Abstract 16141: Women Have More Bleeding Events and Intracranial Hemorrhage Than Men Post LVAD Implantation

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nirupama Vellanki ◽  
kevin kennedy ◽  
Edward W Grandin ◽  
Jose Nunez ◽  
Shweta R Motiwala ◽  
...  

Intro: Women have been shown to have higher risk of bleeding after adverse cardiovascular events. Bleeding events are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with continuous flow left ventricular assist devices (cf-LVADs). There are few studies that have demonstrated that women with cf-LVADs may be at higher risk of bleeding, however the sex differences in specific bleeding events has not been studied in a large multi-center patient population of patients with cf-LVADs. We sought to investigate the relationship between sex and specific types of bleeding events in patients with cf-LVADs. Methods: We included 16,534 patients from the INTERMACS registry, a national multicenter database of patients implanted with cf-LVAD between 2012-2017. Using a cox proportional hazards model, we assessed the relationship between sex and bleeding events after adjusting for relevant covariates*. Bleeding events were further stratified for the type of bleeding including GI bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage, and non-GI/CNS bleeding. Results: Women were more likely to have a bleeding event than men post-LVAD implantation (HR 1.19 p<0.0001). While the majority of bleeding events were GI bleeds, there was no significant difference in risk between men and women (p 0.7). After adjusting for covariates, women were more likely to have an intracranial hemorrhage (HR 1.38, p 0.002) and to have non-GI/non-CNS bleeding (HR 1.25, p<0.0001). Conclusion: Females are more likely than men to develop bleeding events post cf-LVAD implantation. While there was no significant sex difference in GI bleeding, women were more likely to have intracranial bleeding and non-GI/non-CNS bleeding.

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 (5) ◽  
pp. 269-276 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saadia Sherazi ◽  
Peter Kouides ◽  
Charles Francis ◽  
Charles Julian Lowenstein ◽  
Majed Refaai ◽  
...  

Background: Bleeding is a major cause of morbidity in patients with continuous flow left ventricular assist devices (LVADs). We sought to identify clinical predictors of bleeding within the first year of LVAD implantation. Methods: A prospective study was performed on 30 patients with HeartMate II implantation at the University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York, United States. Blood was collected within 1 week before implantation, and at 1, 3, and 30 ± 10 days after implantation. Blood samples were analyzed for prothrombin time (PT), international normalized ratio (INR), von Willebrand factor (vWF) activity, vWF antigen, vWF multimers, collagen binding assay, factor VIII, and epinephrine closure time. The first bleeding event within 1 year of implantation was recorded. Results: There were 17 (57%) patients with a bleeding event. The cumulative incidence of bleeding was 50% at 304 days. Age at the time of LVAD implantation was associated with higher risk of bleeding (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.01–1.10, p = 0.013). Higher baseline INR was also associated with increased risk of bleeding after adjusting for age at the time of implant (HR = 6.58, 95% CI = 1.21–35.70, p = 0.028). The bleeders and non-bleeders had similar hemostatic markers at all four time points. Prior to LVAD, mean epinephrine closure time was similar between bleeders and non-bleeders. However, post LVAD measurement of epinephrine, closure time was frequently limited by platelet clumping. Conclusion: Older age and baseline INR are associated with higher risk of bleeding in LVAD patients. Platelet clumping may suggest underlying platelet dysfunction and associated high risk of bleeding


2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zubair Shah ◽  
Ioannis Mastoris ◽  
Prakash Acharya ◽  
Aniket S. Rali ◽  
Moghni Mohammed ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) have been increasingly used in the treatment of end-stage heart failure. While warfarin has been uniformly recommended in the long-term as anticoagulation strategy, no clear recommendation exists for the post-operative period. We sought to evaluate the feasibility of enoxaparin in the immediate and early postoperative period after LVAD implantation. Methods This is a two-center, retrospective analysis of 250 consecutive patients undergoing LVAD implantation between January 2017 and December 2018. Patients were bridged postoperatively to therapeutic INR by either receiving unfractionated heparin (UFH) or low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). Patients were followed while inpatient and for 3 months after LVAD implantation. The efficacy outcome was occurrence of first and subsequent cerebrovascular accident while safety outcome was the occurrence of bleeding events. Length of stay (LOS) was also assessed. Results Two hundred fifty and 246 patients were analyzed for index admission and 3-month follow up respectively. No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups in CVA (OR = 0.67; CI = 0.07–6.39, P = 0.73) or bleeding events (OR = 0.91; CI = 0.27–3.04, P = 0.88) during index admission. Similarly, there were no differences at 3 months in either CVAs or bleeding events (OR = 0.85; 0.31–2.34; p = 0.76). No fatal events occurred during the study follow-up period. Median LOS was significantly lower (4 days; p = 0.03) in the LMWH group. Conclusions LMWH in the immediate and early postoperative period after LVAD implantation appears to be a concurrently safe and efficacious option allowing earlier postoperative discharge and avoidance of recurrent hospitalizations due to sub-therapeutic INR.


2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
A Wypych-Zych ◽  
G Edwards ◽  
E Synowiec ◽  
K Stevens ◽  
S Mcdonagh ◽  
...  

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background The use of Left Ventricular Assist Devices (LVAD) has noticeably improved the survival for patients with advanced heart failure.  However, this treatment is associated with significant adverse effects. Personalisation of antiplatelet therapy is a key in control and reduction of bleeding/thromboembolic complications of this treatment. However, ISHLT and the manufacturer still recommend unified treatment of 150 mg of acetylsalicylic acid for all LVAD patients. In our centre, we base the treatment decision on clinical picture and patient’s responsiveness to antiplatelet therapy.  The treatment of choice is acetylsalicylic acid in doses 37.5 mg (1 patient), 75 mg (25 patients) and 150 mg (33 patients). For patients unresponsive or intolerant to acetylsalicylic acid we use 75 mg of clopidogrel, currently 9 patients.  1 patient receives both, 75 mg clopidogrel and 75 mg acetylsalicylic acid.  Purpose To gain a better understanding of the platelets function and patients" responses to antiplatelet therapy. In aim to reduce the prevalence of bleeding/thromboembolic related adverse events in LVAD patients, and therefore improve patients outcome. Methods In 2020, we decided to introduce a structured/test-based approach to antiplatelet therapy in this patients group. With the use of Multiplate Electrode Aggregometry (MEA) we have attempted to diagnose platelet disorders and monitor effectiveness of antiplatelet therapy. Based on MEA platlets inhibition test we were able to tailor the therapy.  The retrospective audit was conducted with inclusion criteria; 1. Thromboembolic events include pump thrombosis and any other ischemic complications. Bleeding events contains gastrointestinal (GI) and central nervous system (CNS) events. 2. Any thromboembolic and bleeding events after starting antiplatelet therapy, in the first year after LVAD implantation Results The tables below presents reduction in both thromboembolic and bleeding complications. Conclusion Presented data can be interpreted that, the test-based approach to antiplatelet therapy may be beneficial in limiting the adverse effects of LVAD therapy. However, it needs to be acknowledged that the observation was carried out on a small group of the patients, over a short period of time. Therefore, an extended period of observation is recommended to obtain further data.


2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florim Cuculi ◽  
Philipp Burkart ◽  
Giacomo Cioffi ◽  
Federico Moccetti ◽  
Mehdi Madanchi ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective: To compare the safety and efficacy of manual compression versus use of the MANTA® closure device for access management after Impella® removal on the intensive care unit (ICU).Background: The number of patients treated with percutaneous left ventricular assist devices (pLVAD), namely Impella® and ECMO, for complex cardiac procedures or shock, is growing. However, removal of pLVAD and large bore arteriotomy closure among such patients on the ICU remains challenging, since it is associated with a high risk for bleeding and vascular complications. Methods: Patients included in a prospective registry between 2017 and 2020 were analyzed. Bleeding and vascular access site complications were assessed and adjudicated according to VARC-2 criteria. Results: We analyzed a cohort of 87 consecutive patients, who underwent access closure after Impella® removal on ICU by using either the MANTA® device or manual compression. The cohort´s mean age was 66.1±10.7 years and 76 patients (87%) were recovering from CS. Mean support time was 40 hours (Interquartile range 24–69 hours). MANTA® was used in 31 patients (35.6%) and manual compression was applied in 56 patients (64.4%). Overall access related bleedings were significantly lower in the MANTA® group (6.5% versus 39.3%(odds ratio (OR) 0.10, 95% CI 0.01–0.50; p=0.001), and there was no significant difference in vascular complications between the two groups(p=0.55).Conclusions: Our data suggests that the application of the MANTA® device directly on the ICU is safe. In addition, it seems to reduce access related bleeding without increasing the risk of vascular complications.


Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 2620-2620
Author(s):  
David M. Nemer ◽  
Garrick C. Stewart ◽  
Maneka Puligandla ◽  
Donna S. Neuberg ◽  
Jean M. Connors

Abstract Introduction Anticoagulation is critical for patients with durable left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) in order to protect against life threatening thromboembolic events. An increase in the incidence of pump thrombosis between 2009 and 2014 prompted examination of our anticoagulation practices following device implants. As the majority of pump thromboses occurred within six months of implant, we hypothesized that anticoagulation strategies employed immediately after implant might play a role. We describe the initial post-operative anticoagulation management of 105 patients implanted with a Heart Mate II (HM II) LVAD by a single surgeon at our academic center. Although patients with more severe clinical compromise were more likely to be bridged, we found no difference in overall pump thrombosis incidence based on the use of a post-operative parenteral anticoagulation bridge compared to unopposed warfarin. Methods We performed a retrospective review of 105 patients undergoing primary implant of a HM II LVAD at our center from 2009 through 2014 with follow up through May 31, 2015. Data included demographics, clinical status at time of implant, intra-operative practices, and initial post-operative anticoagulation management. A parenteral bridge was defined as initiation of a parenteral anticoagulant prior to achieving an INR ≥2.0. A parenteral bridge was further defined as early if initiated within ≤3 days of device implant and therapeutic if a goal PTT was achieved during each of the first 0-24, 24-48, and 48-72 hours of the bridge duration. A parenteral bridge was considered sub-therapeutic if at least one but not all PTT measurements were at goal and non-therapeutic if no PTT measurements were at goal. Unopposed warfarin was defined as initiation to reach a therapeutic INR without the use of parenteral anticoagulants. Pump thrombosis was defined as detection within the device, inflow cannula, or outflow conduit at the time of pump replacement, pump explantation, heart transplantation, or autopsy. Pump thrombosis within 186 days of implant was defined as early. Fisher's exact test and the Wilcoxon rank-sum test were used to compare categorical and continuous variables between groups. Cumulative incidence of pump thrombosis was compared using the Gray test with reimplantation, explantation, transplantation, or death as a competing risk. Results Among 105 HM II implants, 73 (70%) were treated with any parenteral bridge, 50 (48%) with an early bridge, and 29 (28%) with an early therapeutic bridge. Median time to bridge initiation was 3 days (range 1 to 7) and median bridge duration was 6 days (range 1 to 45). A total of 32 patients (30%) received unopposed warfarin. Time to warfarin initiation and therapeutic INR were shorter in patients who received unopposed warfarin compared to a parenteral bridge, with median values of 1 vs. 2 days and 5 vs. 8 days, respectively (p<0.001 for both). Patients who received a parenteral bridge had more severe preoperative clinical compromise (p=0.039) and longer intensive care unit length of stay (p=0.005). Pump thrombosis occurred in 25 patients (24%) and 14 (13%) were early. Hypertension was the only clinical variable that differed by group (p=0.012) and was more prevalent in patients with pump thrombosis. Cumulative incidence analyses showed no significant difference in the incidence of pump thrombosis between patients who did and did not receive a parenteral bridge (p = 0.25), an early parenteral bridge (p=0.37), or a therapeutic parenteral bridge (p=0.87) (Figure 1). At 6 months the cumulative incidence (95% confidence interval) of pump thrombosis was 7.9% (2.0, 19.3) for those who received a therapeutic bridge and 16.4% (8.7, 26.3) for those who did not. At 24 months these values were 22.7% (9.4, 39.5) and 24.3% (14.6, 35.3), respectively. Among patients who did not receive a parenteral bridge, there was no difference in the time to initiation of warfarin (p=0.23) or therapeutic INR (p=0.13) according to the outcome of pump thrombosis. Conclusions Post-operative parenteral bridging was more common than initiation of unopposed warfarin. Indices of more severe clinical compromise were associated with the use of a parenteral bridge. Our data suggest that post-implant bridging does not affect overall incidence of LVAD thrombosis. Further analysis will be performed to determine if parenteral bridging prevents early pump thrombosis. Disclosures Connors: Thoratec (St Jude's): Other: Consultant; Bristoml Meyer Squibb: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Ad Boards/Consultant; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Other: Scientifc Ad Boards.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document