Mechanical Circulatory Support for Advanced Heart Failure: Are We about to Witness a New "Gold Standard"?

The impact of left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) for the treatment of advanced heart failure has played a significant role as a bridge to transplant and more recently as a long-term solution for non-eligible candidates. Continuous flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVADs), based on axial and centrifugal design, are currently the most popular devices in view of their smaller size, increased reliability and higher durability compared to pulsatile flow left ventricular assist devices (PF-LVADs). The trend towards their use is increasing. Therefore, it has become mandatory to understand the physics and the mathematics behind their mode of operation for appropriate device selection and simulation set up. For this purpose, this review covers some of these aspects. Although very successful and technologically advanced, they have been associated with complications such as pump thrombosis, haemolysis, aortic regurgitation, gastro-intestinal bleeding and arterio-venous malformations. There is perception that the reduced arterial pulsatility may be responsible for these complications. A flow modulation control approach is currently being investigated in order to generate pulsatility in rotary blood pumps. Thrombus formation remains the most feared complication that can affect clinical outcome. The development of a preoperative strategy aimed at the reduction of complications and patient-device suitability may be appropriate. Patient-specific modelling based on 3D reconstruction from CT-scan combined with computational fluid dynamic studies is an attractive solution in order to identify potential areas of stagnation or challenging anatomy that could be addressed to achieve the desired outcome. The HeartMate II (axial) and the HeartWare HVAD (centrifugal) rotary blood pumps have been now used worldwide with proven outcome. The HeartMate III (centrifugal) is now emerging as the new promising device with encouraging preliminary results. There are now enough pumps on the market: it is time to focus on the complications in order to achieve the full potential and selling-point of this type of technology for the treatment of the increasing heart failure patient population.

Mechanical circulatory support in advanced heart failure: single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Currently, ventricular assist device (VAD) or total artificial heart (TAH) mechanical support provides an effective treatment of unstable patients with advanced heart failure. We report our single-center experience with mechanical circulatory support therapy.

METHODS

From March 2002 to December 2012, 107 adult patients (mean age, 56.8 ± 9.9 y; range, 31-76 y) were primarly supported on temporary or long-term VAD or TAH support as treatment for refractory heart failure at our institution. Temporary extracorporeal radial VAD support (group A) was established in 49 patients (45.7%), and long-term paracorporeal and intracorporeal VAD or TAH (group B) in 58 patients (54.2%). Left ventricular (LVAD) support was established in 55 patients (51.4%; n = 33, Heartmate II; n = 6, Heartmate I XVE; n = 4, Heartware HVAD; and n = 12, Centrimag) and biventricular (BVAD/TAH) support (group B) in 28 patients (26.1%; n = 10, Thoratec paracorporeal; n = 2, Heartware HVAD, n = 1, Thoratec implantable; n = 1, Syncardia TAH; and n = 14, Centrimag). The temporary Centrimag was the only device adopted as isolated right ventricular (RVAD) support, and it was inserted in 24 patients (22.4%).

RESULTS

In group A, overall mean support time was 10.2 ± 6.6 days (range, 3-43 d). In group B, LVAD mean support time was 357 ± 352.3 days (range, 1-902 d) and BVAD/TAH support time was 98 ± 82.6 days (range, 8-832 d). In group A, the overall success rate was 55.1% (27 patients). In group B, LVAD overall success rate was 74.4% (32 patients) and BVAD/TAH success rate was 50% (7 patients). Overall heart transplantation rate for both groups was 27.1% (n = 2, group A; n = 27, group B). Overall 1-year and 5-year survivals after heart transplantation were 72.4% (n = 21) and 58.6% (n = 17), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Mechanical circulatory support is an effective strategy even in cases of end-stage heart failure according to our experience. Further improvement of VAD and TAH technologies may support their adoption as an encouraging alternative to heart transplantation in the near future.

Ventricular assistance devices as bridge to transplantation

The authors herein review the rationale and indications for the use of ventricular assistance devices as a bridge to heart transplantation and discuss the current evidence on the subject. The potential effects of device implantation on posttransplant outcomes and the therapeutic strategies in acute and elective cases are revised and illustrated.

Rotary blood pumps as definitive treatment for severe heart failure

Rotary blood pumps are increasingly recognized as mainstream therapy for severely symptomatic heart failure. Carefully targeted refinements in patient selection and postoperative care have substantially reduced the adverse event burden. These improvements translate into better survival and quality of life in comparison with medical management. Medium-term outcomes now compete favorably with cardiac transplantation, although evidence-based outcome data indicate that transplant and ‘lifetime’ left ventricular-assist device (LVAD) candidates are fundamentally different. Significant challenges remain in relation to neurological injury and right heart failure, which may continue to limit exercise capacity. In the meantime, both physician awareness and patient access to LVAD technology remain limited. The debate is rarely between cardiac transplant or lifetime LVAD. It should focus on the choice between pump versus palliative care for the thousands of patients of all age groups who are judged ineligible for transplantation. Comprehensive healthcare systems must consider contemporary evidence and provide the most symptomatic of heart failure patients with effective care. Cardiac resynchronization therapy is no longer the ceiling for this.