scholarly journals Anaerobic Bacteremias in Left Ventricular Assist Devices and Advanced Heart Failure

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
David R. Murillo-Garcia ◽  
Julian Galindo ◽  
Natalia Pinto ◽  
Gabriel Motoa ◽  
Esther Benamu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Advanced Heart Failure ◽  
Ventricular Assist Devices ◽  
First Year ◽  
Left Ventricular Assist Devices ◽  
Term Outcome ◽  
Odontogenic Infections ◽  
Bridge To Transplant

Left ventricular assisted devices (LVADs) have revolutionized the treatment of advanced heart failure, providing meaningful increases in survival, functional capacity, and quality of life. There are two categories of LVADs patients: (1) bridge-to-transplant and (2) destination therapy. Advanced heart failure and destination LVADs often carry a poor prognosis. The overall 1-year mortality rate remains as high as 30%. LVAD-specific infections, LVAD-related infections, and non-LVAD-related infections represent important emerging clinical problems in this setting. With an incidence ranging from 30 to 50%, these lead to high rates of hospitalization, morbidity, and mortality. Bacteremias caused by anaerobic pathogens in patients with LVAD are underreported. Herein, we describe the microbiological findings, treatment, and clinical outcome of four patients with LVADs and advanced heart failure with anaerobic bacteremias. Fusobacterium species was the most frequent etiological agent. Most patients had a relatively favorable short-term outcome with survival rates of 100% at 30 days and of 50% at 90 days. However, due to other multiple long-term complications, overall mortality remains at 50% during the first year and increases to 75% beyond the first year. Anaerobic bacteremia sources included the oral cavity from odontogenic infections and aspiration pneumonia. Anaerobic bacteremia constitutes an unfavorable mortality prognostic factor in patients with destination LVADs. We recommend implementing preventive strategies with a comprehensive dental care evaluation in patients with LVADs and advanced heart failure.

Abstract 225: Frequency and Assessment of Poor Global Outcome in Patients with Left Ventricular Assist Devices

2015 ◽  
Vol 8 (suppl_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy J Fendler ◽  
Michael E Nassif ◽  
Kevin F Kennedy ◽  
John A Spertus ◽  
Shane J LaRue ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Nyha Class ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Advanced Heart Failure ◽  
Ventricular Assist Devices ◽  
Left Ventricular Assist Devices ◽  
Ventricular Assist ◽  
Bridge To Transplant ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Left Ventricular Assist

Background: Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) therapy can improve survival and quality of life in advanced heart failure (HF), but some patients may still do poorly after LVAD. Understanding the likelihood of experiencing poorer outcomes after LVAD can better inform patients and calibrate their expectations. Methods: We analyzed patients receiving LVAD therapy from January 2012 to October 2013 at a single, high-volume, high-acuity center. We defined a poor global outcome at 1 year after LVAD as the occurrence of death, disabling stroke (precluding transplant), poor patient-reported health status (most recent KCCQ at 3, 6, or 12 months < 45, corresponding to NYHA class IV), or recurrent HF (≥2 HF readmissions post-implant). We compared characteristics of those with and without poor global outcome. Results: Among 164 LVAD recipients who had 1-year outcomes data, mean age was 56, 76.7% were white, 20.9% were female, and 85.9% were INTERMACS Profile 1 or 2 (cardiogenic shock or declining despite inotropes). Poor global outcome occurred in 58 (35.4%) patients at 1 year, of whom 37 (63.8%) died, 17 (29.3%) had a most recent KCCQ score < 45, 3 (5.2%) had ≥2 HF readmissions, and 1 (1.7%) had a disabling stroke (Figure). Eight of the patients who died also experienced one of the three other poor outcomes prior to death. Patients who experienced a poor global outcome were more likely to be designated for destination therapy (46.4% vs. 23.6%, p=0.01) than bridge to transplant, have longer index admissions (median [IQR]: 39 [24, 57] days vs. 25 [18, 35] days, p=0.003), and have major GI bleeding (44.2% vs. 27.7%, p=0.056), and were less likely to undergo LVAD exchange (0% vs. 12.3%, p=0.004). Conclusion: In this large, single-center study assessing global outcome after LVAD implantation, we found that about a third of all patients had experienced a poor global outcome at 1 year. While LVAD therapy remains life-saving and the standard of care for many patients with advanced heart failure, these findings could help guide discussions with eligible patients and families. Future work should compare patients’ pre-LVAD expectations with likely outcomes and create risk models to estimate the probability of poorer outcomes for individual patients using pre-procedural factors.

scholarly journals Implantable ventricular assistance systems (VAD) as a bridge to transplant or as ‘destination therapy’

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement_E) ◽  
pp. E99-E102
Author(s):  
Marialisa Nesta ◽  
Federico Cammertoni ◽  
Piergiorgio Bruno ◽  
Massimo Massetti
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Clinical Syndrome ◽  
Advanced Heart Failure ◽  
Ventricular Assist Devices ◽  
Morbidity Rate ◽  
Team Approach ◽  
Left Ventricular Assist Devices ◽  
Bridge To Transplant

Abstract Heart failure is a complex clinical syndrome associated with a high mortality and morbidity rate. Despite the extensive pharmacological armamentarium, a non-negligible percentage of patients develop advanced heart failure and require further therapies. In these circumstances, heart transplantation remains the treatment of choice, but the limited number of donors and the reduction of potential candidates have made necessary to develop new technologies. Since the 1980s, left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have been introduced and have completely revolutionized the landscape of advanced heart failure treatments. This article has identified the categories of patients who can benefit from the implantation of an LVAD and summarized the new classifications. In addition, the main LVADs are described, analysing the results of the main clinical studies, with particular reference to adverse events. Although there is no perfect LVAD, a multidisciplinary team approach, dedicated to the treatment of advanced heart failure, can guide the choices on the best device to implant, in order to minimize complications and improve the patient’s quality of life.

scholarly journals Impairments in Blood Pressure Regulation and Cardiac Baroreceptor Sensitivity Among Patients With Heart Failure Supported With Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Devices

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Sailer ◽  
Hannah Edelmann ◽  
Cullen Buchanan ◽  
Pedro Giro ◽  
Matthew Babcock ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Heart Rate ◽  
Exercise Testing ◽  
Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Advanced Heart Failure ◽  
Ventricular Assist Devices ◽  
Left Ventricular Assist Devices ◽  
Baroreceptor Sensitivity ◽  
Cardiopulmonary Exercise

Background: Continuous-flow (CF) left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) improve outcomes for patients with advanced heart failure (HF). However, the lack of a physiological pulse predisposes to side-effects including uncontrolled blood pressure (BP), and there are little data regarding the impact of CF-LVADs on BP regulation. Methods: Twelve patients (10 males, 60±11 years) with advanced heart failure completed hemodynamic assessment 2.7±4.1 months before, and 4.3±1.3 months following CF-LVAD implantation. Heart rate and systolic BP via arterial catheterization were monitored during Valsalva maneuver, spontaneous breathing, and a 0.05 Hz repetitive squat-stand maneuver to characterize cardiac baroreceptor sensitivity. Plasma norepinephrine levels were assessed during head-up tilt at supine, 30 o and 60 o . Heart rate and BP were monitored during cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Results: Cardiac baroreceptor sensitivity, determined by Valsalva as well as Fourier transformation and transfer function gain of Heart rate and systolic BP during spontaneous breathing and squat-stand maneuver, was impaired before and following LVAD implantation. Norepinephrine levels were markedly elevated pre-LVAD and improved—but remained elevated post-LVAD (supine norepinephrine pre-LVAD versus post-LVAD: 654±437 versus 323±164 pg/mL). BP increased during cardiopulmonary exercise testing post-LVAD, but the magnitude of change was modest and comparable to the changes observed during the pre-LVAD cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Conclusions: Among patients with advanced heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, CF-LVAD implantation is associated with modest improvements in autonomic tone, but persistent reductions in cardiac baroreceptor sensitivity. Exercise-induced increases in BP are blunted. These findings shed new light on mechanisms for adverse events such as stroke, and persistent reductions in functional capacity, among patients supported by CF-LVADs. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT03078972.

scholarly journals Differences in the prognoses of patients referred to an advanced heart failure center from hospitals with different bed volumes

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Koichi Narita ◽  
Eisuke Amiya ◽  
Masaru Hatano ◽  
Junichi Ishida ◽  
Hisataka Maki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards ◽  
Advanced Heart Failure ◽  
Ventricular Assist Devices ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Left Ventricular Assist Devices ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction

AbstractFew reports have discussed appropriate strategies for patient referrals to advanced heart failure (HF) centers with available left ventricular assist devices (LVADs). We examined the association between the characteristics and prognoses of referred patients with advanced HF and the bed volume of the referring hospitals. This retrospective analysis evaluated 186 patients with advanced HF referred to our center for consultation about the indication of LVAD between January 1, 2015, and August 31, 2018. We divided the patients into two groups according to the bed volume of their referring hospital (high bed volume hospitals (HBHs): ≥ 500 beds in the hospital; low bed volume hospitals (LBHs): < 500 beds). We compared the primary outcome measure, a composite of LVAD implantation and all-cause death, between the patients referred from HBHs and patients referred from LBHs. The 186 patients with advanced HF referred to our hospital, who were referred from 130 hospitals (87 from LBHs and 99 from HBHs), had a mean age of 43.0 ± 12.6 years and a median left ventricular ejection fraction of 22% [15–33%]. The median follow-up duration of the patients was 583 days (119–965 days), and the primary outcome occurred during follow-up in 42 patients (43%) in the HBH group and 20 patients (23%) in the LBH group. Patients referred from HBHs tended to require catecholamine infusion on transfer more often than those referred from LBLs (36.5% (HBH), 20.2% (LBL), P = 0.021). Kaplan–Meier analysis indicates that the occurrence of the primary outcome was significantly higher in the HBH patients than in the LBH patients (log-rank P = 0.0022). Multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis revealed that catecholamine support on transfer and long disease duration were statistically significant predictors of the primary outcome. Patients from HBHs had a greater risk of the primary outcome. However, the multivariate analysis did not indicate an association between referral from an HBH and the primary outcome. In contrast, catecholamine support on transfer, long duration of disease, and low blood pressure were independent predictors of the primary outcome. Therefore, these should be considered when determining the timing of a referral to an advanced HF center, irrespective of the bed volume of the referring hospital.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document