First experience of percutaneous radio-frequency ablation for atrial flutter and atrial fibrillation in a patient with HeartMate II left ventricular assist device

Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in left ventricular assist device: A case report

INTRODUCTION

Mechanical circulatory support such as the left ventricular assist device (LVAD) has become widely implemented in the treatment of end-stage heart failure, whether as bridge-to-transplant or as destination therapy. The hemodynamic effects of arrhythmia on LVADs and its management are significant in determining the long-term outcome of these patients. Both atrial arrhythmia and ventricular arrhythmia are commonly seen after implantation of the device. There are no strict guidelines, however, on the need for intensive management of arrhythmias in LVAD. In this case report, we present a patient with new onset atrial fibrillation after LVAD implantation which leads to acute decompensating heart failure. The patient was treated with catheter ablation. The intervention demonstrated positive outcomes for this patient.

PATIENT CONCERNS

The patient was a Korean male, who presented with dyspnea, fatigue and generalized edema after persistent atrial fibrillation precipitated by implantation of the left ventricular assist device.

DIAGNOSIS

The patient was diagnosed with acute decompensating heart failure that was aggravated by recurrent atrial arrhythmia.

INTERVENTION

We attempted to relieve symptoms of right ventricular dysfunction by method of strict rhythm control in this patient. The patient underwent radiofrequency catheter ablation for recurrent atrial fibrillation.

OUTCOME

The patient showed improved clinical symptoms, BNP levels, and echocardiogram parameters immediately after the procedure as well as during long term outpatient follow up.

CONCLUSION

In this case report, we present the first successful case in Korea of atrial fibrillation in LVAD treated with catheter ablation. This case suggests setting catheter ablation as a routine first-line treatment for atrial arrhythmia in LVAD patients, especially when the arrhythmia predisposes the patient at risk for decompensating heart failure.

Ablation therapy for ventricular arrhythmias in patients with LVAD: Multiple faces of an electrophysiological challenge

Left ventricular assist device implantation is a recognized treatment option for patients with advanced heart failure refractory to medical therapy and can be used both as bridge to transplantation and as destination therapy. The risk of ventricular arrhythmias is common after left ventricular assist device implantation and is influenced by pre-, peri and post-operative determinants. The management of ventricular arrhythmias can be a challenge when they become refractory to medication or to device therapy and their impact on prognosis can be detrimental despite the mechanical support. In this setting, catheter ablation is being increasingly recognized as a feasible option for patients in which standard therapeutic strategies fail, but also with preventive purpose. Catheter ablation is being increasingly considered for the management of ventricular arrhythmias in patients with left ventricular assist device despite complex clinical and technical peculiarities due to the characteristics of the mechanical support. Much conflicting data exist regarding the predictors of success of the procedure and the rate of recurrence. In this review we discuss the latest evidences regarding catheter ablation of ventricular arrhythmias in this subset of patients, focusing on clinical characteristics, arrhythmia etiology, technical aspects and postprocedural features which must be considered by the electrophysiologist.

Influence of Atrial Fibrillation on Functional Tricuspid Regurgitation in Patients With HeartMate 3

Background

Functional tricuspid regurgitation (TR) can occur secondary to atrial fibrillation (AF). The impact of AF on functional TR and cardiovascular events is uncertain in patients with left ventricular assist devices. This study aimed to investigate the effect of AF on functional TR and cardiovascular events in patients with a HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device.

Methods and Results

We retrospectively reviewed 133 patients who underwent HeartMate 3 implantation at our center between November 2014 and November 2018. We excluded patients who had undergone previous or concomitant tricuspid valve procedures and those whose echocardiographic images were of insufficient quality. The primary end point was death and the presence of a cardiovascular event at 1 year. We defined cardiovascular event as a composite of death, stroke, and hospital readmission due to recurrent heart failure and significant residual TR as vena contracta width ≥3 mm. In total, 110 patients were included in this analysis. Patients were divided into 3 groups: no AF (n=51), paroxysmal AF (n=40), and persistent AF (PeAF) (n=19). Kaplan‐Meier analysis showed that patients with PeAF had the worst survival (no AF 98%, paroxysmal AF 98%, PeAF 84%, log‐rank P=0.038) and event‐free rate (no AF 93%, paroxysmal AF 89%, PeAF 72%, log‐rank P=0.048) at 1 year. Thirty‐one (28%) patients had residual TR 1 month after left ventricular assist device implantation. Patients with residual TR had a significantly poor prognosis compared with those without residual TR (log‐rank P=0.014).

Conclusions

PeAF was associated with increased mortality, cardiovascular events, and residual TR compared with no AF and paroxysmal AF.

Consequences of functional mitral regurgitation and atrial fibrillation in patients with left ventricular assist devices

BACKGROUND

Functional mitral regurgitation (MR) (FMR) and atrial fibrillation (AF) are common in patients undergoing left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. However, the impact of FMR and AF on clinical outcomes is uncertain. This study aimed to investigate the characteristics and prognostic significance of FMR and AF in patients with LVADs.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent LVAD implantation at our center between January 2010 and December 2017. We defined significant FMR as the ratio of MR color jet area to left atrial area of >20% and persistent or permanent AF (PeAF) as persistent or permanent AF at LVAD implantation.

RESULTS

A total of 380 patients were included in this analysis. Patients were divided into 6 groups: patients with no PeAF and no significant FMR (Group 1), patients with no PeAF but with significant FMR (Group 2), patients with PeAF but no significant FMR (Group 3), patients with PeAF and significant FMR (Group 4), patients with concomitant mitral valve surgery (MVS) at LVAD implantation and without PeAF (Group 5), and patients with concomitant MVS and with PeAF (Group 6). A total of 56 patients (15%) died within 2 years. Kaplan-Meier curve analysis demonstrated a 2-year survival of 81% in Group 1, 89% in Group 2, 87% in Group 3, 47% in Group 4, 87% in Group 5, and 79 % in Group 6 (log-rank test, p < 0.001). The multivariable Cox proportional-hazards model showed that classification in Group 4 was an independent predictor of mortality (hazard ratio, 4.31; 95% CI: 2.19-8.46; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The coexistence of significant FMR and PeAF may represent a poor prognostic marker in patients undergoing LVAD implantation.

Atrial arrhythmias in patients with left ventricular assist devices

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Atrial arrhythmias commonly occur in patients with advanced heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) who require left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) implantation. This review summarizes the current literature regarding the incidence, prevalence, and predictors of atrial arrhythmias in LVAD patients and its impact on the clinical outcomes. Moreover, we review the mechanisms and management strategies of atrial arrhythmias in this population.

RECENT FINDINGS

Atrial arrhythmias including atrial fibrillation, atrial flutter, and atrial tachycardia are highly prevalent in patients with advanced HFrEF before or after the LVAD implantation. Atrial arrhythmias have a significant impact on overall clinical outcome including survival, heart failure hospitalization, quality of life, thromboembolic events and resource utilization. Atrial fibrillation and other atrial arrhythmias frequently coexist in this population. In patients with atrial arrhythmias and LVAD, anticoagulation and cardiovascular implantable electronic devices should be closely monitored and managed to prevent thromboembolic events or inappropriate shocks. Rhythm and rate control strategies are comparable regarding overall clinical outcomes in this population. LVADs induce favorable atrial remodeling in patients with HFrEF.

SUMMARY

Atrial arrhythmias are highly common in LVAD patients and have significant impact on overall clinical outcomes. Further studies are needed to determine optimal management and prevention of atrial arrhythmias in LVAD population.

Insight into Atrial Fibrillation in LVAD Patients: From Clinical Implications to Prognosis

The use of left ventricular assist devices (LVADs), whether for destination therapy or bridge to transplantation, has gained increasing validation in recent years in patients with advanced heart failure. Arrhythmias can be the most challenging variables in the management of such patients but the main attention has always been focused on ventricular arrhythmias given the detrimental impact on mortality. Nevertheless, atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common rhythm disorder associated with advanced heart failure and may therefore characterize the LVADs' pre- and postimplantation periods. Indeed, the consequences of AF in the population suffering from standard heart failure may require a more comprehensive evaluation in the presence of or in sight of an LVAD, making the AF clinical management in these patients potentially complex. Several studies have been based on this subject with different and often conflicting results, leaving many questions unresolved. The purpose of this review is to summarize the main pieces of evidence about the clinical impact of AF in LVAD patients, underlining the main implications in terms of hemodynamics, thromboembolic risk, bleeding and prognosis. Therapeutic considerations about the clinical management of these patients are also made according to the latest evidence.

2019 EACTS Expert Consensus on long-term mechanical circulatory support

Long-term mechanical circulatory support (LT-MCS) is an important treatment modality for patients with severe heart failure. Different devices are available, and many-sometimes contradictory-observations regarding patient selection, surgical techniques, perioperative management and follow-up have been published. With the growing expertise in this field, the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) recognized a need for a structured multidisciplinary consensus about the approach to patients with LT-MCS. However, the evidence published so far is insufficient to allow for generation of meaningful guidelines complying with EACTS requirements. Instead, the EACTS presents an expert opinion in the LT-MCS field. This expert opinion addresses patient evaluation and preoperative optimization as well as management of cardiac and non-cardiac comorbidities. Further, extensive operative implantation techniques are summarized and evaluated by leading experts, depending on both patient characteristics and device selection. The faculty recognized that postoperative management is multidisciplinary and includes aspects of intensive care unit stay, rehabilitation, ambulatory care, myocardial recovery and end-of-life care and mirrored this fact in this paper. Additionally, the opinions of experts on diagnosis and management of adverse events including bleeding, cerebrovascular accidents and device malfunction are presented. In this expert consensus, the evidence for the complete management from patient selection to end-of-life care is carefully reviewed with the aim of guiding clinicians in optimizing management of patients considered for or supported by an LT-MCS device.

Clinical impact of newly developed atrial fibrillation complicated with longstanding ventricular fibrillation during left ventricular assist device support: A case report

BACKGROUND

Continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) improve survival and morbidity in patients with stage D heart failure. Management of LVADs for longer durations is necessary in some clinical settings, and a better understanding of the hemodynamics of patients using LVADs is warranted. Arrhythmia, including atrial (AA) and ventricular (VAs) arrhythmias, is a modifying factor of hemodynamics that is highly prevalent among patients with LVADs. However, the clinical impact of arrhythmias in various clinical settings in patients with LVAD, in which the hemodynamic load is likely to present as worsening of right heart failure, remains to be completely elucidated.

CASE PRESENTATION

We describe the case of a patient under sustained ventricular fibrillation for extraordinarily long duration who was stabilized using LVAD support and in whom newly developed atrial fibrillation led to a significant worsening of right heart failure while using an LVAD.

CONCLUSION

This case demonstrates the substantial clinical impact of AAs in the management of right heart failure using an LVAD.

Device Therapy and Arrhythmia Management in Left Ventricular Assist Device Recipients: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are an increasingly used strategy for the management of patients with advanced heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Although these devices effectively improve survival, atrial and ventricular arrhythmias are common, predispose these patients to additional risk, and complicate patient management. However, there is no consensus on best practices for the medical management of these arrhythmias or on the optimal timing for procedural interventions in patients with refractory arrhythmias. Although the vast majority of these patients have preexisting cardiovascular implantable electronic devices or cardiac resynchronization therapy, given the natural history of heart failure, it is common practice to maintain cardiovascular implantable electronic device detection and therapies after LVAD implantation. Available data, however, are conflicting on the efficacy of and optimal device programming after LVAD implantation. Therefore, the primary objective of this scientific statement is to review the available evidence and to provide guidance on the management of atrial and ventricular arrhythmias in this unique patient population, as well as procedural interventions and cardiovascular implantable electronic device and cardiac resynchronization therapy programming strategies, on the basis of a comprehensive literature review by electrophysiologists, heart failure cardiologists, cardiac surgeons, and cardiovascular nurse specialists with expertise in managing these patients. The structure and design of commercially available LVADs are briefly reviewed, as well as clinical indications for device implantation. The relevant physiological effects of long-term exposure to continuous-flow circulatory support are highlighted, as well as the mechanisms and clinical significance of arrhythmias in the setting of LVAD support.

Characteristics of ventricular tachycardia ablation in patients with continuous flow left ventricular assist devices

BACKGROUND

Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are increasingly used as a bridge to cardiac transplantation or as destination therapy. Patients with LVADs are at high risk for ventricular arrhythmias. This study describes ventricular arrhythmia characteristics and ablation in patients implanted with a Heart Mate II device.

METHODS AND RESULTS

All patients with a Heart Mate II device who underwent ventricular arrhythmia catheter ablation at 9 tertiary centers were included. Thirty-four patients (30 male, age 58±10 years) underwent 39 ablation procedures. The underlying cardiomyopathy pathogenesis was ischemic in 21 and nonischemic in 13 patients with a mean left ventricular ejection fraction of 17%±5% before LVAD implantation. One hundred and ten ventricular tachycardias (VTs; cycle lengths, 230-740 ms, arrhythmic storm n=28) and 2 ventricular fibrillation triggers were targeted (25 transseptal, 14 retrograde aortic approaches). Nine patients required VT ablation <1 month after LVAD implantation because of intractable VT. Only 10/110 (9%) of the targeted VTs were related to the Heart Mate II cannula. During follow-up, 7 patients were transplanted and 10 died. Of the remaining 17 patients, 13 were arrhythmia-free at 25±15 months. In 1 patient with VT recurrence, change of turbine speed from 9400 to 9000 rpm extinguished VT.

CONCLUSIONS

Catheter ablation of VT among LVAD recipients is feasible and reasonably safe even soon after LVAD implantation. Intrinsic myocardial scar, rather than the apical cannula, seems to be the dominant substrate.

Medical management of patients with continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices

OPINION STATEMENT

The prevalence of patients living with advanced heart failure continues to rise. For a subset of these patients, continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are a life-saving therapy. Given the efficacy and durability of contemporary LVAD devices, their use has increased exponentially in recent years. The medical management of patients with an LVAD is an area of expertise for advanced heart failure clinicians, but a general understanding of the initial approach to, and stabilization of, LVAD patients is an important skillset for many health care providers. The rapidly changing field of the medical management of LVAD patients is largely based on clinical experience and limited published data. In this manuscript, we integrate the available published data on the medical management of LVAD patients with the growing clinical experience.

Ablation of atrial tachycardia and atrial flutter in heart failure

Atrial tachycardia and atrial flutter are common tachyarrhythmias in the heart failure population. They commonly lead to, exacerbate, and increase the morbidity and mortality associated with heart failure and, thereby, warrant urgent and early definitive therapy in the form of catheter ablation. Catheter ablation requires careful patient stabilization and extensive preprocedural planning, particularly with regards to anesthesia, strategy, catheter choice, mapping system, and fluid balance, to increase efficacy and limit adverse effects. Heart failure may limit the success of catheter ablation with higher reported recurrence rates, and in selected patients, a hybrid epicardial-endocardial ablation can be considered.