Predictors of pericardial effusion after orthotopic heart transplantation

Echocardiographic assessment of pediatric heart transplantation: A single-center experience in China

BACKGROUND

Pediatric heart transplant (HT) has become the standard of care for end-stage heart failure in children worldwide. Serial echocardiographic evaluations of graft anatomy and function during follow-up are crucial for post-HT management. However, evolution of cardiac structure and function after pediatric HT has not been well described, especially during first year post-HT. This study aimed to characterize the evolution of cardiac structure and function after pediatric HT and investigate the correlation between biventricular function with adverse clinical outcomes.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective study of echocardiographic data obtained among 99 pediatric HT patients was conducted. Comprehensive echocardiographic examination was performed in all patients at 1-, 3-, 6-, 9- and 12-months post-HT. We obtained structural, functional and hemodynamic parameters from both left- and right-side heart, such as left ventricular stroke volume (LVSV), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), right ventricular fractional area change (RVFAC), etc. The cardiac evolution of pediatric HT patients during first post-HT year was described and compared between different time points. We also explored the correlation between cardiac function and major adverse transplant events (MATEs).

RESULTS

1) Evolution of left heart parameters: left atrial length, mitral E velocity, E/A ratio, LVSV and LVEF significantly increased while mitral A velocity significantly decreased over the first year after HT (P < .05). Compared with 1 month after HT, interventricular septum (IVS) and left ventricular posterior wall (LVPW) decreased at 3 months but increased afterwards. (2) Evolution of right heart parameters: right ventricular base diameter and mid-diameter; right ventricular length diameter, tricuspid E velocity, E/A ratio, tricuspid annular velocity e' at free wall, and RVFAC increased, while tricuspid A velocity decreased over the first year after HT (P < .05). (3) Univariate logistic regression model suggests that biventricular function parameters at 1-year post-HT (LVEF, RVFAC, tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion and tricuspid lateral annular systolic velocity) were associated with MATEs.

CONCLUSION

Gradual improvement of LV and RV function was seen in pediatric HT patients within the first year. Biventricular function parameters associated with MATEs. The results of this study pave way for designing larger and longer follow-up of this population, potentially aiming at using multiparameter echocardiographic prediction of adverse events.

Predictors and clinical significance of pericardial effusions after pediatric heart transplantation

BACKGROUND

We aimed to describe the incidence, risk factors, and clinical outcomes of pericardial effusions within 6 months after pediatric heart transplantation (HT).

METHODS

A single-center retrospective cohort study was performed on all pediatric HT recipients from 2004 to 2018. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with pericardial effusions post-HT, and survival was compared using log-rank test.

RESULTS

During the study period, 97 HTs were performed in 93 patients. Fifty patients (52%) had a ≥small pericardial effusion within 6 months, 16 of which were, or became, ≥moderate in size. Pericardial drain was placed in 8 patients. In univariate analysis, larger recipient body surface area (p = .01) and non-congenital heart disease (p = .002) were associated with pericardial effusion development. Donor/recipient size ratios, post-HT hemodynamics, and rejection did not correlate with pericardial effusion development. In multivariable analysis, non-congenital heart disease (adjusted odds ratio 3.3, p = .01) remained independently associated with development of pericardial effusion. There were no significant differences in post-HT survival between patients with and without ≥small (p = .68) or ≥moderate pericardial effusions (p = .40).

CONCLUSIONS

Pericardial effusions are common after pediatric HT. Patients with cardiomyopathy, or non-congenital heart disease, were at higher risk for post-HT pericardial effusions. Pericardial effusions increased morbidity but had no effect on mortality in our cohort. The risk factors identified may be used for anticipatory guidance in pediatric HT.

The Role of Echocardiography in the Management of Heart Transplant Recipients

Transthoracic echocardiography is the primary non-invasive modality for the investigation of heart transplant recipients. It is a versatile tool that provides comprehensive information on cardiac structure and function. Echocardiography is also helpful in diagnosing primary graft dysfunction and evaluating the effectiveness of therapeutic approaches for this condition. In acute rejection, echocardiography is useful with suspected cellular or antibody-mediated rejection, with findings confirmed and quantified by endomyocardial biopsy. For identifying chronic rejection, ultrasound has a more significant role and, in some specific patients (e.g., patients with renal failure), it may offer a role comparable to coronary angiography to identify cardiac allograft vasculopathy. This review highlights the usefulness of echocardiography in evaluating normal graft function and its role in the management of heart transplant recipients.

Prolonged pericardial drainage using a soft drain reduces pericardial effusion and need for additional pericardial drainage following orthotopic heart transplantation

OBJECTIVES

Pericardial effusion can cause haemodynamic compromise after heart transplantation. We identified the effects of soft drains on the development of pericardial effusion.

METHODS

We enrolled 250 patients ≥17 years of age who underwent heart transplantation between July 1999 and April 2012 and received two conventional tubes (n = 96; 32 French), or two tubes with a soft drain (n = 154; 4.8 mm wide). The development of significant pericardial effusion or the need for drainage procedure during 1 month after heart transplantation was compared with the use of the propensity score matching method to adjust for selection bias.

RESULTS

At 1 month after transplantation, 69 patients (27.6%) developed significant pericardial effusion. Among these, 13 patients (5.2%) underwent pericardial drainage. According to multivariate analysis, history of previous cardiac surgery [odds ratio (OR) = 0.162; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.046-0.565; P = 0.004] and placement of a soft drain (OR = 0.186; 95% CI = 0.100-0.346; P < 0.001) were significant factors that prevented pericardial effusion or the need for drainage during the early postoperative period. For the 82 propensity score matched pairs, patients receiving an additional soft drain were at a lower risk of the development of significant pericardial effusion or the need for a pericardial drainage procedure during 1 month (OR = 0.148; 95% CI = 0.068-0.318; P < 0.001) compared with those receiving only two conventional tubes.

CONCLUSIONS

Pericardial soft drainage is a simple and safe procedure that reduces pericardial effusion and decreases the need for pericardial drainage after heart transplantation.

Pericardial effusion following drain removal after percutaneous epicardial access for an electrophysiology procedure

OBJECTIVES

To determine the frequency and predictors of pericardial effusion following epicardial sheath removal.

BACKGROUND

Pericardial effusion can occur following cardiac surgical or interventional procedures including percutaneous epicardial access (EpiAcc), which is increasingly used as part of electrophysiology ablation procedures.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the Mayo Clinic comprehensive electronic medical record was performed from all patients who underwent planned EpiAcc as part of an electrophysiology ablation procedure between January 1, 2004 and June 30, 2013.

RESULTS

Of 144 patients (mean age 51.3 ± 15.5 years, 68% male) who underwent planned EpiAcc as part of an electrophysiology ablation (95.8% pericardial access success rate), seven (4.9%) developed a postoperative pericardial effusion requiring repeat EpiAcc. Inferior access was utilized in 74 (51.4%) patients. Patients with pericardial effusion tended to be younger (41.1 years vs 51.8 years, P = 0.08) and were more likely to have undergone inferior approach access (85.7% vs 49.6%, P = 0.06) than those who did not develop postoperative pericardial effusion. Seventy-one percent of patients with postoperative pericardial effusion versus 32.1% of patients without postoperative pericardial effusion had a preprocedure ejection fraction ≥55% (P = 0.03). There were no procedural-related deaths, and no difference in mortality between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative pericardial effusion requiring repeat access/drainage was relatively infrequent, occurring in 4.9% of patients shortly after epicardial procedures. While the majority occur early and therefore require close observation, some patients may present in a delayed manner.

Postoperative care of the transplanted patient

The successful delivery of optimal peri-operative care to pediatric heart transplant recipients is a vital determinant of their overall outcomes. The practitioner caring for these patients must be familiar with and treat multiple simultaneous issues in a patient who may have been critically ill preoperatively. In addition to the complexities involved in treating any child following cardiac surgery, caretakers of newly transplanted patients encounter multiple transplant-specific issues. This chapter details peri-operative management strategies, frequently encountered early morbidities, initiation of immunosuppression including induction, and short-term outcomes.

Limited utility of endomyocardial biopsy in the first year after heart transplantation

BACKGROUND

Surveillance endomyocardial biopsies (EMBs) are used for the early diagnosis of acute cardiac allograft rejection. Protocols became standardized in an earlier era and their utility with contemporary immunosuppression has not been investigated.

METHODS

We studied 258 patients after orthotopic heart transplantation comparing 135 patients immunosuppressed by mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) with 123 patients treated by azathioprine (AZA); both with cyclosporine and corticosteroids after induction therapy with rabbit antithymocyte globulin. Fifteen EMBs were scheduled in the first year. Additional EMBs were performed for suspected rejection, after treatment, or for inadequate samples. The MMF group had 1875 EMBs vs. 1854 in the AZA group.

RESULTS

The yield of International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) grade> or =3A biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) was 1.87% per biopsy (35 of 1875) with MMF vs. 3.13% (58 of 1854) with AZA P=0.024. The number of clinically silent BPAR ISHLT grade > or =3A (the true yield of surveillance EMBs) was 1.39% (26 of 1875) of biopsies MMF vs. 2.1% (39 of 1854) AZA, P=0.48. There were five serious complications requiring intervention or causing long-term sequelae; 0.13% (5 of 3729) per biopsy and 1.94% (5 of 258) per patient. The incidence of all definite and potential complications was 1.42% (53 of 3729) per biopsy and 20.5% (53 of 258) per patient. There was no biopsy-related mortality.

CONCLUSION

The yield of BPAR was low in the AZA group and very low in the MMF group. The incidence of complications was also low, but repeated biopsies led to a higher rate per patient. Routine surveillance EMBs and the frequency of such biopsies should be reevaluated in the light of their low yield with current immunosuppression.

Clinical Course and Predictors of Pericardial Effusion Following Cardiac Transplantation

OBJECTIVE

Pericardial effusions occur frequently after orthotopic heart transplantation. There have been conflicting reports describing etiology, prognosis, and outcomes associated with these early postoperative effusions.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 91 patients transplanted between January 2001 and September 2004 was performed. Pericardial effusion was defined by serial echocardiography and graded as none, small, moderate, or large. A total of 1088 echocardiograms were evaluated during the first posttransplant year. Perioperative variables were evaluated by logistic regression analysis to define predictors for occurrence of effusions.

RESULTS

Echocardiographic data were available for 88 patients. Thirty-one patients (35%) developed moderate to large effusion in the immediate postoperative period. Three patients developed hemodynamic compromise that required immediate intervention. All other effusions resolved within 3 months of heart transplantation without any specific intervention. Only prolonged donor ischemic time was associated with higher risk of occurrence of moderate to large pericardial effusions (odds ratio 1.012, 95% confidence interval 1.001 to 1.019, P = .033). There was no difference in morbidity or early mortality between patients with and without pericardial effusions.

CONCLUSION

Moderate to large pericardial effusions occur frequently after heart transplantation. In a vast majority, these effusions are not associated with any adverse clinical outcomes and resolve within 3 months postoperatively. Early postoperative close monitoring is still required to evaluate for tamponade.

Wound healing complications with de novo sirolimus versus mycophenolate mofetil-based regimen in cardiac transplant recipients

Sirolimus was introduced in de novo immunosuppression at Stanford University in view of its favorable effects on reduced rejection and cardiac allograft vasculopathy. After an apparent increase in the incidence of post-surgical wound complications as well as symptomatic pleural and pericardial effusions, we reverted to a mycophenolate mofetil (MMF)-based regimen. This retrospective study compared the outcome in heart transplant recipients on sirolimus (48 patients) with those on MMF (46 patients) in de novo immunosuppressive regimen. The incidence of any post-surgical wound complication (52% vs. 28%, p=0.019) and deep surgical wound complication (35% vs. 13%, p=0.012) was significantly higher in patients on sirolimus than on MMF. More patients on sirolimus also had symptomatic pleural (p=0.035) and large pericardial effusions (p=0.033) requiring intervention. Logistic regression analysis showed sirolimus (p=0.027) and longer cardiac bypass time (OR=1.011; p=0.048) as risk factors for any wound complication. Sirolimus in de novo immunosuppression after cardiac transplantation was associated with a significant increase in the incidence of post-surgical wound healing complications as well as symptomatic pleural and pericardial effusions.