Risk factors of early right ventricular failure in patients undergoing LVAD implantation with intermediate Intermacs profile for advanced heart failure

Right ventricular-pulmonary arterial coupling in patients with implanted left ventricular assist devices

OBJECTIVE

Both the right ventricular (RV) contractile function and pulmonary arterial (PA) pressure influence clinical outcomes in patients supported with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs), but the impact of RV-PA coupling is unknown. This study aimed to determine the prognostic impact of RV-PA coupling in patients with implanted LVADs.

METHODS

Patients with implanted third-generation LVADs were retrospectively enrolled. The RV-PA coupling was assessed preoperatively by the ratio of RV free wall strain (RVFWS) derived from speckle-tracking echocardiography and noninvasively measured peak RV systolic pressure (RVSP). The primary end point was a composite of all-cause mortality or right heart failure (RHF) hospitalization. Secondary end points consisted of all-cause mortality at a 12-month follow-up and RHF hospitalization.

RESULTS

A total of 103 patients were screened, and 72 with good RV myocardial imaging were included. The median age was 57 years; 67 patients (93.1%) were men, and 41 (56,9%) had dilated cardiomyopathy. A receiver-operating characteristic analysis (AUC 0.703, 51.5% sensitivity, 94.9% specificity) was used to identify the optimal cutoff point (0.28%/mmHg) for the RVFWS/TAPSE threshold. Nineteen subjects (26.4%) had advanced RV-PA uncoupling. Event rates were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method showing a strong association with an increased risk for the primary end point of death or RHF hospitalization (89.47% vs. 30.19%, p < 0.001). A similar observation applied to all-cause mortality (47.37% vs. 13.21%, p = 0.003) and RHF hospitalization (80.43% vs. 20%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

An advanced RV dysfunction assessed by RV-PA coupling may serve as a predictor of adverse outcomes in patients with implanted LVADs.

Right ventricular dysfunction in left ventricular assist device candidates: is it time to change our prospective?

The use of left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) has significantly increased in the last years, trying to offer a therapeutic alternative to heart transplantation, in light also to the significant heart donor shortage compared to the growing advanced heart failure population. Despite technological improvements in the devices, LVAD-related mortality is still fairly high, with right heart failure being one of the predominant predictors. Therefore, many efforts have been made toward a thorough right ventricular (RV) evaluation prior to LVAD implant, considering clinical, laboratory, echocardiographic, and invasive hemodynamic parameters. However, there is high heterogeneity regarding both which predictor is the strongest as well as the relative cut-off values, and a consensus has not been reached yet, increasing the risk of facing patients in which the distinction between good or poor RV function cannot be surely reached. In parallel, due to technological development and availability of mechanical circulatory support of the RV, LVADs are being considered even in patients with suboptimal RV function. The aim of our review is to analyze the current evidence regarding the role of RV function prior to LVAD and its evaluation, pointing out the extreme variability in parameters that are currently assessed and future prospective regarding new diagnostic tools. Finally, we attempt to gather the available information on the therapeutic strategies to use in the peri-operative phase, in order to reduce the incidence of RV failure, especially in patients in which the preoperative evaluation highlighted some conflicting results with regard to ventricular function.

Cardiovascular indicators associated with ventricular remodeling in chronic high-altitude disease: a cardiovascular MRI study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess biventricular function and mechanics in patients with the chronic high-altitude disease (CHAD) using cardiovascular MRI and explore the possible risk factors associated with ventricular remodeling.

METHODS

In this prospective study, consecutive CHAD patients and healthy controls at high-altitude (HA) and at sea level (SL) underwent cardiovascular MRI. Right ventricular (RV) and left ventricular (LV) function and global strain parameters were compared. To identify risk factors associated with ventricular remodeling, multiple linear regression analyses were used.

RESULTS

A total of 33 patients with CHAD (42.97 years ± 11.80; 23 men), 33 HA (41.18 years ± 8.58; 21 men), and 33 SL healthy controls (43.48 years ± 13.40; 21 men) were included. A Significantly decreased biventricular ejection fraction was observed in patients (all p < 0.05). Additionally, the HA group displayed lower magnitudes of biventricular longitudinal peak strain (PS) (RV,  - 13.67%  ± 4.05 vs.  - 16.22%  ± 3.03; LV,  - 14.68%  ± 2.20 vs.  - 16.19%  ± 2.51; both p < 0.05), but a higher LV circumferential PS (- 20.74%  ± 2.02 vs.  - 19.17%  ± 2.34, p < 0.05) than the SL group. Moreover, multiple linear regression analyses revealed that HGB (β = 0.548) was related to the LV remodeling index, whereas BUN (β = 0.570) was associated with the RV remodeling index.

CONCLUSIONS

With the deterioration of RV function in patients with CHAD, LV function was also impaired concomitantly. Hypoxia-induced erythrocytosis may contribute to LV impairment, while BUN was considered an independent risk factor for RV remodeling.

KEY POINTS

• A significantly lower biventricular ejection fraction was observed in patients, with a decreased magnitude of left ventricular (LV) peak systolic strain rate (radial and circumferential) and peak diastolic strain rate (all p < 0.05). • High-altitude healthy natives showed a lower biventricular longitudinal peak strain (all p < 0.05). • Hemoglobin was related to LV remodeling (β = 0.548), while BUN (β = 0.570) was independently associated with RV remodeling in CHAD patients.

Right heart failure after left ventricular assist device implantation: a persistent problem

Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is an option for bridge-to-transplant or destination therapy for patients with end-stage heart failure. Right heart failure (RHF) remains a complication after LVAD implantation that portends high morbidity and mortality, despite advances in LVAD technology. Definitions of RHF vary, but generally include the need for inotropic or pulmonary vasodilator support, or potential right ventricular (RV) mechanical circulatory support. This review covers the complex pathophysiology of RHF related to underlying myocardial dysfunction, interventricular dependence, and RV afterload, as well as treatment strategies to curtail this challenging problem.

Prediction, prevention, and management of right ventricular failure after left ventricular assist device implantation: A comprehensive review

Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are increasingly common across the heart failure population. Right ventricular failure (RVF) is a feared complication that can occur in the early post-operative phase or during the outpatient follow-up. Multiple tools are available to the clinician to carefully estimate the individual risk of developing RVF after LVAD implantation. This review will provide a comprehensive overview of available tools for RVF prognostication, including patient-specific and right ventricle (RV)-specific echocardiographic and hemodynamic parameters, to provide guidance in patient selection during LVAD candidacy. We also offer a multidisciplinary approach to the management of early RVF, including indications and management of right ventricular assist devices in this setting to provide tools that help managing the failing RV.

Six-month outcomes in postapproval HeartMate3 patients: A single-center US experience

BACKGROUND

The European CE Mark approval study and the MOMENTUM 3 trial demonstrated safety and a reduction in hemocompatibility-related adverse events with the use of HeartMate 3 (HM3) device. This single-center study investigated the real-world experience in HM3 patients since FDA approval.

METHODS

This retrospective, observational study included patients implanted with the HM3 LVAD as a primary implant between October 2017 and March 2020. Patients were divided into trial group and postapproval group. The primary endpoint was survival at 6 months. Secondary endpoints were adverse events including pump thrombosis (requiring pump exchange), stroke, renal failure, acute limb ischemia, re-exploratory for bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding, right ventricular failure, and driveline infection.

RESULTS

A total of 189 patients were implanted with HM3 device during the study period. 174 patients met the inclusion criteria: 82 patients in the trial group and 92 patients in the postapproval group. The postapproval group had younger patients, higher preoperative mean international normalized ratio, and greater numbers of patients with bridge to transplant (BTT) indications, IINTERMACS profile 1, and use of mechanical assist devices (other than IABP) than the trial group. Other characteristics between the two groups were comparable. Overall survival at 6 months in the postapproval group was 93.3% versus 93.8% (p = .88). The postapproval group demonstrated a statistically significant lower incidence of re-explorative surgery for bleeding (10.9% vs. 46.3, p = .01) than the trial group.

CONCLUSION

In this single-center study, the real-world 6-month survival in the postapproval group was comparable to the trial results. Further studies are needed to monitor long-term outcomes.

The HeartWare Ventricular Assist Device (HVAD): A Single Institutional 10-Year Experience

OBJECTIVES

 The aim of this study was to analyze our 10-year experience with the HVAD in a real-world scenario in a high-volume German heart center.

METHODS

 We retrospectively analyzed outcomes of adults (≥18 years) with terminal heart failure (HF), who underwent HVAD implantation for durable LVAD therapy in our center between October 2009 and March 2020. Primary and secondary end points were all-cause death after implantation and LVAD-associated complications, respectively. We focused the distinct analyses on risk profiles at the time of implantation and implant strategies, i.e., bridge-to-transplant (BTT) or destination therapy (DT).

RESULTS

 A total of 510 patients were included, with 229 and 281 individuals in Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) level 1 (45%) and 2 to 4, respectively. Median follow-up was 26 months (IQR: 5-54 months). Overall survival at 1, 3, and 5 years after HVAD implantation was 66% (95% CI; 61.7-70%), 49.4% (95% CI; 44.9-53.8%), and 37.4% (95% CI; 32.8-42%), not censored for LVAD exchange, LVAD explantation, or heart transplantation. INTERMACS level 1 and peri-operative temporary right heart assistance were independent risk factors for survival. Survival was best in BTT patients undergoing heart transplantation at any time during follow-up. The INTERMACS level at time of HVAD implantation did not affect survival after heart transplantation. Freedom from the combined end point of any device-associated severe complication and death was 44.5% (95% CI; 40-48.8%) at 1-year after implantation.

CONCLUSION

 The HVAD is a reliable pump for durable mechanical circulatory support even in high-risk patients. Still, heart transplantation outperforms durable MCS therapy for a superior long-term survival.

Continuous-flow left ventricular assist device: Current knowledge, complications, and future directions

Long-term continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices have become a real alternative to heart transplantation in patients with advanced heart failure, achieving a promising 2-year event-free survival rate with new-generation devices. Currently, this technology has spread throughout the world, and any cardiologist or cardiac surgeon should be familiar with its fundamentals and its possible complications as well as the advances made in recent years. The aim of this review is to describe current knowledge, management of complications, and future directions of this novel heart-failure therapy.

Left Ventricular Assist Device: Indication, Timing, and Management

Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are indicated in inotrope-dependent heart failure (HF) patients with pure or predominant LV dysfunction. Survival benefit is less clear in ambulatory, advanced HF. Timing is crucial: early, unnecessary exposure to the risks of surgery, and device-related complications (infections, stroke, and bleeding) should be weighed against the probability of dying or developing irreversible right ventricular and/or end-organ dysfunction while deferring implant. The interplay between LVAD and heart transplantation depends largely on donor availability and allocation rules. Postoperatively, quality of life depends on patients' expectations and is influenced by complications. Patients' preferences, prognosis, and alternative options-including palliation-should be openly discussed and reviewed before and after the operation.

Prediction of right ventricular failure after left ventricular assist device implantation in patients with heart failure: a meta-analysis comparing echocardiographic parameters

OBJECTIVES

Between 10% and 40% of patients who receive a left ventricular assistance device (LVAD) suffer from right ventricular failure (RVF) shortly after the device is implanted. Patients with post-LVAD RVF tend to have poor outcomes. Only a few predictive factors concerning the right ventricle (RV) have been investigated. Our goal was to search for non-invasive variables that correlate with RV function, focusing on echocardiographic parameters of the RV.

METHODS

We selected 3 parameters: tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion, right ventricular fractional area change and right ventricular global longitudinal strain. We searched the literature and pooled relevant studies in a meta-analysis. Finally, we performed a statistical analysis to confirm whether each parameter was a reliable predictor of RVF after LVAD implantation.

RESULTS

We retained 19 articles involving a total of 1561 patients. We found a pooled standardized mean deviation of -0.13 cm for the tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion, with the lower and upper tails of -0.21 and -0.04 cm, respectively. Concerning the right ventricular fractional area change, the averaged standardized mean deviation was equal to -2.61%, with the lower and upper extremities of -4.12% and -1.09%, respectively. Finally, regarding the global longitudinal strain, the standardized mean deviation was equal to -2.06% with an uncertainty value between -3.23% and -0.88%.

CONCLUSIONS

The tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion could be a reliable parameter in RVF prediction. The right ventricular fractional area change and global longitudinal strain are likely to be stronger predictors of RVF after LVAD implantation. Prospective studies should be carried out to confirm this observation.

Ambulatory advanced heart failure patients: timing of mechanical circulatory support - delaying the inevitable?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Current indications for continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (cfLVAD) implantation is for patients in cardiogenic shock or inotrope-dependent advanced heart failure. Risk stratification of noninotrope dependent ambulatory advanced heart failure patients is a subject of registries designed to help shared-decision making by clinicians and patients regarding the optimal timing of mechanical circulatory support (MCS).

RECENT FINDINGS

The Registry Evaluation of Vital Information for VADs in Ambulatory Life enrolled ambulatory noninotrope dependent advanced systolic heart failure patients who had 25% annualized risk of death, MCS, or heart transplantation (HT). Freedom from composite clinical outcome at 1-year follow-up was 23.5% for the entire cohort. Seattle Heart Failure Model Score and Natriuretic pepides were predictors with modest discriminatory power. Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) profile 4 patients had the highest risk (3.7-fold) of death, MCS or HT compared to INTERMACS profile 7.

SUMMARY

We propose individualized risk stratification for noninotrope dependent ambulatory advanced heart failure patients and include serial changes in end-organ function, nutritional parameters, frailty assessment, echocardiographic and hemodynamic data. The clinical journey of a patient with advanced heart failure should be tracked and discussed at each clinic visit for shared decision-making regarding timing of cfLVAD.

Ventricular Assist Devices and Chronic Kidney Replacement Therapy: Technology and Outcomes

Heart failure and kidney failure are very common conditions, precipitating and exacerbating each other. Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) represent a relatively new technology for treatment of advanced heart failure. Kidney dysfunction, if present, makes candidate selection for LVADs challenging and contributes to multiple complications while the patients are on an LVAD support. Although kidney function generally improves after LVAD implantation, some patients develop acute and then chronic kidney disease sometimes requiring kidney replacement therapies (KRTs). Overall, chronic KRT in LVAD recipients is feasible and well tolerated, but routine technique of blood pressure monitoring should be adjusted to the continuous blood flow. Both hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis can be used. Unique challenges for chronic KRT posed by the presence of LVAD are discussed in this review.

Assessment of right ventricular function following left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation-The role of speckle-tracking echocardiography: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Right ventricular failure (RVF) following left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation is associated with worse outcomes. Prediction of RVF is difficult with routine transthoracic echocardiography (TTE), while speckle-tracking echocardiography (STE) showed promising results. We performed systematic review and meta-analysis of published literature.

METHODS

We queried multiple databases to compile articles reporting preoperative or intraoperative right ventricle global longitudinal strain (RVGLS) or right ventricle free wall strain (RVFWS) in LVAD recipients. The standard mean difference (SMD) in RVGLS and RVFWS in patients with and without RVF postoperatively was pooled using random-effects model.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies were included. Patients with RVF had significantly lower RVGLS and RVFWS as compared to non-RVF patients; SMD: 2.79 (95% CI: -4.07 to -1.50; P: <.001) and -3.05 (95% CI: -4.11 to -1.99; P: <.001), respectively. The pooled odds ratio (OR) for RVF per percentage increase of RVGLS and RVFWS were 1.10 (95 CI: 0.98-1.25) and 1.63 (95% CI 1.07-2.47), respectively. In a subgroup analysis, TTE-derived GLS and FWS were significantly lower in RVF patients as compared to non-RVF patients; SMD of -3.97 (95% CI: -5.40 to -2.54; P: <.001) and -3.05 (95% CI: -4.11 to -1.99; P: <.001), respectively. There was no significant difference between RVF and non-RVF groups in TEE-derived RVGLS and RVFWS.

CONCLUSION

RVGLS and RVFWS were lower in patients who developed RVF as compared to non-RVF patients. In a subgroup analysis, TTE-derived RVGLS and RVFWS were reduced in RVF patients as compared to non-RVF patients. This difference was not reported with TEE.