Management of ventricular arrhythmias in patients with LVAD

Comparing 3-year survival and readmissions between HeartMate 3 and heart transplant as primary treatment for advanced heart failure

OBJECTIVE

To compare 3-year survival and readmissions of patients who received the HeartMate 3 (HM3) left ventricular assist device (LVAD) or underwent orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT) as primary treatment for advanced heart failure.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 381 adult patients who received an HM3 LVAD or were listed for OHT between January 2014 and March 2021 at our center. To minimize crossover bias, OHT recipients with a prior LVAD were excluded, and HM3 patients were censored at the time of transplant. Cohorts were propensity score-matched to reduce confounding variables. The primary outcome was 3-year survival, and the secondary outcome was mean cumulative all-cause unplanned readmission.

RESULTS

The study population comprised 185 HM3 patients (49%) and 196 OHT patients (51%), with 104 propensity score-matched patients in each group. After propensity score matching, there was no statistical difference in 3-year survival (83.7% for HM3 vs 87.0% for OHT; P = .91; relative risk [RR], 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45-2.20). In the unmatched cohorts, patients age 18 to 49 years had comparable survival with HM3 and OHT (96.9% vs 95.9%; N = 91; P = 1.00; RR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.09-9.78). Patients age 50+ years had slightly inferior survival with HM3 (75.0% vs 83.9%; N = 290; P = .60; RR, 1.51; 95% CI, 0.85-2.68). The mean number of readmissions at 3 years was higher in the HM3 group (3.89 vs 2.05; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

This exploratory analysis suggests that for similar patients, HM3 may provide comparable 3-year survival to OHT as a primary treatment for heart failure but may result in more readmissions.

Late Right Heart Failure After Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation: Contemporary Insights and Future Perspectives

Late right heart failure (RHF) is increasingly recognized in patients with long-term left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support and is associated with decreased survival and increased incidence of adverse events such as gastrointestinal bleeding and stroke. Progression of right ventricular (RV) dysfunction to clinical syndrome of late RHF in patients supported with LVAD is dependent on the severity of pre-existing RV dysfunction, persistent or worsening left- or right-sided valvular heart disease, pulmonary hypertension, inadequate or excessive left ventricular unloading, and/or progression of the underlying cardiac disease. RHF likely represents a continuum of risk with early presentation and progression to late RHF. However, de novo RHF develops in a subset of patients leading to increased diuretic requirement, arrhythmias, renal and hepatic dysfunction, and heart failure hospitalizations. The distinction between isolated late RHF and RHF due to left-sided contributions is lacking in registry studies and should be the focus of future registry data collection. Potential management strategies include optimization of RV preload and afterload, neurohormonal blockade, LVAD speed optimization, and treatment of concomitant valvular disease. In this review, the authors discuss definition, pathophysiology, prevention, and management of late RHF.

HFSA Expert Consensus Statement on the Medical Management of Patients on Durable Mechanical Circulatory Support

The medical management of patients supported with durable continuous flow left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support encompasses pharmacologic therapies administered in the preoperative, intraoperative, postoperative and chronic LVAD support stages. As patients live longer on LVAD support, the risks of LVAD-related complications and progression of cardiovascular and other diseases increase. Using existing data from cohort studies, registries, randomized trials and expert opinion, this Heart Failure Society of America Consensus Document on the Medical Management of Patients on Durable Mechanical Circulatory Support offers best practices on the management of patients on durable MCS, focusing on pharmacological therapies administered to patients on continuous flow LVADs. While quality data in the LVAD population are few, the utilization of guideline directed heart failure medical therapies (GDMT) and the importance of blood pressure management, right ventricular preload and afterload optimization, and antiplatelet and anticoagulation regimens are discussed. Recommended pharmacologic regimens used to mitigate or treat common complications encountered during LVAD support, including arrhythmias, vasoplegia, mucocutaneous bleeding, and infectious complications are addressed. Finally, this document touches on important potential pharmacological interactions from anti-depressants, herbal and nutritional supplements of relevance to providers of patients on LVAD support.

A review of new-onset ventricular arrhythmia after left ventricular assist device implantation

INTRODUCTION

Heart failure (HF) is a severe and terminal stage of various heart diseases. Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are relatively mature and have contributed to the treatment of end-stage HF. Ventricular arrhythmia (VA) is a common complication after LVAD implantation, including ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation, both of which may cause abnormal circulation in the body.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in the PubMed database, "Ventricular Arrhythmia" OR "VA" OR "Arrhythmia" OR "Ventricular Tachycardia," OR "Ventricular Fibrillation" AND "LVAD" OR "Left Ventricular Assist Device" OR "Heart Assist Device" as either keywords or MeSH terms, the authors screened the titles and abstracts of the articles. Eventually, 12 original research articles were retrieved.

RESULTS

The 0.83 [95%CI: 0.77, 0.89] of patients were male. A whole of 53% [95%CI:0.25, 0.81] of VA patients had a history of atrial fibrillation and 61% [95%CI:0.52, 0.69] had a history of VA. 39% [95%CI:0.29, 0.49] of the participants had no prior history of VA and experienced new VA following CF-LVAD implantation. Following CF-LVAD implantation, 59% [95%CI:0.51, 0.67] of patients developed the early VA (VA ≤ 30 days). The 30-day mortality of patients was 4% [95%CI:0.01, 0.07]. And overall mortality was 28% [95%CI:0.15, 0.41] The reported incidence of VA after LVAD implantation is not identical in different medical centers and ranges from 20% to 60%. The mechanism of VA after LVAD implantation is summarized as primary cardiomyopathy-related, device mechanical stimulation, myocardial scarring, ventricular displacement, electrolyte regulation, and other processes.

CONCLUSIONS

A preoperative VA history is considered a predictor of VA following LVAD implantation in most studies. Multiple mechanisms and factors, such as prevention of "suction events", ablation, and ICD, should be considered for the prevention and treatment of postoperative VA in patients requiring long-term VAD treatment. This study provides a reference for the clinical application of LAVD and the prevention of postoperative VA after LVAD implantation. Future multicenter prospective studies with uniform patient follow-up are needed to screen for additional potential risk factors and predictors. These studies will help to define the incidence rate of VA after LAVD implantation. As a result, we provide guidance for the selection of preventive intervention.

Direct Cardiac Compression Devices to Augment Heart Biomechanics and Function

The treatment of end-stage heart failure has evolved substantially with advances in medical treatment, cardiac transplantation, and mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices such as left ventricular assist devices and total artificial hearts. However, current MCS devices are inherently blood contacting and can lead to potential complications including pump thrombosis, hemorrhage, stroke, and hemolysis. Attempts to address these issues and avoid blood contact led to the concept of compressing the failing heart from the epicardial surface and the design of direct cardiac compression (DCC) devices. We review the fundamental concepts related to DCC, present the foundational devices and recent devices in the research and commercialization stages, and discuss the milestones required for clinical translation and adoption of this technology. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering, Volume 24 is June 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

Outcomes of Cardiac Arrest and Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Patients With Left Ventricular Assist Device; an Insight From a National Inpatient Sample

BACKGROUND

Outcomes of patients with implanted left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation experiencing a cardiac arrest (CA) are not well reported. We aimed at defining the in-hospital outcomes of patients with implanted LVAD experiencing a CA.

METHODS

The national inpatient sample (NIS) was queried using ICD9/ICD10 codes for patients older than 18 years with implanted LVAD and CA between 2010-2018. We excluded patients with orthotropic heart transplantation, biventricular assist device (BiVAD) implantation and do not resuscitate (DNR) status.

RESULTS

A total of 93,153 hospitalisations between 2010 and 2018 with implanted LVAD were identified. Only 578 of these hospitalisations had experienced CA and of those, 173 (33%) hospitalisations underwent cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). The mean age of hospitalisations that experienced a CA was 60.61±14.85 for non-survivors and 56.23±17.33 for survivors (p=0.14). The in-hospital mortality was 60.8 % in hospitalisations with CA and 74.33% in hospitalisations in whom CPR was performed. In an analysis comparing survivors with non-survivors, non-survivors had more diabetes mellitus (DM) (p=0.01), and ischaemic heart disease (IHD) (p=0.04). Age, female sex, peripheral vascular disease and history of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) were independently associated with increased mortality in our cohort. Also, ventricular tachycardia (VT) and CPR were independently associated with in-hospital mortality. During the study period, there was a significantly decreasing trend in performing CPR in LVAD hospitalisations with CA.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, age, female sex, peripheral vascular disease, history of CABG, VT and CPR were independently associated with in-hospital mortality in LVAD hospitalisations who experienced CA.

Biomechanical effects of the novel series LVAD on the aortic valve

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The series type of LVAD (i.e., BJUT-II VAD) is a novel left ventricular assist device, whose effects on the aortic valve remain unclear.

METHODS

The biomechanical effects of BJUT-II VAD on the aortic valve were investigated by using a fluid-structure interaction method. The geometric model of BJUT-II VAD was virtually implanted into the ascending aorta to generate the realistic flow pattern for the aortic valve (i.e., support). In addition, the biomechanical states of the aortic valve without BJUT-II VAD support was computed as control (i.e., control case).

RESULTS

Results demonstrated that the biomechanical effects of BJUT-II VAD were quite different from that resulting from traditional "bypass LVAD." Compared with those in the control case, BJUT-II VAD support could significantly reduce the stress load of the leaflet (maximum stress, 0.5 MPa in the control case vs. 0.12 MPa in the support case). Similarly, the rapid valve opening time (100 ms in the control case vs. 175 ms in the support case) and rapid valve closing time (50 ms in the control case vs. 150 ms in the support case) in the support case were obviously longer than those in the control case. Moreover, BJUT-II VAD support reduced retrograde blood flow during the diastolic phase and significantly changed the distribution of WSS of the leaflets.

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, while unloading the left ventricle, BJUT-II VAD could provide beneficial biomechanical states for the aortic leaflets, thereby reducing the risk of aortic valve disease.