Surgical Microaxial Pump Catheters as Bridge to Permanent Mechanical Circulatory Support in Patients with Left Ventricular Failure: Who Makes It?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. Sugimura ◽  
N. Kalampokas ◽  
A. Mehdiani ◽  
P. Rellecke ◽  
I. Tudorache ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (10) ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia Frankfurter ◽  
Micaela Molinero ◽  
Julie K.K. Vishram-Nielsen ◽  
Farid Foroutan ◽  
Susanna Mak ◽  
...  

Background: Right ventricular failure (RVF) is a cause of major morbidity and mortality after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. It is, therefore, integral to identify patients who may benefit from biventricular support early post-LVAD implantation. Our objective was to explore the performance of risk prediction models for RVF in adult patients undergoing LVAD implantation. Methods: A systematic search was performed on Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from inception until August 2019 for all relevant studies. Performance was assessed by discrimination (via C statistic) and calibration if reported. Study quality was assessed using the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool criteria. Results: After reviewing 3878 citations, 25 studies were included, featuring 20 distinctly derived models. Five models were derived from large multicenter cohorts: the European Registry for Patients With Mechanical Circulatory Support, Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support, Kormos, Pittsburgh Bayesian, and Mechanical Circulatory Support Research Network RVF models. Seventeen studies (68%) were conducted in cohorts implanted with continuous-flow LVADs exclusively. The definition of RVF as an outcome was heterogenous among models. Seven derived models (28%) were validated in at least 2 cohorts, reporting limited discrimination (C-statistic range, 0.53–0.65). Calibration was reported in only 3 studies and was variable. Conclusions: Existing RVF prediction models exhibit heterogeneous derivation and validation methodologies, varying definitions of RVF, and are mostly derived from single centers. Validation studies of these prediction models demonstrate poor-to-modest discrimination. Newer models are derived in cohorts implanted with continuous-flow LVADs exclusively and exhibit modest discrimination. Derivation of enhanced discriminatory models and their validations in multicenter cohorts is needed.


1992 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 114-119 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Zobel ◽  
D. Dacar ◽  
M. Kuttnig ◽  
S. Rödl ◽  
B. Rigler

Objective this study compares the hemodynamic effects of intraaortic balloon pumping (IABP), left ventricular assist device (LVAD), and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in left ventricular failure in pigs. Methods In 29 pigs weighing 12 + 0.7 kg left ventricular failure was induced by ligating the left anterior descending coronary artery. Eight animals served as controls. Eight pigs were treated by IABP, seven by LVAD, and six by ECMO. The study period lasted four hours. Hemodynamic and oxygen transport/ uptake parameters were measured continuously or intermittently. Results Six animals of the ECMO and LVAD groups survived the 4 hour period, but only 3 and 4 animals of the IABP and control groups survived (p<0.05). Cardiac index decreased about 48% and 22% in the control and IABP groups (p<0.05), whereas there was only a slight decrease in the ECMO (9%) and LVAD (14%) groups. Oxygen delivery fell significantly in the control and IABP groups (p<0.05), compared with only a slight change in the LVAD and ECMO groups. Conclusion ECMO is the most effective system for temporary circulatory support in severe ventricular failure. LVAD maintains cardiac output when pulmonary blood flow is provided. IABP is less efficient in supporting the failing heart, especially in the presence of severe ventricular arrhythmias.


Circulation ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 93 (12) ◽  
pp. 2188-2196 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert L. Duerr ◽  
M. Dan McKirnan ◽  
Ronald D. Gim ◽  
Ross G. Clark ◽  
Kenneth R. Chien ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document