Titanium Fastener Utilization during HeartMate 3 Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation

Author(s):  
Carl A. Johnson ◽  
Amber L. Melvin ◽  
Davida A. Robinson ◽  
Hossein Amirjamshidi ◽  
Peter A. Knight ◽  
...  

Objective The objective of this study was to investigate the feasibility of using titanium fasteners for securement of the inflow sewing ring during HeartMate 3 implantation. The secondary objective was to compare cardiopulmonary bypass and total operative times between the titanium fastener and hand-tied knot groups. Methods Clearance between the sewing ring and the HeartMate 3 device was assessed in vitro. Thirty-one patients undergoing HeartMate 3 implantation via median sternotomy at a single center from April 2017 to February 2018 were reviewed. The sewing ring was secured with hand-tied knots (n = 18) or titanium fasteners (n = 13). Cannulation strategy and implantation technique were otherwise identical between groups. Central arterial and venous cannulation was performed for cardiopulmonary bypass. The left ventricular apex was cored, and the sewing ring was attached with hand-tied knots or titanium fasteners. Results There was adequate clearance for the titanium fastener to secure the inflow sewing ring and then connect to the HeartMate 3 in vitro. The inflow sewing ring was successfully secured during HeartMate 3 implantation in the titanium fastener group. Cardiopulmonary bypass time was 75 and 92 minutes for the titanium fastener and hand-tied groups, respectively ( P < 0.03). Total operative time was 177 and 193 minutes for the titanium fastener and hand-tied groups, respectively ( P = 0.513). Conclusions The inflow sewing ring of the HeartMate 3 was efficiently secured using titanium fasteners. Titanium fasteners resulted in shorter cardiopulmonary bypass times compared with the hand-tied group. There was no difference in total operative time.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mleyhi Sobhi ◽  
Miri Rim ◽  
Denguir Raouf

Indication of Ventricular assistance is advanced cardiac failure with maximal medical and surgical treatment has been used. The ventricular assistance has two main purposes: first, to maintain circulation by discharging the ventricle (s) untill to recovery, or to ensure patient survival by replacing cardiac function permanently or transitionally for patients waiting for heart Transplantation. The encouraging results of the partial or total artificial heart and the miniaturization of these devices allow their use in permanent implantation for patients with heart failure that is not eligible for heart transplantation. In left mono-ventricular assistance, blood is taken from the apex of the left ventricle (LV) and reinjected in the ascending aorta. The classic surgical approach is a total median sternotomy. Other minimally invasive approaches for the implantation or explanation of left ventricular assist devices have been published and have shown encouraging results. These alternatives currently play an important role in certain indications and in patients with heavy medical history. Nevertheless, the complications of the ventricular assistance even by minimally invasive approaches might be serious and represent a turning point in the life of the patients. In this chapter, we describe the implantation technique of left ventricular assistance device (LVAD) and we discuss its advantages and disadvantages including possible complications.


2018 ◽  
Vol 67 (03) ◽  
pp. 170-175 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Reichart ◽  
C.F. Brand ◽  
A.M. Bernhardt ◽  
S. Schmidt ◽  
A. Schaefer ◽  
...  

Background Minimally invasive left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation may reduce peri-/postoperative complications and risks associated with resternotomies. In this study, we describe our first results using a minimally invasive LVAD implantation technique (lateral thoracotomy [LT] group). These results were compared with LVAD implantations done via full median sternotomy (STX group). Methods HVAD (HeartWare, Framingham, Massachusetts, United States) implantations in 70 patients (LT group n = 22, 52 ± 15 years old; STX group n = 48, 59 ± 11 years old) were retrospectively analyzed. Minimally invasive access via left thoracotomy was feasible in 22 patients. Peri- and postoperative analyses of survival and adverse events were performed. Results No survival differences were observed between the LT and STX group (p = 0.43). LT patients without temporary right ventricular assist device (tRVAD) showed a significantly better survival rate compared to LT patients with concomitant tRVAD implantation (p = 0.02), which could not be demonstrated in the STX group (p = 0.11). Two LT and four STX patients were successfully bridged to heart transplantation and three STX patients were successfully weaned with subsequent LVAD explantations. LVAD-related infections (n = 4 LT group vs n = 20 STX group, p = 0.04) were less likely in the LT group. No wound dehiscence occurred in the LT group, whereas five were observed in the STX group (p = 0.17). The amount of perioperative blood transfusions (within the first 7 postoperative days) did not differ in both study groups (p = 0.48). Conclusion The minimally invasive approach is a viable alternative with the possibility to reduce complications and should be particularly considered for bridge-to-transplant patients.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document