Community support of patients with a left ventricular assist device: The Toronto General Hospital experience

Post-acute Care Trajectories in the First Year Following Hospital Discharge After Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation

INTRODUCTION

Patients with advanced heart failure who undergo left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation are heavy users of post-acute care services. We sought to better describe the post-acute trajectories and burden of care transitions for this patient population.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 227 patients who were discharged after index hospitalization for LVAD implantation. Of these, 162 (71%) were discharged home, and 65 (29%) were discharged to a facility, including long-term acute care hospitals (n = 50), inpatient rehabilitation facilities (n = 11), and skilled nursing facilities (n = 4). Follow-up extended to 1 year, with censoring at date of heart transplantation, LVAD removal, death, or loss of follow- up. In the first year post-discharge, those patients initially discharged home spent a mean 265 days at home, 0.5 days in a facility, and 13 days in the hospital as result of readmission. Those initially discharged to a facility spent a mean 241 days at home, 37 days in a facility, and 19 days in the hospital as result of readmission. Patients initially discharged home experienced fewer care transitions, 4.2 vs 5.2 transitions per patient, compared with those initially discharged to a facility.

CONCLUSIONS

In the first year following index hospitalization for LVAD implantation, patients initially discharged to a facility have an increased burden of care transitions, as well as time spent in the hospital and in a facility, compared with patients initially discharged home. Specialized models of care are needed in facilities caring for patients with LVADs.

Outpatient management of intra-corporeal left ventricular assist device system in children: a multi-center experience

Little is known about the outcomes of children supported on intracorporeal left ventricular assist device (HVAD), and the feasibility of outpatient management. All centers with pediatric patients discharged from the hospital on the device were identified using company database. A total of 14 centers were contacted, with 9 centers, contributing data retrospectively. From 2011 to 2013, 12 pediatric patients (7 females), mean aged 11.9 ± 2.3 years (range 8-15), mean weight 43 ± 19 kg (range 18-81), mean body surface area 1.3 ± 0.3 m(2) (range 0.76-1.96) were identified. Diagnosis included: dilated cardiomyopathy (CMP) (n = 5), noncompaction CMP (n = 4), toxic CMP (n = 2) and viral CMP (n = 1). Indications for support were permanent support (n = 1), bridge to recovery (n = 1) and bridge to transplantation (n = 10). Prior to HVAD implantation, all patients received intravenous inotropes and two patients were on temporary mechanical support. Overall mortality was 0%. Mean duration of inpatient and outpatient support were 56 (range: 19-95 days) and 290 days (range: 42-790), respectively. Mean readmission rate was 0.02 per patient month (2.1 per patient). No adverse events involving emergency department occurred. Eight children resumed local schooling. Home discharge of children supported on HVAD is feasible and safe. School integration can be achieved. There is wide center variability to discharge practice for children.

Left Ventricular Assist Device: Care On Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility

PURPOSE

Investigate the outcomes of patients admitted to an inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) after placement of a left ventricular assist device (LVAD).

DESIGN

Retrospective review of records.

METHOD

Authors reviewed records of patients admitted to the IRF after cardiac surgery or admission to the hospital with either acute myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, or placement of an LVAD. The study reports improvement in function, length of stay (LOS), and location of discharge.

FINDINGS

The patients in the LVAD group made as much progress in terms of improvement in function as the other groups. None of the patients in the LVAD group required transfer back to medical or surgical units. All were discharged to home. Length of stay (LOS) of the LVAD group was not significantly longer than that of the other cardiac patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who have had placement of an LVAD can be safely cared for in an IRF.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This paper provides information about the indications for LVAD, the nursing care of patients with an LVAD, and the outcomes of care in an IRF.

Prehospital assessment and management of patients with ventricular-assist devices

Advances in the management of heart failure have led to an increasing number of patients living outside the hospital with a variety of ventricular-assist devices (VADs). These implantable pumps may be placed temporarily as a bridge to cardiac transplantation or resolution of a reversible condition, or as destination therapy for the rest of the patient's life. Emergency medical services (EMS) providers may be called to care for such patients experiencing an emergency related to the device itself, the underlying cardiac condition, or a totally unrelated medical or traumatic issue. Providers should have a basic knowledge of how these devices work and what sort of complications VAD patients may experience. In addition, they should know how to troubleshoot the devices if they alarm or malfunction, what emergency interventions can and cannot be performed, and where to turn for guidance if needed. Challenges related to management of patients with VADs include their poor baseline medical status, limitations of traditional prehospital assessment techniques, the relative infrequency with which these patients are encountered, and the rapidity with which device technology is evolving. This article presents a brief history of VADs, with an emphasis on left ventricular-assist devices (LVADs), reviews the relevant anatomy and pathophysiology, and describes the types of devices currently in clinical use. It discusses patient-specific and device-specific complications that may be encountered and concludes with an approach to prehospital patient assessment and care.

Palliative medicine consultation for preparedness planning in patients receiving left ventricular assist devices as destination therapy

OBJECTIVE

To assess the benefit of proactive palliative medicine consultation for delineation of goals of care and quality-of-life preferences before implantation of left ventricular assist devices as destination therapy (DT).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the cases of patients who received DT between January 15, 2009, and January 1, 2010.

RESULTS

Of 19 patients identified, 13 (68%) received proactive palliative medicine consultation. Median time of palliative medicine consultation was 1 day before DT implantation (range, 5 days before to 16 days after). Thirteen patients (68%) completed advance directives. The DT implantation team and families reported that preimplantation discussions and goals of care planning made postoperative care more clear and that adverse events were handled more effectively. Currently, palliative medicine involvement in patients receiving DT is viewed as routine by cardiac care specialists.

CONCLUSION

Proactive palliative medicine consultation for patients being considered for or being treated with DT improves advance care planning and thus contributes to better overall care of these patients. Our experience highlights focused advance care planning, thorough exploration of goals of care, and expert symptom management and end-of-life care when appropriate.

Clinical management of continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices in advanced heart failure

Continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) have emerged as the standard of care for advanced heart failure patients requiring long-term mechanical circulatory support. Evidence-based clinical management of LVAD-supported patients is becoming increasingly important for optimizing outcomes. In this state-of-art review, we propose key elements in managing patients supported with the new continuous-flow LVADs. Although most of the presented information is largely based on investigator experience during the 1,300-patient HeartMate II clinical trial, many of the discussed principles can be applied to other emerging devices as well. Patient selection, pre-operative preparation, and the timing of LVAD implant are some of the most important elements critical to successful circulatory support and are principles universal to all devices. In addition, proper nutrition management and avoidance of infectious complications can significantly affect morbidity and mortality during LVAD support. Optimizing intraoperative and peri-operative care, and the monitoring and treatment of other organ system dysfunction as it relates to LVAD support, are discussed. A multidisciplinary heart failure team must be organized and charged with providing comprehensive care from initial referral until support is terminated. Preparing for hospital discharge requires detailed education for the patient and family or friends, with provisions for emergencies and routine care. Implantation techniques, troubleshooting device problems, and algorithms for outpatient management, including the diagnosis and treatment of related problems associated with the HeartMate II, are discussed as an example of a specific continuous-flow LVAD. Ongoing trials with other continuous-flow devices may produce additional information in the future for improving clinical management of patients with these devices.