Effect of concomitant mitral valve procedures for severe mitral regurgitation during left ventricular assist device implantation

Prosthetic Valve Fate in Patients With Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Devices

Prosthetic valve-related morbidity and mortality in patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) remain unclear. We retrospectively reviewed patients who received a HeartMate II or 3 LVAD at our center between April 2004 and December 2022. Patients with a valve prosthesis in any position were included. Of the 726 LVAD recipients, 74 (10.2%) underwent valve replacement before (n = 37, 50.0%), concomitantly with (n = 32, 43.2%), or after (n = 6, 8.1%) LVAD insertion. Prosthetic valves were implanted in the aortic (n = 32), mitral (n = 23), and tricuspid (n = 26) positions. Mechanical valves were present in eight (three aortic, five mitral) patients. At a median follow-up of 1.97 years post-VAD (interquartile range [IQR]: 0.56-4.58 years), there was one valve-related death due to severe aortic bioprosthetic insufficiency. Five of 28 (17.9%) patients with an aortic bioprosthesis had evidence of dysfunction on follow-up echocardiography. Median time to first sign of aortic bioprosthetic valve dysfunction was 1 (IQR: 0.6-5.1) year from time of LVAD with the prosthesis in place and 10.8 (IQR: 9.5-12.6) years from date of initial valve insertion. Prosthetic valve-related mortality or reinterventions are uncommon in patients with LVADs; however, bioprosthetic aortic valve dysfunction can develop less than 1 year after LVAD implantation.

Effect of Preoperative Mitral Regurgitation on LVAD Outcomes in Patients with Elevated Pulmonary Vascular Resistance

PURPOSE

In patients with end-stage heart failure who undergo left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation, higher pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) is associated with higher right heart failure rates and ineligibility for heart transplant. Concomitant mitral regurgitation (MR) could potentially worsen pulmonary hemodynamics and lead to worse outcomes; however, its effects in this patient population have not been specifically examined.

METHODS

Using an institutional database spanning November 2003 to August 2017, we retrospectively identified patients with elevated PVR who underwent LVAD implantation. Patients were stratified by concurrent MR: moderate/severe (PVR + MR) vs. mild/none (PVR - MR). Cumulative incidence functions and Fine-Gray competing risk regression were performed to assess the effect of MR on heart transplant rates and overall survival during index LVAD support.

RESULTS

Of 644 LVAD recipients, 232 (171 HeartMate II, 59 HeartWare, 2 HeartMate III) had baseline PVR > 3 Woods units; of these, 124 (53%) were INTERMACS 1-2, and 133 (57%) had moderate/severe MR (≥ 3 +). Patients with PVR + MR had larger a baseline left ventricular end-diastolic diameter than patients with PVR - MR (87.9 ± 38.2 mm vs. 75.9 ± 38.0 mm; P = 0.02). Median clinical follow-up was 18.8 months (interquartile range: 4.7-36.4 months). Moderate/severe MR was associated with lower mortality rates during index LVAD support (adjusted hazard ratio 0.64, 95% CI 0.41-0.98; P = 0.045) and higher heart transplant rates (adjusted odds ratio 2.86, 95% CI 1.31-6.25; P = 0.009). No differences in stroke, gastrointestinal bleeding, or right heart failure rates were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Among LVAD recipients with elevated preoperative PVR, those with moderate/severe MR had better overall survival and higher transplant rates than those with mild/no MR. These hypothesis-generating findings could be explained by incremental LVAD benefits resulting from reduction of MR and better LV unloading in a subset of patients with larger ventricles at baseline. In patients with preoperative elevated PVR, MR severity may be a prognostic sign that can inform patient selection for end-stage heart failure therapy.

Left ventricular assist device implantation and concomitant mitral valve surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The management of concomitant valvular lesions in patients undergoing left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation remains a topic of debate. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the existing evidence on postoperative outcomes following LVAD implantation, with and without concomitant MV surgery.

METHODS

A systematic database search was conducted as per PRISMA guidelines, of original articles comparing LVAD alone to LVAD plus concomitant MV surgery up to February 2023. The primary outcomes assessed were overall mortality and early mortality, while secondary outcomes included stroke, need for right ventricular assist device (RVAD) implantation, postoperative mitral valve regurgitation, major bleeding, and renal dysfunction.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 10 studies comprising 32 184 patients. It revealed that concomitant MV surgery during LVAD implantation did not significantly affect overall mortality (OR:0.83; 95% CI: 0.53 to 1.29; p = 0.40), early mortality (OR:1.17; 95% CI: 0.63 to 2.17; p = 0.63), stroke, need for RVAD implantation, postoperative mitral valve regurgitation, major bleeding, or renal dysfunction. These findings suggest that concomitant MV surgery appears not to confer additional benefits in terms of these clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Based on the available evidence, concomitant MV surgery during LVAD implantation does not appear to have a significant impact on postoperative outcomes. However, decision-making regarding MV surgery should be individualized, considering patient-specific factors and characteristics. Further research with prospective studies focusing on specific patient populations and newer LVAD devices is warranted to provide more robust evidence and guide clinical practice in the management of valvular lesions in LVAD recipients.

Pathophysiology and management of valvular disease in patients with destination left ventricular assist devices

Over the last two decades, implantable continuous flow left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) have proven to be invaluable tools for the management of selected advanced heart failure patients, improving patient longevity and quality of life. The presence of concomitant valvular pathology, including that involving the tricuspid, mitral, and aortic valve, has important implications relating to the decision to move forward with LVAD implantation. Furthermore, the presence of concomitant valvular pathology often influences the surgical strategy for LVAD implantation. Concomitant valve repair or replacement is not uncommonly required in such circumstances, which increases surgical complexity and has demonstrated prognostic implications both short and longer term following LVAD implantation. Beyond the index operation, it is also well established that certain valvular pathologies may develop or worsen over time following LVAD support. The presence of pre-existing valvular pathology or that which develops following LVAD implant is of particular importance to the destination therapy LVAD patient population. As these patients are not expected to have the opportunity for heart transplantation in the future, optimization of LVAD support including ameliorating valvular disease is critical for the maximization of patient longevity and quality of life. As collective experience has grown over time, the ability of clinicians to effectively address concomitant valvular pathology in LVAD patients has improved in the pre-implant, implant, and post-implant phase, through both medical management and procedural optimization. Nevertheless, there remains uncertainty over many facets of concomitant valvular pathology in advanced heart failure patients, and the understanding of how to best approach these conditions in the LVAD patient population continues to evolve. Herein, we present a comprehensive review of the current state of the field relating to the pathophysiology and management of valvular disease in destination LVAD patients.

Role of the mitral valve in left ventricular assist device pathophysiology

Functional mitral regurgitation (MR) in the setting of heart failure results from progressive dilatation of the left ventricle (LV) and mitral annulus. This leads to leaflet tethering with posterior displacement. Contrary to common assumptions, MR often does not resolve with LVAD decompression of the LV alone. The negative impact of significant (moderate-severe) mitral regurgitation in the LVAD setting is becoming better recognized in terms of its harmful effect on right heart function, pulmonary vascular resistance and hospital readmissions. However, controversies remain regarding the threshold for intervention and management. At present, there are no consensus indications for the repair of significant mitral regurgitation at the time of LVAD implantation due to the conflicting data regarding potential adverse effects of MR on clinical outcomes. In this review, we summarize the current understanding of MR pathophysiology in patients supported with LVAD and potential future management strategies.

Impact of concomitant cardiac valvular surgery during implantation of continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices: A European registry for patients with mechanical circulatory support (EUROMACS) analysis

BACKGROUND

We investigated the clinical outcomes after cardiac valvular surgery procedures concomitant (CCPs) with left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation compared to propensity score (PS) matched controls using the European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support (EUROMACS) data.

METHODS

Between 2006 and 2018, 2760 continuous-flow LVAD patients were identified. Of these, 533 underwent a CCP during the LVAD implant.

RESULTS

Cardiopulmonary bypass time (p < 0.001) and time for implant (p < 0.001) were both significantly longer in the LVAD+CCP group. Hospital mortality was comparable between the two groups from the unmatched population (15.7% vs. 14.1%, p = 0.073). Similarly, short-to-mid-term survival was similar in both groups, with 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival rates of 67.9%, 48.2%, and 27.7% versus 66.4%, 46.1%, and 26%, respectively (log-rank, p = 0.25). The results were similar in the PS-matched population. Hospital mortality was comparable between the two groups (18.9% vs. 17.4%, p = 0.074). The short-to-mid-term Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was similar for both groups, with 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival rates of 63.4%, 49.2%, and 24.7% versus 66.5%, 46%, and 25.1%, respectively (log-rank, p = 0.81). In the unmatched population, LVAD+CCP patients had longer intensive care unit (ICU) stays (p < 0.0001), longer mechanical ventilation time (p = 0.001), a higher rate of temporary right ventricular assist device (RVAD) support (p = 0.033), and a higher rate of renal replacement therapy (n = 35, 6.6% vs. n = 89, 4.0%, p = 0.014). In the PS-matched population, the LVAD+CCP patients had longer ICU stays (p = 0.019) and longer mechanical ventilation time (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The effect of additive valvular procedures (CCPs) does not seem to affect short-term survival, significantly, based on our registry data analysis. However, the decision to perform CCPs should be balanced with the projected type of surgery and preoperative characteristics. LVAD+CCP patients remain a delicate population and adverse device-related events should be strictly monitored and managed.

Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation in Patients with Preoperative Severe Mitral Regurgitation

We examined cardiac features associated with residual mitral regurgitation (MR) following continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (cfLVAD) implant. From 2003 to 2017, 134 patients with severe MR underwent cfVLAD implant without mitral valve (MV) intervention. Echocardiographic (echo) assessment occurred pre-cfLVAD, early post-cfLVAD, and at last available echo. Ventricular and atrial volumes were calculated from established formulas and normalized to be predicted. Cluster analysis based on preoperative normalized left ventricular and atrial volumes, and MV height identified grades 1, 2, and 3 with progressively larger cardiac chamber sizes. Median early echo follow-up was 0.92 (0.55, 1.45) months and the last follow-up was 15.12 (5.28, 38.28) months. Mitral regurgitation improved early after cfLVAD by 2.10 ± 1.16 grades (p < 0.01). Mitral regurgitation severity at the last echocardiogram positively correlated with the preoperative left ventricular volume (p = 0.014, R = 0.212), left atrial volume (p = 0.007, R = 0.233), MV anteroposterior height (p = 0.032, R = 0.185), and MV mediolateral diameter (p = 0.043, R = 0.175). Morphologically, smaller grade 1 hearts were correlated with MR resolution at the late follow-up (p = 0.023). Late right ventricular failure (RVF) at the last clinical follow-up was less in grade 1 (4/48 [8.3%]) compared with grades 2 and 3 (26/86 [30.2%]), p = 0.004). Grade 1 cardiac dimensions correlates with improvement in severe MR and had less late RVF.

Validation of mitral regurgitation reversibility in patients with HeartMate 3 implantation

The resolution of functional mitral valve regurgitation (MR) in patients awaiting left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation is discussed controversially. The present study analyzed MR and echocardiographic parameters of the third-generation LVAD HeartMate 3 (HM3) over 3 years. Of 135 LVAD patients (with severe MR, n = 33; with none, mild, or moderate MR, n = 102), data of transthoracic echocardiography were included preoperatively to LVAD implantation, up to 1 month postoperatively, and at 1, 2, and 3 years after LVAD implantation. Demographic data and clinical characteristics were collected. Severe MR was reduced immediately after LVAD implantation in all patients. The echocardiographic parameters left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (P < .001), right ventricular end-diastolic diameter (P < .001), tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (P < .001), and estimated pulmonary artery pressure (P < .001) decreased after HM3 implantation independently from the grade of MR prior to implantation and remained low during the 2 years follow-up period. Following LVAD implantation, right heart failure, ventricular arrhythmias, ischemic stroke as well as pump thrombosis and bleeding events were comparable between the groups. The incidences of death and cardiac death did not differ between the patient groups. Furthermore, the Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that survival was comparable between the groups (P = .073). HM3 implantation decreases preoperative severe MR immediately after LVAD implantation. This effect is long-lasting in most patients and reinforces the LVAD implantation without MR surgery. The complication rates and survival were comparable between patients with and without severe MR.

Left thoracotomy vs full sternotomy for centrifugal durable LVAD implantation: 1-year outcome comparison post-LVAD and post-heart transplantation

Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantations have traditionally been approached through a full median sternotomy (FS). Recently, a minimally invasive left thoracotomy (LT) approach has been popularized. This study sought to compare the outcomes of FS and LT patients post-primary LVAD implantation and post-subsequent heart transplant (HT). This was a single-center retrospective study. 83 patients who underwent primary centrifugal durable LVAD implantation from January 2014 to June 2018 were included (FS, n = 41; LT, n = 42). 41 patients had a subsequent HT (FS, n = 19; LT, n = 22). Pre-operative patient demographics, intraoperative variables, post-operative 1-year survival, length of hospital stay, complications, and outcomes for LVAD implantation and following HT were analyzed. Intraoperative data showed that the LT group had a 23.4% longer mean LVAD implant surgical time (p < 0.01). One-year post-LVAD survival was similar between the two groups (p = 0.05). Complication rates, with the exception of the rate of hemorrhagic stroke (p = 0.04) post-LVAD implant were similar. One-year survival post-HT was similar between groups (p = 0.35). Complication rates and mean length of hospital stay were also similar (p = 1.0) post-HT. Our study demonstrated that LT approach does not negatively affect post-LVAD implantation or post-HT outcomes. Further, larger studies may determine more detailed effects of LT approach.

Persistent mitral regurgitation after left ventricular assist device: a clinical conundrum

Aims

Persistent mitral valve regurgitation (MR) after continuous flow left ventricular assist device implantation (cfLVAD) is associated with pulmonary hypertension and right ventricular failure with variable effects on survival across published studies. The aim of this study is to determine the incidence and predictors of persistent MR at 6‐month follow‐up after cfLVAD implantation and its impact on survival, haemodynamics, right ventricular function, and morbidity.

Methods and results

We performed a retrospective review of all adult cfLVAD recipients from January 2012 to June 2017 at a single tertiary university hospital with follow‐up until April 2019. Primary outcome was to compare survival between patients with no‐to‐mild compared with persistent moderate‐to‐severe MR at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included right heart failure (RHF), length of stay, re‐hospitalizations, and composite of death, transplant, and pump exchange during the length of follow‐up. Final analytic sample was 111 patients. The incidence of persistent moderate or severe MR at 6 months was 26%. Significant predictors of persistent MR at 6 months were left atrium dimension and volume. The group with persistent moderate‐to‐severe MR at 6 months had higher incidence of RHF at 6 months (45% vs. 25%, P = 0.04). There was no difference in survival at 1 year between the groups (no‐to‐mild MR 85.5%, moderate‐to‐severe MR 87.9%, Wilcoxon P‐value = 0.63). There was no difference in re‐hospitalizations, length of stay, composite of death, transplant, or pump exchange during the length of follow‐up between the comparison groups.

Conclusions

Persistent moderate‐to‐severe MR after cfLVAD implantation is present in one fourth of patients and is associated with increased incidence of RHF, higher mean pulmonary pressure, and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure with no effect on 1 year survival. Increased left atrium size was associated with persistent moderate‐to‐severe MR at 6 months.

Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Devices and Valvular Heart Disease: A Comprehensive Review

Mechanical circulatory support with implantable durable continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVADs) represents an established surgical treatment option for patients with advanced heart failure refractory to guideline-directed medical therapy. CF-LVAD therapy has been demonstrated to offer significant survival, functional, and quality-of-life benefits. However, nearly one-half of patients with advanced heart failure undergoing implantation of a CF-LVAD have important valvular heart disease (VHD) present at the time of device implantation or develop VHD during support that can lead to worsening right or left ventricular dysfunction and result in development of recurrent heart failure, more frequent adverse events, and higher mortality. In this review, we summarize the recent evidence related to the pathophysiology and treatment of VHD in the setting of CF-LAVD support and include a review of the specific valve pathologies of aortic insufficiency (AI), mitral regurgitation (MR), and tricuspid regurgitation (TR). Recent data demonstrate an increasing appreciation and understanding of how VHD may adversely affect the hemodynamic benefits of CF-LVAD support. This is particularly relevant for MR, where increasing evidence now demonstrates that persistent MR after CF-LVAD implantation can contribute to worsening right heart failure and recurrent heart failure symptoms. Standard surgical interventions and novel percutaneous approaches for treatment of VHD in the setting of CF-LVAD support, such as transcatheter aortic valve replacement or transcatheter mitral valve repair, are available, and indications to intervene for VHD in the setting of CF-LVAD support continue to evolve.