Change in quality of life from before to after discharge following left ventricular assist device implantation.

BACKGROUND: Quality of life (QOL) outcomes after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation from before to after hospital discharge have been examined only in a very small sample of patients. The purposes of this study are to describe change in QOL from before to after hospital discharge in LVAD patients and to determine whether being discharged with an LVAD predicts better QOL than being hospitalized with an LVAD. METHODS: A non-random sample of 62 LVAD patients (approximately 50 years old, male, white, married, fairly well-educated) completed self-report questionnaires at >or=2 timepoints post-implant. The questionnaires (Quality of Life Index, Rating Question Form, Heart Failure Symptom Checklist, Sickness Impact Profile, LVAD Stressor Scale, Jalowiec Coping Scale), which were collated into booklets, had acceptable reliability and validity. Longitudinal analyses were performed in 2 steps using 1-sample t-tests and linear mixed effects modeling. RESULTS: Perception of QOL and health status were fairly good both before and after discharge of LVAD patients. Discharge predicted increased satisfaction with socioeconomic areas of life; decreased overall and psychologic stress and stress related to family and friends, self-care and work/school/finances; and decreased physical and self-care disability. CONCLUSIONS: QOL outcomes improved from before to after hospital discharge in LVAD patients awaiting heart transplantation. As LVADs potentially become available as destination therapy, in addition to being successful bridges to heart transplantation, QOL outcomes will become more important to study.     

Wound complications after left ventricular assist device implantation

BACKGROUND: Wound necrosis and infection pose a tremendous risk for patients with left ventricular assist devices. METHODS: We analyzed our database of patients with left ventricular assist devices for those who developed wound dehiscence and concomitant infection after left ventricular assist device implantation. RESULTS: Three of our 66 patients (4.5%) with implantable ventricular assist devices had had severe wound complications with necrosis of the abdominal or thoracic wall uncovering part of the device. The predominant impact on the development of these complications was presumably related to multiple surgical interventions on the same site. CONCLUSIONS: Nevertheless, these patients can recover and undergo successful heart transplantation if adequately managed.     

Anesthetic management for left ventricular assist device implantation in patients waiting for heart transplantation

We report the anesthetic management of patients with dilated cardiomyopathy who underwent left ventricular assist device implantation (LVAD). Anesthesia was induced and maintained with midazolam and fentanyl. Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and a PA catheter were useful for hemodynamic monitoring and management of the patients. Furthermore, TEE is useful for the early detection of inflow of the air which is absorbed by negative pressure derived from high LVAD support pressure. On starting LVAD support, evaluation of right ventricular function and treatment for right ventricular failure were important and necessary for the patients. Added to conventional therapy using catecholamines, inhaled nitric oxide may provide a favorable effect for right ventricular failure.     

Optimal timing of cardiac transplantation after ventricular assist device implantation

OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine the influence of the interval from ventricular assist device implantation to cardiac transplantation on end-organ function and posttransplantation survival. METHODS: United Network for Organ Sharing data on 2692 heart transplantations performed in adult patients in the United States between October 1999 and March 2001 were reviewed. RESULTS: Seventeen percent (466) of adult heart transplant recipients were bridged to transplantation with a ventricular assist device. Almost half of patients with ventricular assist devices undergoing transplantation were upgraded to status 1A as a result of ventricular assist device-related complications occurring more than 30 days after ventricular assist device implantation. Creatinine and total bilirubin levels were less in patients undergoing transplantation after 2 to 4 weeks of mechanical support. One-year survival was higher in the nonventricular assist device than in the ventricular assist device group (85.7% vs 79.7%, P =.0004). Within the ventricular assist device group, survival was lower for patients undergoing transplantation within 2 weeks of ventricular assist device implantation compared with those undergoing transplantation later (74.2% vs 84.2 %, P =.03). One-year survival among patients supported with a ventricular assist device for more than 30 days without complications was 91.4%. Multivariate analysis demonstrated a significant independent effect of the time interval from ventricular assist device implantation to transplantation on posttransplantation mortality and suggested that a period of lowest risk might exist between 1 and 3 months after implantation. CONCLUSIONS: Survival after cardiac transplantation is influenced by the time interval from ventricular assist device insertion to transplantation. Survival is significantly lower when performed within 2 to 4 weeks of ventricular assist device implantation.     

Durable left ventricular assist device implantation in extremely obese heart failure patients

Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have improved clinical outcomes and quality of life for those with end‐stage heart failure. However, the costs and risks associated with these devices necessitate appropriate patient selection. LVAD candidates are becoming increasingly more obese and there are conflicting reports regarding obesity’s effect on outcomes. Hence, we sought to evaluate the impact of extreme obesity on clinical outcomes after LVAD placement. Consecutive LVAD implantation patients at our center from June 2008 to May 2016 were studied retrospectively. We compared patients with a body mass index (BMI) ≥40 kg/m² (extremely obese) to those with BMI < 40 kg/m² with respect to patient characteristics and surgical outcomes, including survival. 252 patients were included in this analysis, 30 (11.9%) of whom met the definition of extreme obesity. We found that patients with extreme obesity were significantly younger (47[33, 57] vs. 60[52, 67] years, P < 0.001) with fewer prior sternotomies (16.7% vs. 36.0%, P = 0.04). They had higher rates of pump thrombosis (30% vs. 9.0%, P = 0.003) and stage 2/3 acute kidney injury (46.7% vs. 27.0%, P = 0.003), but there were no differences in 30‐day or 1‐year survival, even after adjusting for age and clinical factors. Extreme obesity does not appear to place LVAD implantation patients at a higher risk for mortality compared to those who are not extremely obese; however, extreme obesity was associated with an increased risk of pump thrombosis, suggesting that these patients may require additional care to reduce the need for urgent device exchange.     

Impact of pretransplant left ventricular assist device support duration on outcome after heart transplantation

 Open in a separate windowOBJECTIVESHeart transplantation after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation remains challenging. It is still unclear whether its support duration impacts the outcome after transplantation. METHODSAll patients undergoing heart transplantation between 2010 and 2021 at a single department after previous left ventricular assistance were retrospectively reviewed and divided into 4 different study groups with regard to the duration of LVAD support to examine the impact on the postoperative morbidity and mortality.RESULTSA total of n = 198 patients were included and assigned to the 4 study groups (group 1: <90 days, n = 14; group 2: 90 days to 1 year, n = 31; group 3: 1–2 years, n = 29; group 4: >2 years, n = 24). Although there were no differences between the 4 groups concerning relevant mismatch between the recipients and donors, the incidence of primary graft dysfunction was numerically increased in patients with the shortest support duration, and also those patients with >1 year of support (group 1: 35.7%, group 2: 25.8%, group 3: 41.4%, group 4: 37.5%, P = 0.63). The incidence of acute graft rejection was by trend increased in patients of group 1 (group 1: 28.6%, group 2: 3.3%, group 3: 7.1%, group 4: 12.5%, P = 0.06). Duration of LVAD support did not impact on perioperative adverse events (infections, P = 0.79; acute kidney injury, P = 0.85; neurological events, P = 0.74; thoracic bleeding, P = 0.61), neither on postoperative survival (1-year survival: group 1: 78.6%, group 2: 66.7%, group 3: 80.0%, group 4: 72.7%, P = 0.74).CONCLUSIONWe cannot identify a significant impact of the duration of pretransplant LVAD support on postoperative outcome; therefore, we cannot recommend a certain timeframe for transplantation of LVAD patients.     

Right ventricular failure after left ventricular assist device implantation: the need for an implantable right ventricular assist device

Right ventricular failure after implantation of a left ventricular assist device is an unremitting problem. Consideration of portal circulation is important for reversing liver dysfunction and preventing multiple organ failure after left ventricular assist device implantation. To achieve these objectives, it is imperative to maintain the central venous pressure as low as possible. A more positive application of right ventricular assistance is recommended. Implantable pulsatile left ventricular assist devices cannot be used as a right ventricular assist device because of their structure and device size. To improve future prospects, it is necessary to develop an implantable right ventricular assist device based on a rotary blood pump.