Percutaneous implantation of a ventricular partitioning device for treatment of ischemic heart failure: Initial experience of a center

Heartech® left ventricular partitioning device improves left ventricular systolic function of patients with chronic heart failure post-myocardial infarction at 1-year follow-up

OBJECTIVES

This study presents 1-year follow-up data of echocardiographic outcomes in patients who received the Heartech® left ventricular (LV) partitioning device (LVPD) (Xinrui Medical Equipment Co. Ltd., Shanghai, China).

BACKGROUND

Our first-in-man study of the Heartech® LVPD confirmed its safety and efficacy in patients with chronic heart failure (HF) post-myocardial infarction (MI) 1 month post-implantation. This subsequent study reports the echocardiographic outcomes of these patients at 1 year of follow-up.

METHODS

Fifteen patients with HF post-MI from three cardiac intervention centers in China were successfully implanted with the Heartech® LVPD via percutaneous ventricular restoration procedures. Echocardiographic parameters-including LV systolic function, diastolic function, two-dimensional speckle-tracking analysis, and right ventricular systolic function-were obtained before device implantation and at 1 month and 1 year postoperatively.

RESULTS

There was no deterioration of LV diastolic function, specific strain parameters, or right ventricular function at 1 year. Relative to the echocardiographic parameters recorded before the procedure, the LV ejection fraction (32.47 ± 6.98% vs. 42.5 ± 7.41%; p = .001) was significantly improved at 1 year, while the LV end-diastolic volume index (106.29 ± 28.01 vs. 83.30 ± 31.71; p = .005) and end-systolic volume index were significantly reduced (72.47 ± 22.77 vs. 50.00 ± 19.70; p = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

One-year echocardiographic follow-up results confirmed that no deterioration of LV diastolic function or specific strain parameters was observed and LV systolic function was significantly improved in patients with HF post-MI who were implanted with the Heartech® LVPD.

Percutaneous Ventricular Restoration with a Partitioning Device for Ischemic Heart Failure Treatment

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

Percutaneous ventricular restoration with a ventricular partitioning device (VPD) is a novel minimally invasive procedure designed to restore the left ventricular (LV) shape by isolating the infarcted and aneurysmal LV apex from remainder of the cavity in heart failure patients with severely reduced LV ejection fraction. In this review, we perform an in-depth analysis of the design and purpose of the VPD and review the available clinical data, with special attention to hemodynamics, outcomes, and complications.

RECENT FINDINGS

PARACHUTE trials have shown >90% procedural success rate of VPD implant. Heart failure patients had improvement in hemodynamics (reduction in LV volumes and increase in LV ejection fraction) and functional status (6-min walking distance and quality of life scores) after the VPD implant. Optimal implant position is necessary to obtain a good clinical outcome. Percutaneous VPD implantation has thus far been a safe intervention capable of improving surrogate markers of heart failure but there is still a need to develop more durable devices with a long-lasting hemodynamics effect.

Transseptal and transmitral Parachute® implantation in conjunction with "MitraClipping"

AIMS

Parachute® implantation (PI) is an attractive treatment option for patients with left ventricular apical aneurysms (LVAA). So far, only the retrograde approach has been approved for PI. Unfortunately, severe functional mitral regurgitation (MR) restricts PI. Thus, we were intrigued to combine PI and MitraClip therapy (MCT) as a new transvenous hybrid concept.

METHODS AND RESULTS

PI was performed via a transseptally placed MitraClip guide in six consecutive patients (age 73.8±5.2; 66% male). Immediately after PI, MR was treated by MCT. Invasive right and left heart haemodynamics were taken before and after PI and MCT, respectively. Procedural success was 100%. PI induced a numerical increase in cardiac output (CO: +36.4; p=0.15) and stroke volume (SV: +30.1%; p=0.09), despite some evidence of MR aggravation. Subsequent MCT successfully reduced MR at least to mild in five patients and to moderate in one patient. SV and CO demonstrated a further increase (SV: +44.3%, p=0.03; CO: +44.5%; p=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

The study documents for the first time the feasibility of transseptal and transmitral PI. Nevertheless, pre-procedural MR seems to counteract the beneficial effects of PI. Hence, the combined transseptal approach of PI and MCT seems to be the appropriate strategy in patients with significant MR and LVAA.