A multi-institutional retrospective analysis on impact of RV acute mechanical support timing after LVAD implantation on 1-year mortality and predictors of RV acute mechanical support weaning

Association between pulmonary artery pulsatility and mortality after implantation of left ventricular assist device

AIMS

Right ventricular failure after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation is a major concern that remains challenging to predict. We sought to investigate the relationship between preoperative pulmonary artery pulsatility index (PAPi) and mortality after LVAD implantation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A retrospective analysis of the ASSIST-ICD multicentre registry allowed the assessment of PAPi before LVAD according to the formula [(systolic pulmonary artery pressure - diastolic pulmonary artery pressure)/central venous pressure]. The primary endpoint was survival at 3 months, according to the threshold value of PAPi determined by the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. A multivariate analysis including demographic, echographic, haemodynamic, and biological variables was performed to identify predictive factors for 2 year mortality. One hundred seventeen patients were included from 2007 to 2021. The mean age was 58.45 years (±13.16), with 15.4% of women (sex ratio 5.5). A total of 53.4% were implanted as bridge to transplant and 43.1% as destination therapy. Post-operative right ventricular failure was observed in 57 patients (48.7%), with no significant difference between survivors and non-survivors at 1 month (odds ratio 1.59, P = 0.30). The median PAPi for the whole study population was 2.83 [interquartile range 1.63-4.69]. The threshold value of PAPi determined by the ROC curve was 2.84. Patients with PAPi ≥ 2.84 had a higher survival rate at 3 months [PAPi < 2.84: 58.1% [46.3-72.8%] vs. PAPi ≥ 2.84: 89.1% [81.1-97.7%], hazard ratio (HR) 0.08 [0.02-0.28], P < 0.01], with no significant difference after 3 months (HR 0.67 [0.17-2.67], P = 0.57). Other predictors of 2 year mortality were systemic hypertension (HR 4.22 [1.49-11.97], P < 0.01) and diabetes mellitus (HR 4.90 [1.83-13.14], P < 0.01). LVAD implantation as bridge to transplant (HR 0.18 [0.04-0.74], P = 0.02) and heart transplantation (HR 0.02 [0.00-0.18], P < 0.01) were associated with a higher survival rate at 2 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative PAPi < 2.84 was associated with a higher risk of early mortality after LVAD implantation without impacting 2 year outcomes among survivors.

PERSUADE Survey-PERioperative AnestheSia and Intensive Care Management of Left VentricUlar Assist DevicE Implantation in Europe and the United States

OBJECTIVE

To comprehensively assess relevant institutional variations in anesthesia and intensive care management during left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation.

DESIGN

The authors used a prospective data analysis.

SETTING

This was an online survey.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were from LVAD centers in Europe and the US.

INTERVENTIONS

After investigating initial interest, 91 of 202 European and 93 of 195 US centers received a link to the survey targeting institutional organization and experience, perioperative hemodynamic monitoring, medical management, and postoperative intensive care aspects.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The survey was completed by 73 (36.1%) European and 60 (30.8%) US centers. Although most LVAD implantations were performed in university hospitals (>5 years of experience), significant differences were observed in the composition of the preoperative multidisciplinary team and provision of intraoperative care. No significant differences in monitoring or induction agents were observed. Propofol was used more often for maintenance in Europe (p < 0.001). The choice for inotropes changed significantly from preoperatively (more levosimendan in Europe) to intraoperatively (more use of epinephrine in both Europe and the US). The use of quantitative methods for defining right ventricular (RV) function was reported more often from European centers than from US centers (p < 0.05). Temporary mechanical circulatory support for the treatment of RV failure was more often used in Europe. Nitric oxide appeared to play a major role only intraoperatively. There were no significant differences in early postoperative complications reported from European versus US centers.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the perioperative practice of care for patients undergoing LVAD implantation differs in several aspects between Europe and the US, there were no perceived differences in early postoperative complications.

The Value of Right Heart Catheterization: Case Series Showing Benefits in a Variety of Diagnoses

Although the right heart catheterization (RHC) was first introduced in 1945, its use in the quantitative hemodynamic assessment of patients has remained of questionable benefit. With recent advances in pharmacotherapies and mechanical support devices, RHC has been increasingly used to assess and help tailor the management of more complex patient scenarios. We present a case series in which the use of the RHC was helpful in making complex medical decisions. (Level of Difficulty: Intermediate.).

An Update on the Diagnosis and Management of Acute Right Heart Failure

Right ventricular (RV) dysfunction and resultant acute right heart failure (ARHF) is a rapidly growing field of interest, driven by increasing appreciation of its contribution to heart failure morbidity and mortality. Understanding of ARHF pathophysiology has advanced dramatically over recent years and can be broadly described as RV dysfunction related to acute changes in RV afterload, contractility, preload, or left ventricular dysfunction. There are several diagnostic clinical signs and symptoms as well as imaging and hemodynamic assessments that can provide insight into the degree of RV dysfunction. Medical management is tailored to the different causative pathologies, and in cases of severe or end-stage dysfunction, mechanical circulatory support can be utilized. In this review, we describe the pathophysiology of ARHF, how its diagnosis is established by clinical signs and symptoms and imaging findings, and provide an overview of treatment options, both medical and mechanical.

The Year in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia: Selected Highlights from 2022

This special article is the 15th in an annual series for the Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia. The authors thank the editor-in-chief Dr. Kaplan and the editorial board for the opportunity to continue this series, namely the research highlights of the past year in the specialties of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesiology. The major themes selected for 2022 are outlined in this introduction, and each highlight is reviewed in detail in the main body of the article. The literature highlights, in the specialties for 2022, begin with an update on COVID-19 therapies, with a focus on the temporal updates in a wide range of therapies, progressing from medical to the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and, ultimately, with lung transplantation in this high-risk group. The second major theme is focused on medical cardiology, with the authors discussing new insights into the life cycle of coronary disease, heart failure treatments, and outcomes related to novel statin therapy. The third theme is focused on mechanical circulatory support, with discussions focusing on both right-sided and left-sided temporary support outcomes and the optimal timing of deployment. The fourth and final theme is an update on cardiac surgery, with a discussion of the diverse aspects of concomitant valvular surgery and the optimal approach to procedural treatment for coronary artery disease. The themes selected for this 15th special article are only a few of the diverse advances in the specialties during 2022. These highlights will inform the reader of key updates on a variety of topics, leading to the improvement of perioperative outcomes for patients with cardiothoracic and vascular disease.

Right ventricular failure: Current strategies and future development

Right heart failure can be defined as a clinical syndrome consisting of signs and symptoms of heart failure resulting from right ventricular dysfunction. Function is normally altered due to three mechanisms: (1) pressure overload (2) volume overload, or (3) a decrease in contractility due to ischaemia, cardiomyopathy or arrythmias. Diagnosis is based upon a combination of clinical assessment plus echocardiographic, laboratory and haemodynamic parameters, and clinical risk assessment. Treatment includes medical management, mechanical assist devices and transplantation if recovery is not observed. Distinct attention to special circumstances such as left ventricular assist device implantation should be sought. The future is moving towards new therapies, both pharmacological and device centered. Immediate diagnosis and management of RV failure, including mechanical circulatory support where needed, alongside a protocolized approach to weaning is important in successfully managing right ventricular failure.

Concomitant tricuspid valve repair in left ventricular assist device implantation may increase the risk for temporary right ventricular support but does not impact overall outcomes

OBJECTIVES

Tricuspid valve repair in left ventricular assist device implantation continues to pose a challenge and may impact the occurrence of early and late right heart failure. We investigated the effects of concomitant tricuspid repair on clinical outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective, multicentre study enrolled adult patients who received continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices between 2005 and 2017 and compared those who received concomitant tricuspid valve repair to those who did not. Primary outcomes were early right heart failure necessitating temporary ventricular assist devices and right heart failure-related rehospitalizations requiring inotropic or diuretic treatment.

RESULTS

Out of 526 patients who underwent left ventricular assist device implantation, 110 (21%) received a concomitant tricuspid valve repair. Those patients were sicker, and most had moderate or severe tricuspid regurgitation. A significantly higher incidence of temporary right ventricular assist devices was observed in the group with concomitant tricupid valve repair (18% vs. 11%, P = 0.049), with a significantly elevated risk for temporary right heart assist device (sHR 1.68, 95% CI 1.04-2.72; P = 0.037). After adjusting for confounders, no significant differences were found in the incidence of and risk for most clinical outcomes, including right heart failure-related rehospitalizations (P = 0.891) and death (P = 0.563).

CONCLUSIONS

Concomitant tricuspid valve repair, when deemed necessary in left ventricular assist device implantation, may increase the risk of early right heart failure requiring a temporary right ventricular assist device but does not impact the incidence or risk of death or rehospitalizations due to late right heart failure.