Bridging cardiogenic shock patients with short-term ventricular support at a community hospital to long-term ventricular support at a tertiary hospital

Survival on biventricular mechanical support with the Centrimag® as a bridge to decision: a single-center risk stratification

Objective:

Temporary mechanical assist devices are increasingly being used as a lifesaving bridge to decision in patients requiring cardiopulmonary resuscitation. We report our single-center experience with biventricular Centrimag® pumps over a five-year period.

Method:

Data was retrospectively collected in consecutive patients who required biventricular support from 2008 to 2013. Patients who were supported with central cannulation using the Centrimag® system were analyzed. In addition to demographic information, data pertaining to indications, outcomes and mortality were collected.

Results:

The cohort consisted of 48 patients (19 women and 29 men, mean age of 56 years). The median duration of support was 14 days. The median duration to patient expiration while still on the Centrimag® was 12 days. Thirty-day survival was 56% (27/48). Nine patients were explanted to recovery, while fourteen patients were converted to a durable LVAD, two of whom were then transplanted. We stratified patients into two groups. Group I comprised patients who were either explanted to recovery, converted to durable LVAD or transplanted (23/48) and Group II consisted of patients who either died on the Centrimag® or were explanted for withdrawal of care (25/48). Statistical analysis did not reveal any clinically significant differences between the two groups in terms of age, sex, etiology, hemodynamic, co-morbidities or laboratory parameters.

Conclusion:

The biventricular Centrimag® can be used as a bridge to decision in patients with thirty-day survival of >50%. Parameters to predict 30-day survival in this high-risk cohort continue to remain elusive.

Acute mechanical circulatory support for fulminant myocarditis complicated by cardiogenic shock

In fulminant myocarditis complicated by cardiogenic shock, early mechanical circulatory support (MCS) may prevent cardiomyopathy and death. We sought to examine the outcomes of patients with fulminant myocarditis supported with MCS. A retrospective review of patients with acute cardiogenic shock treated with MCS from 2007 to 2013 was conducted, and patients with a diagnosis of fulminant myocarditis were included in this series. At our center, 260 patients received MCS for acute cardiogenic shock, and 11 were implanted for fulminant myocarditis. Eight received the Centrimag biventricular assist device (BIVAD), and three received veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenator (VA ECMO), though 1 VA ECMO-supported patient was transitioned to BIVAD due to refractory shock. The mean acute support time was 14.7 ± 4.4 days. Two patients required long-term left ventricular assist devices and were further supported for 55 and 112 days. Eight patients recovered with a mean ejection fraction of 54 ± 7 %, and one was successfully transplanted. Eight patients survived to discharge (73 %) with mean follow-up: 292.6 ± 306.8 days. All three deaths were due to neurologic complications. MCS should be considered in patients with fulminant myocarditis complicated by shock. With aggressive medical therapy, early utilization of MCS carries promising outcomes.

Can long-term ventricular assist devices be safely implanted in low-volume, non-heart transplant centres?

BACKGROUND

Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) using long-term ventricular assist devices (VADs) is an established therapy in select patients with advanced heart failure. Studies have suggested that outcomes after VAD implantation may be dependent on institutional procedural volume, and outcome data from non-transplant centres are lacking. This study reviews the outcomes of patients who received a long-term VAD at our centre to determine if these devices can be safely implanted at tertiary care, low-volume, non-transplant centres.

METHODS

We conducted a single-centre retrospective cohort study, examining the clinical outcomes of consecutive patients who received a long-term VAD over a 42-month period.

RESULTS

During the study period 73 patients required MCS, of whom 16 received a long-term VAD. This select group had a mean Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) profile of 1.6 (0.9) and before implantation 94% required at least 1 inotropic medication, 69% had suffered a cardiac arrest, 63% required an intra-aortic balloon pump, 69% required mechanical ventilation, and 44% required short-term MCS. The primary outcome of survival to transplant or ongoing MCS at 1 year was achieved in 75% of patients. Operating room, intensive care unit, and hospital survival were 100%, 88%, and 81%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term VADs can be implanted at low-volume, nontransplant centres with survival rates comparable with contemporary clinical trials. Availability of a specialty trained multidisciplinary team with expertise in short-term and long-term MCS options facilitates appropriate patient selection and might be more important than institutional volume in determining outcomes after implantation.