Anesthetic Management for Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation Without Using Cardiopulmonary Bypass: Case Series

Lateral thoracotomy versus sternotomy for left ventricular assist device implantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Traditionally, left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are implanted via the standard median sternotomy approach. However, a left thoracotomy approach has been purported to offer physiologic benefits. As a result, utilization of the left thoracotomy for LVAD placement is increasing globally, but the benefits of this approach versus sternotomy are still evolving and debatable. This review compares the median sternotomy and thoracotomy approaches for LVAD placement.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent meta-analyses of LVAD implantation via thoracotomy approach suggest that the thoracotomy approach was associated with a reduced incidence of RVF, bleeding, hospital length of stay (LOS), and mortality [1 ▪▪ ,2 ▪▪ ] . No difference in stroke rates was noted. These results offer support as to the feasibility of a thoracotomy approach for LVAD implantation but also highlight its potential superiority over sternotomy.

SUMMARY

The most recent literature supports the use of lateral thoracotomy for placement of left ventricle assist devices compared to median sternotomy. Long-term outcomes from lateral thoracotomy are still unknown, however, short-term results favor lateral thoracotomy approaches for LVAD implantation. While the conventional median sternotomy approach was the original operative technique of choice for LVAD implantation, lateral thoracotomy is quickly emerging as a potentially superior technique.

Anesthetic management of the patient with a ventricular assist device

The use of long- and short-term mechanical circulatory support in the form of ventricular assist device (VAD) has increased over the last decade. Although cardiothoracic anesthesiologists care for these patients during device placement, increasingly higher numbers of general anesthesiologists are involved in the management of VAD patients during noncardiac surgery and procedures. An understanding of devices, their indications, and complications is essential to the anesthesiologists caring for these patients. We review the anesthetic considerations for the implantation of these devices and concerns when caring for patients with durable and short-term devices already in place.

Anesthetic Management for Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation Through Left Thoracotomy: Evaluation of On-Pump Versus Off-Pump

BACKGROUND

Ventricular assist devices (VADs) are alternative approaches to medical treatment in patients with acute or chronic heart failure. The goal of this study was to compare an anesthetic approach in patients undergoing implantation of a VAD with (on-pump) or without (off-pump) cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) through left thoracotomy.

METHODS

A total of 32 patients were divided into 2 groups: on-pump (group 1) and off-pump (group 2). A standard anesthesia protocol was used in all patients. Baseline characteristics of the patients, intraoperative hemodynamic and respiratory variables, anesthetic agents and vasoactive drugs administered, the amount of blood products, extubation, length of hospital stay and intensive care unit stay, and postoperative complications were recorded.

RESULTS

Patients' mean age was 54.7 ± 13.3 years (range, 18-74 years). Eighteen patients underwent surgery with CPB. Demographic data of the patients, preoperative characteristics, intraoperative use of blood products, intraoperative complications, and anesthetic drugs used were similar between groups (P > .05). The duration of surgery (219 ± 23 vs 273 ± 56 minutes) and anesthesia (274 ± 38 vs 323 ± 57 minutes) were shorter in group 2; there was no difference between the 2 groups in terms of mechanical ventilation time, length of stay in the intensive care unit, and length of hospital stay. There was no decrease in postoperative oxygen parameters and an increase in patient lactate levels with the use of CPB. The use of fresh frozen plasma and platelet suspension in the postoperative period was significantly higher in group 1 (P < .05). The rate of complications and mortality rate were comparable between the 2 groups (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study results show that the use of CPB during VAD implantation via left thoracotomy increases operation time and use of blood products, while causing no change in the rate of complications.