Implanting a Nonpulsatile Axial Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device as a Bridge to Transplant for Systemic Ventricular Failure After A Mustard Procedure

Heart Transplantation in Mustard Patients Bridged With Continuous Flow Systemic Ventricular Assist Device - A Case Report and Review of Literature

Thirty four-year-old male with history of D-transposition of the great arteries (D-TGA) who underwent Mustard operation at 14 months of age presented in cardiogenic shock secondary to severe systemic right ventricular failure. Catheterization revealed significantly increased pulmonary pressures. Due to the patient's inotrope dependence and prohibitive pulmonary hypertension, he underwent implantation of a Heart Ware HVAD® for systemic RV support. Within 4 months of continuous flow ventricular assist device (VAD) implantation complete normalization of pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) was achieved. He ultimately underwent orthotopic heart transplantation with favorable outcomes. This is the second report of complete normalization of PVR following VAD implantation into a systemic RV in <4 months. We conducted a thorough literature review to identify Mustard patients that received systemic RV VAD as a bridge to a successful heart transplantation. In this article, we summarize the outcomes and focus on pulmonary hypertension reversibility following VAD implant.

Durable mechanical circulatory support in teenagers and adults with congenital heart disease: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Heart failure is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality for adults with congenital heart disease (ACHD). Many patients are ineligible for transplantation, and those who are eligible often face long wait times with high wait-list morbidity. Durable mechanical circulatory support (MCS) may be an option for many patients. This systematic review evaluates the published literature on the use of durable MCS in teenagers and adults with congenital heart disease.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was performed electronically in July 2015 and updated in March 2016, guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines.

RESULTS

Individual case reports and several case series identified 66 patients with ACHD treated with durable MCS. More than half were INTERMACS 1 or 2 at the time of implantation. Patients with Fontan repairs were more frequently classified as INTERMACS 1 or 2 (89% compared to 59% or less among other groups). Cases published after 2010 showed a trend toward less severe INTERMACS status, and patients were less likely to have received transplants by the time of reporting (31% compared to 61% prior). Durable MCS was implanted as bridge-to-transplant in 77%. Patients with Fontan repair accounted for 14% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Reports of durable MCS utilization in patients with ACHD are becoming more frequent and devices are being implanted in more stable patients. Reports are mostly case reports or small case series so reporting bias is likely and prospective protocoled reporting is needed.