group than in the primary group (probability of CVAs, P = 0.002; log-rank test). In Cox multivariate logistic regression analysis, a bridge from central ECLS was an independent predictive factor of CVAs (hazard ratio 4.27, 95% confidence interval 1.43-12.8; P = 0.0095). Patients who are bridged from central ECLS are more frequently complicated by CVAs compared with those who undergo primary implantation of a durable LVAD, but survival is not significantly different between the two groups. A bridge from central ECLS is an independent predictive factor of CVAs post-implantation of an LVAD.

"BAX602" in Preventing Surgical Adhesion after Extracorporeal Ventricular Assist Device Implantation for Refractory Congestive Heart Failure: Study Protocol for a Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

The high surgical risk in redo cardiac surgery is largely attributed to adhesions around the epicardium and the great vessels. BAX602 is an adhesion prevention reagent composed of two synthetic polyethylene glycols. Spraying BAX602 over the epicardium and the great vessels reportedly contributes to adhesion prevention after pediatric cardiac surgery. The present study aims to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of BAX602 spray in patients undergoing extracorporeal ventricular assist device implantation surgery to treat refractory congestive heart failure.

METHODS AND DESIGN

This investigator-initiated, multicenter, pivotal, two-arm, open-label, randomized trial will include a total of 30 patients. The primary outcome measure is the severity of adhesions, which will be evaluated during re-sternotomy surgery performed 2-12 weeks after the primary extracorporeal ventricular assist device implantation surgery. The adhesion severity will be evaluated at five predefined sites using a four-grade adhesion evaluation score (0 = no adhesion; 1 = filmy and avascular adhesion; 2 = dense/vascular adhesion; 3 = cohesive adhesion). This measure will be summarized in two ways to evaluate the effect of BAX602: (1) the total score of the severity of adhesions at all five sites (ranging from 0 to 15), and (2) the total number of sites with dense/vascular or cohesive adhesions (ranging from 0 to 5).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study findings will be disseminated at regional, national, and international conferences and through peer-reviewed scientific journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered in the UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN-CTR: UMIN000038998) on 6 January 2020.

Bridge-to-Bridge Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation Strategy vs. Primary Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation Strategy

BACKGROUND

The bridge-to-bridge (BTB) strategy, a conversion to durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) after stabilization using surgical temporary mechanical circulatory supports for a couple of months, is not uncommon in Japan. However, its effect on clinical outcomes in comparison with a primary durable LVAD implantation strategy remains unknown.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Data of 837 consecutive patients (median age 45, 73% males) who underwent durable LVAD implantation as BTB (n=168) or primary implant (n=669) between April 2011 and April 2019 were retrospectively reviewed from the prospective multicenter Japanese mechanically assisted circulatory support registry. The BTB group was younger and had comparable end-organ function, better hemodynamic profile, and longer operative time compared with the primary implant group at baseline. The 3-year survival was 80% vs. 87% (P=0.007) for the BTB and primary implant groups respectively, with greater observed rates of stroke and infection as the predominant causes of death. The BTB strategy was independently associated with increased 3-year mortality (hazard ratio 2.69 [1.43-5.07], P=0.002) in addition to other significant risk factors.

CONCLUSIONS

The BTB cohort had comparable baseline characteristics to the primary implant cohort at the time of durable LVAD conversion, but had lower 3-year survival. Detailed analysis clarifying the causality of this finding should improve outcomes with the BTB strategy.

Impact of bridge-to-bridge strategies from paracorporeal to implantable left ventricular assist devices on the pre-heart transplant outcome: A single-center analysis of 134 cases

BACKGROUND

In Japan, patients with heart failure who have a paracorporeal left ventricular assist device (pLVAD) and cannot be weaned from the VAD may undergo conversion to implantable continuous-flow LVAD (iLVAD) via a bridge-to-bridge (BTB) strategy for bridge-to-transplantation (BTT). This study aimed to evaluate the real-world clinical status of BTB strategies.

METHODS

Among 134 patients who underwent iLVAD implantation for BTT, 34 patients underwent conversion from pLVAD to iLVAD (BTB group) and 100 patients underwent iLVAD implantation primarily (primary iLVAD group). The clinical characteristics and outcomes were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

No significant difference was found in the overall survival between the two groups (p = 0.26; log-rank test). However, the 1-year survival rate and the 1-year freedom from the composite events of death, stroke, systemic infection, and bleeding rate were lower in the BTB group than in the primary iLVAD group (survival rate, 88.2% vs. 99.0%, p = 0.0040; composite event-free survival rate, 26.1% vs. 49.8%, p = 0.030; log-rank test). Multivariate analysis indicated that the BTB strategy [hazard ratio (HR) 1.70, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.03-2.72; p=0.036] and serum total bilirubin levels at iLVAD implantation [HR 1.31, 95% CI 1.00-1.65; p=0.043] were independent predictors of 1-year composite events.

CONCLUSIONS

The BTB strategy is useful in providing long-term survival in patients with acute critical diseases. However, the early mortality rate after conversion is higher in patients who underwent the BTB strategy.