Readmission Patterns During Long-Term Follow-Up After Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation

Survival and Readmission Burden in Advanced Heart Failure Patients Managed With Ventricular Assist Device Versus Continued Medical Therapy

As questions remain about the risk-benefit of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) therapy, we evaluated the association between LVAD versus medical therapy for the competing risk of all-cause mortality and all-cause readmission. Among consecutive patients evaluated for advanced heart failure (HF) therapy, 260 were referred for LVAD implantation and 292 continued medical therapy in this retrospective, observational database study. At 2 years, all-cause mortality was significantly higher among medically managed patients versus LVAD recipients (37% vs. 25%, p = 0.014). Separation in event rates appeared within 3 months and was sustained throughout follow-up. The cumulative incidence rate of all-cause readmissions at 2 years was higher among LVAD recipients (78% vs. 40%, p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, compared with medical therapy, LVAD therapy was associated with a significant 35% lower risk of death (p = 0.005), driven by a 57% reduction in the risk of death within the first 3 months (p < 0.001), and a 2.8-fold increased risk of readmission. Among medically managed patients, lower baseline hemoglobin and blood pressure, older age, and increased creatinine were predictors of death. In conclusion, among patients with advanced HF, LVAD therapy was associated with pronounced survival benefit, but a higher 2-year readmission rate compared with medical management.

Sex-based differences in left ventricular assist device clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

Heart failure (HF) continues to be a significant public health issue, posing a heightened risk of morbidity and mortality for both genders. Despite the widespread use of left ventricular assist device (LVAD), the influence of gender differences on clinical outcomes following implantation remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

We investigated the impact of gender differences on readmission rates and other outcomes following LVAD implantation in patients admitted with advanced HF.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of patients who underwent LVAD implantation for advanced HF between 2014 and 2020, using the Nationwide Readmissions Database. Our study cohort was divided into male and female patients. The primary outcome was 30-day readmission (30-dr), while secondary outcomes were inpatient mortality, length of stay (LOS), procedural complication rates, and periadmission rates. Multivariate linear, Cox, and logistic regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

During the study period, 11,492 patients with advanced HF who had LVAD placement were identified. Of these, 22% (n = 2532) were females and 78% (n = 8960) were males. The mean age was 53.9 ± 10.8 years for females and 56.3 ± 10.5 years for males (adjusted Wald test, p < 0.01). Readmissions were higher in females (21% vs. 17%, p = 0.02) when compared to males. Cox regression analysis showed higher readmission events (hazard ratio: 1.24, 95% confidence interval: 1.01-1.52, p = 0.03) in females when compared to males. Inpatient mortality, LOS, and most procedural complication rates were not statistically significantly different between the two groups (p > 0.05, all).

CONCLUSION

Women experienced higher readmission rates and were more likely to be readmitted multiple times after LVAD implantation when compared to their male counterparts. However, there were no significant sex-based differences in inpatient mortality, LOS, and nearly all procedural complication rates. These findings suggest that female patients may require closer monitoring and targeted interventions to reduce readmission rates.

Impact of Frailty on Left Ventricular Assist Device Clinical Outcomes

Frailty is a clinical syndrome prevalent in older adults and carries poor outcomes in patients with heart failure. We investigated the impact of frailty on left ventricular assist device (LVAD) clinical outcomes. The Nationwide Readmission Database was used to retrospectively identify patients with a primary diagnosis of heart failure who underwent LVAD implantation during their hospitalization from 2014 to 2020. Patients were categorized into frail and nonfrail groups using the Hospital Frailty Risk Score. Cox and logistic regression were used to predict the impact of frailty on inpatient mortality, 30-day readmissions, length of stay, and discharge to a skilled nursing facility. LVADs were implanted in 11,465 patients who met the inclusion criteria. There was more LVAD use in patients who were identified as frail (81.6% vs 18.4%, p <0.001). The Cox regression analyses revealed that LVAD insertion was not associated with increased inpatient mortality in frail patients (hazard ratio 1.15, 95% confidence interval 0.81 to 1.65, p = 0.427). Frail patients also did not experience a higher likelihood of readmissions within 30 days (hazard ratio 1.15, 95% confidence interval 0.91 to 1.44, p = 0.239). LVAD implantation did not result in a significant increase in inpatient mortality or readmission rates in frail patients compared with nonfrail patients. These data support continued LVAD use in this high-risk patient population.

Racial differences in clinical characteristics and readmission burden among patients with a left ventricular-assist device

BACKGROUND

There are limited data regarding racial disparities in outcomes after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. The purpose of this study was to compare clinical characteristics and the burden of readmissions by race among patients with LVAD.

METHODS

The study population included 461 patients implanted with LVADs at the University of Rochester Medical Center, NY from May 2008 to March 2020. Patients were stratified by race as White patients (N = 396 [86%]) and Black patients (N = 65 [14%]). The Anderson-Gill recurrent regression analysis was used to assess the independent association between race and the total number of admissions after LVAD implant during an average follow-up of 2.45 ± 2.30 years.

RESULTS

Black patients displayed significant differences in baseline clinical characteristics compared to White patients, including a younger age, a lower frequency of ischemic etiology, and a higher baseline serum creatinine. Black patients had a significantly higher burden of readmissions after LVAD implantation as compared with White patients 10 versus 7 (average number of hospitalizations per patient at 5 years of follow-up, respectively) translated into a significant 39% increased risk of recurrent readmissions after multivariate adjustment (Hazard ratio 1.39, 95% CI; 1.07-1.82, p 0.013).

CONCLUSION

Black LVAD patients experience an increased burden of readmissions compared with White patients, after adjustment for baseline differences in demographics and clinical characteristics. Future studies should assess the underlying mechanisms for this increased risk including the effect of social determinants of health on the risk of readmissions in LVAD recipients.

Left Ventricular Assist Devices: A Primer For the General Cardiologist

Durable implantable left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have been shown to improve survival and quality of life for patients with stage D heart failure. Even though LVADs remain underused overall, the number of patients with heart failure supported with LVADs is steadily increasing. Therefore, general cardiologists will increasingly encounter these patients. In this review, we provide an overview of the field of durable LVADs. We discuss which patients should be referred for consideration of advanced heart failure therapies. We summarize the basic principles of LVAD care, including medical and surgical considerations. We also discuss the common complications associated with LVAD therapy, including bleeding, infections, thrombotic issues, and neurologic events. Our goal is to provide a primer for the general cardiologist in the recognition of patients who could benefit from LVADs and in the principles of managing patients with LVAD. Our hope is to "demystify" LVADs for the general cardiologist.

Hospitalization Patterns and Impact of a Magnetically-Levitated Left Ventricular Assist Device in the MOMENTUM 3 Trial

BACKGROUND

In the MOMENTUM 3 (Multicenter Study of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy with HeartMate 3) pivotal trial, the HeartMate 3 (HM3) fully magnetically levitated left ventricular assist device (LVAD) demonstrated superiority over the axial-flow HeartMate II (HMII) LVAD. The patterns and predictors of hospitalizations with the HM3 LVAD have not been characterized.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to determine causes, predictors, and impact of hospitalizations during LVAD support.

METHODS

Patients discharged after LVAD implantation were analyzed. In the pivotal trial, 485 recipients of HM3 were compared with 471 recipients of HMII. The pivotal trial HM3 group was also compared to 949 recipients of HM3 in the postapproval phase within the trial portfolio. Predictors of cause-specific rehospitalization were analyzed.

RESULTS

The rates of rehospitalization were lower with HM3 LVAD than with HMII LVAD in the pivotal trial (225.7 vs 246.4 events per 100 patient-years; P < 0.05). Overall, rehospitalization rates and duration were similar in the HM3 postapproval phase and pivotal trial but prolonged hospitalizations (>7 days) were less frequent (rate ratio: 0.90 [95% CI: 0.80-0.98]; P < 0.05). In HM3 recipients, the most frequent causes of rehospitalization included infection, heart failure (HF)-related events, and bleeding. First rehospitalization caused by HF-related event versus other causes was associated with reduced survival (HR: 2.2 [95% CI: 1.3-3.9]; P = 0.0014). Male sex, non-White race, presence of cardiac resynchronization therapy/implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, obesity, higher right atrial pressure, smaller LV size, longer duration of index hospitalization, and lower estimated glomerular filtration rate at index discharge predicted HF hospitalizations.

CONCLUSIONS

Contemporary support with the HM3 fully magnetically levitated LVAD is associated with a lower hospitalization burden than with prior pumps; however, rehospitalizations for infection, HF, and bleeding remain important challenges for progress in the patient journey. (MOMENTUM 3 IDE Clinical Study, NCT02224755; MOMENTUM 3 Continued Access Protocol [MOMENTUM 3 CAP], NCT02892955).

Long-term Outcomes in Ventricular Assist Device Outflow Cannula Anastomosis to the Descending Aorta

BACKGROUND

Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation via thoracotomy with outflow cannula anastomosis to the descending aorta is an alternative implantation technique that uses a single incision and avoids anterior mediastinal planes. We evaluated long-term survival and hospital readmissions following LVAD implantation via thoracotomy with outflow cannula anastomosis to the descending aorta.

METHODS

Adult patients implanted with a continuous flow centrifugal LVAD at an academic center were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were assigned to one of the two cohorts based on the anastomosis site of the LVAD outflow cannula: ascending aorta cohort (Asc-Ao) and descending aorta cohort (Desc-Ao). Primary and secondary outcomes were survival and hospital readmissions during device support. Readmission analysis included patients with ≥30-day survival following discharge. Multivariable analysis and propensity score matching were performed.

RESULTS

Survival analysis included 330 patients (Asc-Ao: 272, Desc-Ao: 58). Readmission analysis included 277 patients (Asc-Ao: 231, Desc-Ao: 46) and a total of 1028 readmissions during 654 patient-years of follow-up were analyzed. There was no significant difference in in-hospital, 6-month, 1-year, 3-year and 5-year mortality between the two cohorts. Readmission-free survival, 30-day readmission, number of admissions per year and hospital length of stay per year were not significantly different between the 2 cohorts following adjustment for patient characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found no difference in long-term survival or hospital readmissions between LVAD implantation via thoracotomy with outflow cannula anastomosis to the descending aorta and standard implantation.

A pilot clinical trial of a self-management intervention in patients with a left ventricular assist device

Self-management is a health behavior known to predict treatment outcomes in patients with multiple co-morbidities and/or chronic conditions. However, the self-management process and outcomes in the left-ventricular assist device (LVAD) population are understudied. This pilot randomized control trial (RCT) evaluated the feasibility of a novel "smartphone app-directed and nurse-supported self-management intervention" in patients implanted with durable LVADs. Assessments included behavioral (self-efficacy and adherence), clinical (complications), and healthcare utilization (unplanned clinic, emergency room (ER) visits, and re-hospitalization) outcomes, completed at baseline (pre-hospital discharge) and months 1, 3, and 6 post-hospital discharge. Intervention patients (n = 14) had favorable patterns/trends of results across study outcomes than control patients (n = 16). Notably, intervention patients had much lower complications and healthcare utilization rates than controls. For example, intervention patients had 2 (14.3%) driveline infections in 6 months while control patients had 3 (19.0%). Additionally, at month 3, intervention patients had 0% ER visits versus 36% of control patients. At month 6, the mean cumulative number of re-hospitalizations for the control group was higher (0.9 ± 0.93) than intervention (0.3 ± 0.61) group. Despite the small sample size and limitations of feasibility/pilot studies, our outcomes data appeared to favor the novel intervention. Lessons learned from this study suggest the intervention should be implemented for 6 months post-hospital discharge. Further research is needed including large and rigorous multi-center RCTs to generate knowledge explaining the mechanism of the effect of self-management on LVAD treatment outcomes.

Safety and feasibility of hemodynamic pulmonary artery pressure monitoring using the CardioMEMS device in LVAD management

BACKGROUND

There is a clinical need for additional remote tools to improve left ventricular assist device (LVAD) patient management. The aim of this pilot concept study was to assess the safety and feasibility of optimizing patient management with add-on remote hemodynamic monitoring using the CardioMEMS in LVAD patients during different treatment stages.

METHODS

Ten consecutive patients accepted and clinically ready for (semi-) elective HeartMate 3 LVAD surgery were included. All patients received a CardioMEMS to optimize filling pressure before surgery. Patients were categorized into those with normal mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP) (≤25 mmHg, n = 4) or elevated mPAP (>25 mmHg, n = 6), and compared to a historical cohort (n = 20). Endpoints were CardioMEMS device safety and a combined endpoint of all-cause mortality, acute kidney injury, renal replacement therapy and/or right ventricular failure at 1-year follow-up. Additionally, we investigated hospital-free survival and improvement in quality of life (QoL) and exercise tolerance.

RESULTS

No safety issues or signal interferences were observed. The combined endpoint occurred in 60% of historical controls, 0% in normal and 83% in elevated mPAP group. Post-discharge, the hospital-free survival was significantly better, and the QoL improved more in the normal compared to the elevated mPAP group.

CONCLUSION

Remote hemodynamic monitoring in LVAD patients is safe and feasible with the CardioMEMS, which could be used to identify patients at elevated risk of complications as well as optimize patient management remotely during the out-patient phase with less frequent hospitalizations. Larger pivotal studies are warranted to test the hypothesis generated from this concept study.

Exploring gender differences in trajectories of clinical markers and symptoms after left ventricular assist device implantation

AIMS

Despite well-known gender differences in heart failure, it is unknown if clinical markers and symptoms differ between women and men after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. Our aim was to examine gender differences in trajectories of clinical markers (echocardiographic markers and plasma biomarkers) and symptoms from pre- to post-LVAD implantation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This was a secondary analysis of data collected from a study of patients from pre- to 1, 3, and 6 months post-LVAD implantation. Data were collected on left ventricular internal end-diastolic diameter (LVIDd) and ejection fraction (LVEF), plasma N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), and soluble suppressor of tumorigenicity (sST2). Physical and depressive symptoms were measured using the Heart Failure Somatic Perception Scale and Patient Health Questionnaire-9, respectively. Latent growth curve modelling was used to compare trajectories between women and men. The average age of the sample (n = 98) was 53.3 ± 13.8 years, and most were male (80.6%) and had non-ischaemic aetiology (65.3%). Pre-implantation, women had significantly narrower LVIDd (P < 0.001) and worse physical symptoms (P = 0.041) compared with men. Between pre- and 6 months post-implantation, women had an increase in plasma sST2 followed by a decrease, whereas men had an overall decrease (slope: P = 0.014; quadratic: P = 0.011). Between 1 and 6 months post-implantation, women had a significantly greater increase in LVEF (P = 0.045) but lesser decline in plasmoa NT-proBNP compared with men (P = 0.025).

CONCLUSION

Trajectories of clinical markers differed somewhat between women and men, but trajectories of symptoms were similar, indicating some physiologic but not symptomatic gender differences in response to LVAD.

Contemporary Management Strategies in VAD Infection

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The use of durable ventricular assist devices (VAD) to manage end-stage heart failure is increasing, but infection remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among patients with VAD. In this review, we synthesize recent data pertaining to the epidemiology, diagnosis, management, and prevention of VAD infections, discuss transplant considerations in patients with VAD infections, and highlight remaining knowledge gaps. We also present a conceptual framework for treating clinicians to approach these infections that draws on the same principles that guide the treatment of analogous infections that occur in patients without VAD.

RECENT FINDINGS

Despite advances in device design, surgical techniques, and preventative interventions, more than a third of VAD recipients still experience infection as an adverse outcome. Positron emission tomography has emerged as a promising modality for identifying and characterizing VAD infections. High-quality data to support many of the routine therapeutic strategies currently used for VAD infections-including suppressive antibiotic therapy, surgical debridement/device exchange, and novel antimicrobials for emerging multidrug-resistant organisms-remain limited. Although pre-transplant VAD infection may impact some early transplant outcomes, transplantation remains a viable option for patients with most types of VAD infection. Standardized definitions of VAD infection applied to large registry datasets have yielded key insights into the epidemiology of infectious complications among VAD recipients, but more prospective studies are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of existing and novel diagnostic and therapeutic strategies.

The Joint Association of Septicemia and Cerebrovascular Diseases with In-Hospital MortalityAmong Patients with Left Ventricular Assist Device in the United States

OBJECTIVES

Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is associated with complications such as cerebrovascular diseases (CEVD) as well as septicemia which is often preventable. With their use increasing in the U.S., identifying patients with LVAD who are at high risk for short-term mortality is essential for targeted effective patient management strategies to prevent adverse outcomes. We investigated the individual and joint association of CEVD and septicemia with the risk of in-hospital mortality in patients with LVAD in the U.S.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used data from the National Inpatient Sample from 2004 to 2015 to identify patients ≥18 years of age who underwent LVAD implantation by means of International Classification of Disease, 9th Revision, codes. Multivariable hierarchical negative binomial regression models were used to estimate risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for in-hospital mortality by CEVD-septicemia status.

RESULTS

The mean age of the 4638 patients was 56 years, and 23% of them were women. Approximately 13% of patients had septicemia; 7% had CEVD and 2% had both conditions. In models adjusted for demographic, lifestyle/behavior factors and comorbid conditions, the risk of in-hospital mortality was almost threefold higher among patients with septicemia alone (RR=2.84, CI:2.24-3.60); two-and-half fold higher among patients with CEVD alone (RR=2.53, CI:1.85-3.48); and almost fourfold among patients with both septicemia and CEVD (RR=3.76, CI: 2.38-5.94, P_interaction = <0.001) CONCLUSION: The presence of both septicemia and CEVD was associated with a substantially higher risk of in-hospital mortality among LVAD patients when compared to septicemia or CEVD alone.

The analysis of unplanned readmissions after left ventricular assist device implantation as bridge-to-transplant

Background

In this study, we aimed to investigate frequency, patterns, etiologies, and costs of unplanned readmissions after left ventricular assist device implantation.

Methods

Between April 2012 and September 2016, 99 unplanned readmissions of a total of 50 consecutive bridge-to-transplant patients (45 males, 5 females; mean age 46.9±10.3 years; range, 19 to 67 years) who were successfully discharged after left ventricular assist device implantation were retrospectively analyzed. Patient demographic data, hemodynamic measurements before implantation, and readmissions after discharge were recorded. Hospitalizations due to major problems which were unable to be managed in routine outpatient clinic were accepted as unplanned readmissions. Survival analysis was performed.

Results

The readmission rate was 1.7 per year after discharge. Survival of patients who were readmitted within the first 90 days was found to be significantly lower than those without early readmission. The most common reasons of readmissions during follow-up were major infection (23.2%), neurological dysfunction (22.2%), cardiac causes (12.1%), bleeding (11.1%), and device malfunction (10.1%). Neurological dysfunctions (82,005 USD) and device malfunctions (73,300 USD) caused the highest economic burden.

Conclusion

Among patients with a left ventricular assist device, hospital readmissions are common. Development of preventive strategies as well as effective treatment methods focused on longterm adverse events is critical to reduce the frequency and costs of hospital readmissions.

Risk factors and prognostic impact of left ventricular assist device-associated infections

BACKGROUND

Left ventricular assist device (LVAD)-associated infections may be life-threatening and impact patients' outcome. We aimed to identify the characteristics, risk factors, and prognosis of LVAD-associated infections.

METHODS

Patients included in the ASSIST-ICD study (19 centers) were enrolled. The main outcome was the occurrence of LVAD-associated infection (driveline infection, pocket infection, or pump/cannula infection) during follow-up.

RESULTS

Of the 652 patients enrolled, 201 (30.1%) presented a total of 248 LVAD infections diagnosed 6.5 months after implantation, including 171 (26.2%), 51 (7.8%), and 26 (4.0%) percutaneous driveline infection, pocket infection, or pump/cannula infection, respectively. Patients with infections were aged 58.7 years, and most received HeartMate II (82.1%) or HeartWare (13.4%). Most patients (62%) had implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) before LVAD, and 104 (16.0%) had ICD implantation, extraction, or replacement after the LVAD surgery. Main pathogens found among the 248 infections were Staphylococcus aureus (n = 113' 45.4%), Enterobacteriaceae (n = 61; 24.6%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 34; 13.7%), coagulase-negative staphylococci (n = 13; 5.2%), and Candida species (n = 13; 5.2%). In multivariable analysis, HeartMate II (subhazard ratio, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.03 to 2.36; P = .031) and ICD-related procedures post-LVAD (subhazard ratio, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.03-1.98; P = .031) were significantly associated with LVAD infections. Infections had no detrimental impact on survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Left ventricular assist device-associated infections affect one-third of LVAD recipients, mostly related to skin pathogens and gram-negative bacilli, with increased risk with HeartMate II as compared with HeartWare, and in patients who required ICD-related procedures post-LVAD. This is a plea to better select patients needing ICD implantation/replacement after LVAD implantation.

Clinical outcomes of inpatient cardiac rehabilitation for patients with treated left ventricular assist device in Korea: 1-year follow-up

In Korea, the first patient with a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) for destination therapy had successful implantation of a continuous-flow model in 2012. We investigated the safety and efficacy of exercise therapy with LVAD implantation 15 Korean patients. We retrospectively reviewed 15 patients (mean age, 67.4±11.6 years; 10 males, 5 female, left ventricular ejection fraction 23.6%±7.1%), including 4 with implanted continuous-flow and 11 an axial-flow LVAD. The New York Heart Association functional classification, ejection fraction, and quality of life were obtained. Survival rate, adverse events, admission rates, and enrollment rates in cardiac rehabilitation were investigated. Survival at 6 and 12 months was 100% and 89%, respectively. The New York Heart Association functional classification improved from 3.4±0.5 to 2.3±0.05 at 12 months postoperatively (P<0.0001). The ejection fraction significantly increased from 23.6%±7.2% on the preoperative day to 35.4%±14.2% at 1 year (P<0.0018). The quality of life was also improved at 1 year (P<0.0001). The most common adverse events were bleeding (56%) and dyspnea (44%). The number of admissions was 3.2 per patient-year. LVAD therapy is a safe and effective treatment option with exercise intervention for Korean patients waiting for heart transplantation or those who were ineligible for heart transplantation. A larger study with longer follow-up is needed to determine details clinical outcomes after LVAD.