Long-term predictors of morbidity and mortality in patients following LVAD replacement.
heart failure surgery
mechanical circulatory assistance
ventricular assist device
Journal
Artificial organs
ISSN: 1525-1594
Titre abrégé: Artif Organs
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7802778
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 Oct 2023
10 Oct 2023
Historique:
revised:
05
09
2023
received:
31
05
2023
accepted:
18
09
2023
medline:
10
10
2023
pubmed:
10
10
2023
entrez:
10
10
2023
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
As heart transplant guidelines evolve, the clinical indication for 73% of durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implants is now destination therapy. Although completely magnetically levitated LVAD devices have demonstrated improved durability relative to previous models, LVAD replacement procedures are still required for a variety of indications. Thus, the population of patients with a replaced LVAD is growing. There is a paucity of data regarding the outcomes and risk factors for those patients receiving first-time LVAD replacements. The study cohort consisted of all consecutive patients between 2006 and 2020 that received a first-time LVAD replacement at a single institution. Preoperative clinical and laboratory variables were collected retrospectively. The primary endpoint was death or need for an additional LVAD replacement. Data were subjected to Kaplan-Meier, univariate, and multivariate Cox hazard ratio analyses. In total, 152 patients were included in the study, of which 101 experienced the primary endpoint. On multivariate analysis, patients receiving HeartMate 3 (HM3) LVADs as the replacement device showed superior outcomes (HR 0.15, 95% CI 0.065-0.35, p < 0.0001). Independent risk factors for death or need for additional replacement included preoperative extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) (HR 4.44, 95% CI 1.87-14.45, and p = 0.00042), increased number of sternotomies (HR 5.20, 95% CI 1.87-14.45, and p = 0.0016), and preoperative mechanical ventilation (HR 1.98, 95% CI 1.01-3.86, and p = 0.045). Replacement with HM3 showed superior outcomes compared to all other pump types when controlling for both initial pump type and other independent predictors of death or LVAD replacement. Preoperative ECMO, mechanical ventilation, and multiple sternotomies also increased the odds for death or the need for subsequent replacement.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
As heart transplant guidelines evolve, the clinical indication for 73% of durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implants is now destination therapy. Although completely magnetically levitated LVAD devices have demonstrated improved durability relative to previous models, LVAD replacement procedures are still required for a variety of indications. Thus, the population of patients with a replaced LVAD is growing. There is a paucity of data regarding the outcomes and risk factors for those patients receiving first-time LVAD replacements.
METHODS
METHODS
The study cohort consisted of all consecutive patients between 2006 and 2020 that received a first-time LVAD replacement at a single institution. Preoperative clinical and laboratory variables were collected retrospectively. The primary endpoint was death or need for an additional LVAD replacement. Data were subjected to Kaplan-Meier, univariate, and multivariate Cox hazard ratio analyses.
RESULTS
RESULTS
In total, 152 patients were included in the study, of which 101 experienced the primary endpoint. On multivariate analysis, patients receiving HeartMate 3 (HM3) LVADs as the replacement device showed superior outcomes (HR 0.15, 95% CI 0.065-0.35, p < 0.0001). Independent risk factors for death or need for additional replacement included preoperative extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) (HR 4.44, 95% CI 1.87-14.45, and p = 0.00042), increased number of sternotomies (HR 5.20, 95% CI 1.87-14.45, and p = 0.0016), and preoperative mechanical ventilation (HR 1.98, 95% CI 1.01-3.86, and p = 0.045).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Replacement with HM3 showed superior outcomes compared to all other pump types when controlling for both initial pump type and other independent predictors of death or LVAD replacement. Preoperative ECMO, mechanical ventilation, and multiple sternotomies also increased the odds for death or the need for subsequent replacement.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2023 International Center for Artificial Organ and Transplantation (ICAOT) and Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Molina EJ, Shah P, Kiernan MS, Cornwell WK III, Copeland H, Takeda K, et al. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Intermacs 2020 annual report. Ann Thorac Surg. 2021;111(3):778-792. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.12.038
Gustafsson F, Rogers JG. Left ventricular assist device therapy in advanced heart failure: patient selection and outcomes. Eur J Heart Fail. 2017;19(5):595-602. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejhf.779
Mehra MR, Uriel N, Naka Y, Cleveland JC Jr, Yuzefpolskaya M, Salerno CT, et al. A fully magnetically levitated left ventricular assist device-final report. N Engl J Med. 2019;380(17):1618-1627. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1900486
Schechter MA, Daneshmand MA, Patel CB, Blue LJ, Rogers JG, Milano CA. Outcomes after implantable left ventricular assist device replacement procedures. ASAIO J. 2014;60(1):44-48. https://doi.org/10.1097/mat.0000000000000011
Kirklin JK, Naftel DC, Kormos RL, Pagani FD, Myers SL, Stevenson LW, et al. Interagency registry for mechanically assisted circulatory support (INTERMACS) analysis of pump thrombosis in the HeartMate II left ventricular assist device. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2014;33(1):12-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healun.2013.11.001
Cogswell R, Cantor RS, Vorovich E, Kilic A, Stehlik J, Cowger JA, et al. HVAD to Heartmate 3 device exchange: a society of thoracic surgeons intermacs analysis. Ann Thorac Surg. 2021;114:1672-1678. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2021.09.031
Barac YD, Wojnarski CM, Junpaparp P, Jawitz OK, Billard H, Daneshmand MA, et al. Early outcomes with durable left ventricular assist device replacement using the HeartMate 3. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2020;160(1):132-139.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2019.09.151
Akhter SA, Badami A, Murray M, Kohmoto T, Lozonschi L, Osaki S, et al. Hospital readmissions after continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implantation: incidence, causes, and cost analysis. Ann Thorac Surg. 2015;100(3):884-889. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2015.03.010
Cowger J, Sundareswaran K, Rogers JG, Park SJ, Pagani FD, Bhat G, et al. Predicting survival in patients receiving continuous flow left ventricular assist devices. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61(3):313-321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2012.09.055
Aaronson KD, Patel H, Pagani FD. Patient selection for left ventricular assist device therapy. Ann Thorac Surg. 2003;75(6 Suppl):S29-S35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-4975(03)00461-2
Lamba HK, Kim M, Santiago A, Hudson S, Civitello AB, Nair AP, et al. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as a bridge to durable left ventricular assist device implantation in INTERMACS-1 patients. J Artif Organs. 2022;25(1):16-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10047-021-01275-3
Unai S, Yamane K, Tanaka D, Cook G, Hirose H, Cavarocchi NC, et al. Quality of life and mid-term survival of patients bridged with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation to left ventricular assist device. ASAIO J. 2017;63(3):273-278. https://doi.org/10.1097/mat.0000000000000471
Millar JE, Fanning JP, McDonald CI, McAuley DF, Fraser JF. The inflammatory response to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO): a review of the pathophysiology. Crit Care. 2016;20(1):387. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-016-1570-4
Kirshbom PM, Myung RJ, Simsic JM, Kramer ZB, Leong T, Kogon BE, et al. One thousand repeat sternotomies for congenital cardiac surgery: risk factors for reentry injury. Ann Thorac Surg. 2009;88(1):158-161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2009.03.082
Morales D, Williams E, John R. Is resternotomy in cardiac surgery still a problem? Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2010;11(3):277-286. https://doi.org/10.1510/icvts.2009.232090
Ayers BC, Wood K, McNitt S, Goldenberg I, Chen L, Alexis J, et al. Association of previous cardiac surgery with outcomes in left ventricular assist device patients. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2020;31(1):1-8. https://doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivaa055
Worku B, Gambardella I, Rahouma M, Demetres M, Gaudino M, Girardi L. Thoracotomy versus sternotomy? The effect of surgical approach on outcomes after left ventricular assist device implantation: a review of the literature and meta-analysis. J Card Surg. 2021;36(7):2314-2328. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocs.15552
Miller PE, Caraballo C, Ravindra NG, et al. Clinical implications of respiratory failure in patients receiving durable left ventricular assist devices for end-stage heart failure. Circ Heart Fail. 2019;12(11):e006369. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.119.006369
Kirklin JK, Naftel DC, Pagani FD, Kormos RL, Stevenson LW, Blume ED, et al. Seventh INTERMACS annual report: 15,000 patients and counting. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2015;34(12):1495-1504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healun.2015.10.003