Effect of Preoperative Small Left Ventricle on Patients with Chronic Heart Failure Undergoing Implantation of Long-Term Continuous Flow Ventricular Assist Devices: Comparative Analysis of HeartMate II and HeartWare Devices

Microparticles are small circulating vesicles originating from circulatory system and vascular wall cells released during their activation or damage. They possess different roles in regulation of endothelial function, inflammation, thrombosis, angiogenesis, and in general, cellular stress. Microparticles are the subject of intensive research in pulmonary hypertension, atherosclerotic disease, and heart failure. Another recently emerging role is the evaluation of the status of vasculature in end-stage heart failure patients treated with implantable ventricular assist devices. In patients implanted as destination therapy, assessment of the long-term effect of currently used continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) on vasculature might be of critical importance. However, unique continuous flow pattern generated by LVADs makes it difficult to assess reliably the vascular function with most currently used methods, based mainly on ultrasound detection of changes of arterial dilatation during pulsatile flow. In this respect, the measurement of circulating microparticles as a marker of vascular status may help to elucidate both short- and long-term effects of LVADs on the vascular system. Because data regarding this topic are very limited, this review is focused on the advantages and caveats of the circulating microparticles as markers of vascular function in patients on continuous-flow LVADs.

Download Full-text

Results of primary biventricular support: an analysis of data from the EUROMACS registry

European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery ◽

10.1093/ejcts/ezz173 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 56 (6) ◽

pp. 1037-1045 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Juliane Vierecke ◽

Brigitta Gahl ◽

Theo M M H de By ◽

Herwig Antretter ◽

Friedhelm Beyersdorf ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Heart Failure ◽

Adverse Events ◽

Right Ventricular ◽

Continuous Flow ◽

Left Ventricular ◽

Ventricular Assist Devices ◽

Short Term ◽

Ventricular Assist ◽

Assist Devices

Abstract OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to describe pre- and postoperative data from the EUROMACS registry with regard to indications, for and survival and complication rates of patients with primary continuous flow and pulsatile biventricular long-term assist devices (BiVADs) versus total artificial hearts (TAHs) or left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) + short-term right ventricular assist device (RVAD) implants. METHODS We investigated patients who received implants between 1 January 2011 and 21 October 2017. Clinical baseline information about comorbidities, laboratory results, medical and device therapies and echocardiographic, haemodynamic and right ventricle (RV) parameters were evaluated along with the rates of deaths and complications. RESULTS A total of 413 of 3282 patients (12.5%) needed a biventricular pump. We investigated 37 long-term BiVADs, 342 LVAD + short-term RVAD implants and 34 TAHs. Minor differences were found in the baseline characteristics of our population, which had an overall high morbidity profile. The 1-year survival rate was 55% for patients with a continuous flow BiVAD; 52% for patients with an LVAD + short-term RVAD; 37% for patients with pulsatile BiVADs; and 36% for patients with a TAH. No statistical difference was observed among the groups. Over 50% of patients with BiVAD support were classified as INTERMACS profiles 1 and 2. The percent of patients with ambulatory heart failure (INTERMACS 4‒7) undergoing BiVAD implants was modest at <15%. No patients with a pulsatile BiVAD (n = 15) or a TAH (n = 34) were implanted as destination therapy, but 27% of the patients with continuous flow BiVADs (n = 6) and 23% of the patients with LVAD + short-term RVAD (n = 342) were implanted as ‘destination’. The adverse events profile remained high, with no significant difference among pump types. The right ventricular stroke work index and right heart failure scores indicated poor RV function in all groups. After 3 months of LVAD + short-term RVAD support, 46.7% still required ongoing support, and only 18.5% were weaned from RVAD support; 33.1% died. CONCLUSIONS The mortality rate after BiVAD support was high. Survival rates and adverse events were statistically not different among the investigated groups. In the future, composite study end points examining quality of life and adverse events beyond survival may help in shared decision-making prior to general mechanical circulatory support, particularly in patients with BiVAD implants.

Download Full-text