Electrical storm after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation.
left ventricular assist device
ventricular tachycardia
Journal
Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology
ISSN: 1540-8167
Titre abrégé: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9010756
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 Apr 2024
09 Apr 2024
Historique:
revised:
22
03
2024
received:
21
11
2023
accepted:
27
03
2024
medline:
9
4
2024
pubmed:
9
4
2024
entrez:
9
4
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Ventricular tachycardia storm or electrical storm (ES) is a common complication following left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. The factors contributing to ES and outcomes are less studied. The study aimed to determine the factors associated with ES and the probability of survival in patients undergoing LVAD in three tertiary centers over a span of 15 years. We performed a retrospective cohort study on all patients who underwent LVAD implantation at the Mayo Clinic (Rochester, Phoenix, and Jacksonville) from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2020. ES was defined as ≥3 episodes of sustained ventricular tachycardia over a period of 24 h with no identifiable reversible cause. Detailed chart reviews of the electronic health records within the Mayo Clinic and outside medical records were performed. A total of 883 patients who underwent LVAD implantation were included in our study. ES occurred in 7% (n = 61) of patients with a median of 13 days (interquartile range [IQR]: 5-297 days) following surgery. We found 57% of patients (n = 35) developed ES within 30 days, while 43% (n = 26) patients developed ES at a median of 545 (IQR 152-1032) days after surgery. Following ES, 26% of patients died within 1 year. Patients with ES had a significant association with a history of ventricular arrhythmias and implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) shocks before the procedure. ES was significantly associated with reduced survival compared to patients without ES (hazards ratio [HR]: 1.92, 95% CI: 1.39-2.64, p < .001). Following LVAD implantation, the rate of ES was 7% with majority of ES occurring within 30 days of LVAD. Risk factors for ES included pre-implant history of ventricular arrhythmias and ICD shock. ES was significantly associated with reduced survival compared to patients without ES.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Authors. Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Slaughter MS, Rogers JG, Milano CA, et al. Advanced heart failure treated with continuous‐flow left ventricular assist device. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(23):2241‐2251.
Rose EA, Gelijns AC, Moskowitz AJ, et al. Long‐term use of a left ventricular assist device for end‐stage heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2001;345(20):1435‐1443.
Mehra MR, Goldstein DJ, Uriel N, et al. Two‐year outcomes with a magnetically levitated cardiac pump in heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(15):1386‐1395.
Rehorn MR, Black‐Maier E, Loungani R, et al. Electrical storm in patients with left ventricular assist devices: risk factors, incidence, and impact on survival. Heart Rhythm. 2021;18(8):1263‐1271.
Numan L, Zimpfer D, Zadok OIB, et al. Identifying patients at risk: multi‐centre comparison of HeartMate 3 and HeartWare left ventricular assist devices. ESC Heart Fail. 2023;10(3):1656‐1665.
Chaudhry SP, DeVore AD, Vidula H, et al. Left ventricular assist devices: a primer for the general cardiologist. J Am Heart Assoc. 2022;11(24):e027251.
Greet BD, Pujara D, Burkland D, et al. Incidence, predictors, and significance of ventricular arrhythmias in patients with continuous‐flow left ventricular assist devices. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2018;4(2):257‐264.
Hohnloser SH, Al‐Khalidi HR, Pratt CM, et al. Electrical storm in patients with an implantable defibrillator: incidence, features, and preventive therapy: insights from a randomized trial. Eur Heart J. 2006;27(24):3027‐3032.
Fisher LD, Lin DY. Time‐dependent covariates in the Cox proportional‐hazards regression model. Annu Rev Public Health. 1999;20:145‐157.
Genovese EA, Dew MA, Teuteberg JJ, et al. Incidence and patterns of adverse event onset during the first 60 days after ventricular assist device implantation. Ann Thorac Surg. 2009;88(4):1162‐1170.
Pagani FD, Miller LW, Russell SD, et al. Extended mechanical circulatory support with a continuous‐flow rotary left ventricular assist device. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54(4):312‐321.
Galand V, Flécher E, Auffret V, et al. Predictors and clinical impact of late ventricular arrhythmias in patients with continuous‐flow left ventricular assist devices. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2018;4(9):1166‐1175.
Galand V, Flécher E, Auffret V, et al. Early ventricular arrhythmias after LVAD implantation is the strongest predictor of 30‐day post‐operative mortality. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2019;5(8):944‐954.
Chou A, Larson J, Deshmukh A, et al. Association between biventricular pacing and incidence of ventricular arrhythmias in the early post‐operative period after left ventricular assist device implantation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2022;33(5):1024‐1031.
Martins RP, Leclercq C, Bourenane H, et al. Incidence, predictors, and clinical impact of electrical storm in patients with left ventricular assist devices: new insights from the ASSIST‐ICD study. Heart Rhythm. 2019;16(10):1506‐1512.
Raasch H, Jensen BC, Chang PP, et al. Epidemiology, management, and outcomes of sustained ventricular arrhythmias after continuous‐flow left ventricular assist device implantation. Am Heart J. 2012;164(3):373‐378.
Tankut S, Gosev I, Yoruk A, et al. Intraoperative ventricular tachycardia ablation during left ventricular assist device implantation in high‐risk heart failure patients. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2022;15(6):e010660.