Interagency Registry For Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support Research Articles

Different ECLS Pump Configurations for Temporary Right Ventricular Assist Device in LVAD Patients: A Retrospective Case–Control Study

Background: Acute right ventricular failure is a critical complication after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation, often managed with a temporary paracorporeal right ventricular assist device (RVAD). This study examined three extracorporeal life support (ECLS) systems regarding mortality, bleeding complications, and intensive care unit (ICU) stay duration. Methods: This monocentric, retrospective case–control study included all patients receiving LVAD with paracorporeal RVAD between 2009 and 2020. Three patient groups were formed: CentrimagTM (A), CardiohelpTM (B), and DeltastreamTM (C). Results: A total of 245 patients were included. Preoperative parameters were similar between the CentrimagTM and DeltastreamTM groups, but CardiohelpTM patients had worse Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) Scores (A: 1.7 ± 0.8, B: 1.36 ± 0.5, C: 1.9 ± 0.9; p < 0.05). In-hospital death rates were A: 61 (41.8%), B: 15 (32.6%), C: 29 (54.7%); p < 0.05, and reoperation due to bleeding rates were A: 32 (21.9%), B: 8 (17.4%), C: 25 (47.2%); p < 0.05, with the DeltastreamTM group showing the highest rates. This group also had increased thrombocyte consumption and prolonged ICU stays. Conclusions: Temporary RVADs lead to bleeding complications, affecting patient outcomes. The DeltastreamTM group had significantly higher bleeding complications, likely due to high pump revolution rates and thrombocyte decline. Due to the study’s retrospective nature and complex patient profiles, these interesting findings should be validated in future studies.

Retrospective Evaluation of Inpatient Warfarin Management Practices in Patients Immediately Following Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation.

Background: The International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation recommends patients receive warfarin and aspirin following left ventricular assist device (LVAD) placement. Optimal warfarin management in this population has not been well established. Objectives: The objectives of this study were to evaluate warfarin practices in patients immediately post-LVAD implantation. Methods: This single-center, retrospective cohort study included patients 18 years and older following LVAD placement from August 1, 2012 to April 1, 2020. The primary outcome was to assess patient-specific risk factors affecting time to therapeutic range. Secondary outcomes included bleeding events, thrombotic events, and warfarin dosing patterns. Results: Of 104 included patients, 91% reached the therapeutic range at a median of 8 days. A higher proportion of patients started on 3.5 mg or higher reached therapeutic international normalized ratio (INR) and faster (96% vs 90%; 8 vs 5 days) compared to lower doses. Univariate analysis of associations with reaching therapeutic INR range included initial warfarin dose, cumulative warfarin, and warfarin dosing changes, whereas HAS-BLED and CHA2DS2VAC were associated with slower time to therapeutic INR. Overall, 44% of patients met Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) bleeding criteria. There were a total of 12 thrombotic events and no pump thrombotic events. Total weekly warfarin dosing was significantly lower post-LVAD (24.3 mg vs 35 mg, P = 0.0009). In addition, warfarin requirements were statistically higher after the first week of therapy (4.0 mg vs 2.89 mg, P < 0.0001). Conclusion: Based on the results, consider warfarin starting dose between 2.5 and 4 mg for patients on LVAD therapy, while balancing patient-specific risks for bleeding.

Platelet count in heart failure patients undergoing left ventricular assist device.

Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation, a therapy for end-stage heart failure, is associated with platelet (PLT) activation. This study aims to evaluate the prognostic impact of PLT count in patients with LVAD implantation. Data from the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) registry were investigated, and patients were divided into three groups according to tertiles. The dynamic change of PLT counts and its associations with long-term outcomes were analysed. The primary outcome was long-term mortality. A total of 19517 patients who received the first continuous-flow LVAD were identified from the INTERMACS registry. The PLT count underwent a dynamic change towards normalization after LVAD implantation. Compared with intermediate, both high (hazard ratio [HR], 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01 to 1.17, P=0.033) and low (HR, 1.18, 95% CI: 1.10 to 1.27, P<0.001) pre-implant PLT counts were associated with an increased risk of 2year mortality. Compared with intermediate, a high post-implant PLT count was associated with an increased risk of 4year mortality (HR, 1.38, 95% CI: 1.26 to 1.52, P<0.001). Besides, both pre- and post-implant PLT counts exhibit a U-shaped association with the risk of mortality. LVAD implantation could improve the PLT count towards normalization. Abnormal pre-/post-implant PLT counts were independently associated with increased risks of long-term mortality.

Prognostic Implications of Delirium After Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation: A Retrospective Study

IntroductionIn critically ill patients, delirium is a prognostic indicator of morbidity and mortality. This study investigates the impact of a delirium diagnosis on outcomes after Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD) implantation. MethodsThis retrospective study included all adult patients who received LVADs at our institution between January 2016 and December 2020. We compared pre-implantation characteristics between the two groups, with and without a diagnosis of delirium, and compared their outcomes, including 1-month, 6-month, and in-hospital mortality, as well as re-intubation rate, length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, and readmission rates. ResultsIn total, 361 patients (26.7% women, 75.8% African American) received durable LVADs. Ninety-four patients (26.1%) were diagnosed with delirium during the index admission. Pre-implantation demographic characteristics, past medical and psychiatric conditions, Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) Profile, and laboratory values did not differ between the two groups with and without a diagnosis of delirium; older age (59 vs 56; P=0.03) was associated with delirium. Delirium diagnosis was associated with higher 1-month (P=0.007), 6-month (P=0.004), and in-hospital mortality (P<0.001), unplanned re-intubations (P<0.001), and a lower likelihood of discharge home (P = 0.03). Total hospital and ICU LOS were higher in patients with a diagnosis of delirium, though these results were not statistically significant. Readmission to hospital after index admission was quicker in patients with a diagnosis of delirium, but this result was not statistically significant. ConclusionsIn this study, a diagnosis of delirium during the LVAD implantation admission was associated with higher mortality, adverse post-surgical outcomes, and unfavorable discharge dispositions. Future prospective research is needed to validate the prognostic implications of delirium in both the short and long term. Additionally, there is a need to identify modifiable risk factors associated with delirium to promote early diagnosis and implement evidence-based management strategies to enhance outcomes within this population.

Temporal Analysis in Outcomes of Long-Term Mechanical Circulatory Support: Retrospective Study.

Mechanical assist device indications have changed in recent years. Reduced incidence of complications, better survival, and the third generation of mechanical support devices contributed to this change. In this single-center study, we focused on two time periods that are characterized by the use of different types of mechanical support devices, different patient characteristics, and change in the indications. The data were processed from the European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support (EUROMACS). We retrospectively defined two time intervals to reflect changes in ventricular assist device technology (period 1: 2007-2015; period 2: 2016-20222). A total of 181 patients underwent left ventricular assist device implantation. Device utilization was the following: HeartMate II = 52 (76.4%) and HeartWare = 16 (23.6%) in period 1 and HeartMate II = 2 (1.8%), HeartMate 3 = 70 (61:9%), HeartWare = 29 (25.7%), SynCardia TAH = 10 (8.8%), and BerlinHeart EXCOR = 2 (1.8%) in period 2. The outcomes of the time intervals were analyzed and evaluated. Survival was significantly higher during the second time period. Multivariate analysis revealed that age and bypass pump time are independent predictors of mortality. Idiopathic cardiomyopathy, bypass time, and the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) score are independent predictors of adverse events. Furthermore, the first period was noted to be at an increased risk of the following adverse events: pump thrombosis, gastrointestinal bleeding, and bleeding events. Despite the higher risk profile of the patients and persistent challenges, during the second period, there was a significant decrease in mortality and morbidity. The use of the HeartMate 3 device may have contributed to this result.

Association of Psychosocial Risk Factors With Quality of Life and Readmissions 1 Year After LVAD Implantation

BackgroundAmong patients with advanced heart failure (HF), treatment with a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) improves health-related quality of life (HRQOL). We investigated the association between psychosocial risk factors, HRQOL, and outcomes after LVAD implantation. MethodsA retrospective cohort (n=9832) of adults aged ≥ 19 years who received durable LVAD between 2008 – 2017 was identified using the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS). Patients were considered to have psychosocial risk factors if ≥1 of the following were present: 1) substance abuse; 2) limited social support; 3) limited cognitive understanding; 4) repeated non-adherence; and 5) major psychiatric disease. Multivariable logistic and linear regression models were used to evaluate the association between psychosocial risk factors and change in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ)-12 scores from baseline to 1-year, persistently poor HRQOL (KCCQ-12 score < 45 at baseline and 1-year), and 1-year rehospitalization. ResultsAmong the final analytic cohort, 2024 (20.6%) patients had ≥1 psychosocial risk factors. Patients with psychosocial risk factors were associated with a smaller improvement in KCCQ-12 scores from baseline to 1-year (Mean ± SD, 29.1 ± 25.9 vs 32.6 ± 26.1, p=0.015) for a difference of -3.51 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -5.88 to -1.13). Psychosocial risk factors were associated with persistently poor HRQOL (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.35, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04 – 1.74), and 1-year all-cause readmission (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.11, 95% CI 1.05 – 1.18). Limited social support, major psychiatric disorder, and repeated non-adherence were associated with persistently poor HRQOL, while major psychiatric disorder was associated with 1-year rehospitalization. ConclusionThe presence of psychosocial risk factors is associated with lower KCCQ-12 scores and higher risk for readmission at 1-year after LVAD. While these associations are statistically significant, further research is needed to determine whether these differences are clinically meaningful.

Impella as Bridge to Durable Left Ventricular Assist Device in Acute Myocardial Infarction Cardiogenic Shock Patients.

Implantation of durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) in cardiogenic shock (CS) patients after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) poses specific challenges (small left ventricular size, acute infarct area, need for antithrombotic therapy, status Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) 1 with impaired organ function and derangements in coagulation and inflammatory parameters) which may affect outcomes. We reviewed data of all AMI-CS patients who were implanted LVAD after Impella support at a referral center with the aim to analyze feasibility, timing, and outcomes of durable LVAD implantation after tMCS with Impella due to AMI-CS. Twenty-one patients were treated between 2013 and 2023: all were in Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions (SCAI) class D-E and INTERMACS 1-2 at presentation, median LV ejection fraction (EF) and LV end-diastolic diameter (EDD) were 15 (10-20)% and 57 (54-60) mm, respectively. Eleven patients (52%) were supported with Impella CP, seven with Impella 5.0 (33%), and three (14%) with Impella 2.5. Axillary cannulation was performed in nine patients (43%). Five patients (24%) had concomitant venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) support. Median duration of Impella support was 12 (8-14) days. Overall, the use of Impella was characterized by low rate of complications and allowed successful bridge to durable LVAD in all patients, with 100% 30 day survival rate.

Kidney Function Trajectories and Right Heart Failure Following LVAD Implantation.

Preoperative kidney dysfunction is a risk factor for right heart failure (RHF) after implantation of a left ventricular assist device (LVAD). However, characteristic kidney function trajectories before and after post-LVAD RHF are uncertain, so we investigated this. We identified individuals who received primary continuous-flow LVAD implantation from July 1, 2014 to December 31, 2017 in the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) data set. Incident RHF was ascertained using the INTERMACS definition at 1 and 3 months and classified as transient or persistent. Kidney function trajectories before and after RHF onset, and relationships of baseline kidney function with RHF risk at the different time points, were assessed. We identified 8076 LVAD recipients who met inclusion criteria. Incident RHF was present at 1 month in 26.4%. There were 4850 individuals with follow-up at 3 months, with incident RHF in 4.2%. Kidney function trajectories differed from pre-LVAD implantation to 1-month follow-up by RHF category, with those developing persistent RHF having no improvement in baseline kidney function. For trajectories before the 3-month RHF ascertainment time, the shape was similar for those with and without RHF, with lower estimated glomerular filtration rate levels among those who developed RHF. Baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate levels below the normal range were associated with higher risk of RHF at 1 and 3 months. In LVAD recipients, preimplantation kidney function and subsequent kidney function trajectories differed substantially by RHF at 1 and 3 months postimplantation, even after adjustment for several confounders. This may demonstrate bidirectional associations between kidney function and right ventricular function in LVAD recipients.

Outcomes of Intracorporeal Continuous and Paracorporeal Pulsatile Ventricular Assist Devices in Pediatric Patients 10-30 kg.

Ventricular assist devices (VADs) have been increasingly implanted in pediatric patients. Paracorporeal VADs are generally chosen when intracorporeal continuous (IC) devices are too large. Superiority between IC and paracorporeal pulsatile (PP) devices remains unclear in smaller pediatric patients. Our study analyzes outcomes of IC and PP VADs in pediatric patients who could be considered for either of these options. Using the Advanced Cardiac Therapies Improving Outcomes Network (ACTION) database, we identified children between 10 and 30 kg who received a VAD between June 2018 and September 2021. Survival and stroke outcomes were analyzed based on VAD type. There were 41 patients in the IC group and 54 patients in the PP group. Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) profile at the time of implant was higher in the PP cohort ( p < 0.02). The PP cohort was younger ( p < 0.001) and smaller ( p < 0.001) than the IC cohort. The diagnosis was similar between cohorts. Overall survival was similar between groups. Stroke was more common in the PP cohort, but did not reach statistical significance ( p = 0.07). Discharge was possible only in the IC group, but the discharge rate was low (9.5%). Direct comparisons remain challenging given differences in INTERMACS profiles, age, and size.

Right Ventricular Assist Device Placement During Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation Is Associated With Improved Survival.

Right ventricular failure (RVF) is a significant cause of mortality in patients undergoing left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. Although right ventricular assist devices (RVADs) can treat RVF in the perioperative LVAD period, liberal employment before RVF is not well established. We therefore compared the survival outcomes between proactive RVAD placement at the time of LVAD implantation with a bailout strategy in patients with RVF. Retrospectively, 75 adult patients who underwent durable LVAD implantation at our institution and had an RVAD placed proactively before LVAD implantation or as a bailout strategy postoperatively due to hemodynamically unstable RVF were evaluated. Patients treated with a proactive RVAD strategy had lower Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) and a higher proportion of these required temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS) preoperatively. Preoperative hemodynamic profiling showed a low pulmonary artery pulsatility index (PAPi) score of 1.8 ± 1.4 and 1.6 ± 0.94 ( p = 0.42) in the bailout RVAD and proactive RVAD groups, respectively. Survival at 3, 6, and 12 months post-LVAD implantation was statistically significantly higher in patients who received a proactive RVAD. Thus, proactive RVAD implantation is associated with short- and medium-term survival benefits compared to a bailout strategy in RVF patients undergoing LVAD placement.

Pericardial Closure With Expanded Polytetrafluoroethylene Patch in Left Ventricular Assist Device Surgery.

To reduce adhesions after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation, pericardial closure using an expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) patch has been suggested. However, as foreign material, ePTFE patches could increase the risk of infectious complications. In this single-center retrospective study, we investigated outcomes of pericardial closure using an ePTFE patch in LVAD implantation. We included all patients who underwent LVAD implantation at our center between 2011 and 2020 (n = 166). Primary endpoint was development of mediastinitis at any point of time between LVAD implantation and heart transplantation (HTx) or death. Secondary endpoint was overall survival. Preoperative and postoperative clinical data were collected to ensure comparability between the groups. We included 166 patients with LVAD. A total of 116 patients (70%) underwent pericardial closure using an ePTFE patch. There were significant differences between the groups in treatment setting, previous cardiac surgery, Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) level, development of driveline infection, and HTx. Patients with an ePTFE patch developed mediastinitis more frequently (16%) than patients without ePTFE patch (4%) ( p = 0.039). A significant difference in overall survival between the groups could not be confirmed ( p = 0.29). The use of PTFE patches for pericardial closure in LVAD implantation was associated with a higher incidence of mediastinitis, but not with a difference in overall survival.

Early stroke after left ventricular assist device implantation: role of right heart failure.

Both stroke and right heart failure (RHF) are common and serious complications after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. The objective of this study was to evaluate relation between stroke and RHF early after LVAD implantation. This is a retrospective observational cohort study. From January 2012 to December 2020, patients who underwent LVAD implantation in a single-center were enrolled. Patients with a non-dischargeable LVAD or without follow-up data were excluded. Early stroke was defined as a stroke event within 6 months after implantation. Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) definition was used for the diagnosis of RHF. A total of 70 patients underwent LVAD implantation. Sixty-seven patients (95.7%) were successfully discharged and 16 patients (22.9%) died during follow-up. 14 patients (20.0%) experienced a stroke within 6 months after implantation, and 0.28 stroke events per patient-year occurred during follow-up. Postoperative RHF was more common in the stroke group (64.3% vs. 23.2%, P=0.008) and the median time from implantation to RHF was 1 day. In the Cox multivariable analysis, postoperative RHF [hazard ratio (HR): 5.063; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.682-15.245; P=0.004], and cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) on postoperative day (POD) 1 (HR: 0.923; 95% CI: 0.858-0.992; P=0.030) were independent predictors for early stroke. A CPP of 62 mmHg (sensitivity, 71.4%; specificity, 59.3%) was the cutoff value for early stroke according to the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. RHF after LVAD implantation may be a risk factor for early stroke. Prevention and management of postoperative RHF with adequate CPP could prevent early stroke after LVAD implantation.

Associations Between Preimplant Cancer Type and Left Ventricular Assist Device Outcomes: An INTERMACS Registry Analysis.

We used the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) database to examine whether history of a solid versus hematologic malignancy impacts outcomes after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. We included LVAD recipients (2007-2017) with cancer history reported (N = 14,799, 21% female, 24% Black). Multivariate models examined the association between cancer type and post-LVAD mortality and adverse events. Competing risk analyses compared death and heart transplantation between cancer types and those without cancer in bridge-to-transplant (BTT) patients. A total of 909 (6.1%) patients had a history of cancer (4.9% solid tumor, 1.3% hematologic malignancy). Solid tumors were associated with higher mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.09-1.57), major bleeding (aHR = 1.15, 95% CI = 1.00-1.32), and pump thrombosis (aHR = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.09-2.13), whereas hematologic malignancies were associated with increased major infection (aHR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.14-1.80). Compared to BTT patients without a history of cancer, solid tumor patients were less likely to undergo transplantation (adjusted subdistribution HR [aSHR] = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.45-0.89) and hematologic malignancy patients were as likely to experience death (aSHR = 1.16, 95% CI = 0.63-2.14) and transplantation (aSHR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.44-1.08). Cancer history and type impact post-LVAD outcomes. As LVAD utilization in cancer survivors increases, we need strategies to improve post-LVAD outcomes in these patients.

Treatment Strategies and Outcomes of Right Ventricular Failure Post Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation: An INTERMACS Analysis.

Right heart failure (RHF) management after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation includes inotropes, right ventricular mechanical support, and heart transplantation. The purpose of this study is to compare different RHF treatment strategies in patients with a magnetically levitated centrifugal LVAD. A total of 6,632 Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) patients from 2013 to 2020 were included. Of which, 769 (69.6%) patients (group 1) were supported with inotropes (≥14 days post-LVAD implantation), 233 (21.1%) patients (group 2) were supported with temporary right ventricular assist device (RVAD) that was implanted during LVAD implant, 77 (7.0%) patients (group 3) with durable centrifugal RVAD implanted during the LVAD implant, and 26 (2.4%) patients (group 4) were supported with RVAD (temporary or permanent), which was implanted at a later stage. Groups 1 and 4 had higher survival rates in comparison with group 2 (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.513, 95% confidence intervals [CIs] = 0.402-0.655, p < 0.001, versus group 1) and group 3 (HR = 0.461, 95% CIs = 0.320-0.666, p < 0.001, versus group 1). Patients in group 3 showed higher heart transplantation rates at 12 and 36 months as compared with group 1 (40.4% and 46.6% vs. 21.9% and 37.4%, respectively), group 2 (40.4% and 46.6% vs. 25.8% and 39.3%, respectively), and group 4 (40.4% and 46.6% vs. 3.8% and 12.0%, respectively). Severe RHF post-LVAD is associated with poor survival. Patients with LVAD who during the perioperative period are in need of right ventricular temporary or durable mechanical circulatory support constitute a group at particular risk. Improvement of devices tailored for right ventricular support is mandatory for further evolution of the field.

Calcium channel blockers and clinical outcomes in patients with continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices.

Current guidelines suggest calcium channel blockers (CCBs) as the second or third option for blood pressure management in patients with left ventricular assist device (LVAD). However, the clinical outcomes of patients with LVAD who receive CCBs remain unclear. Our study aims to analyse the association of CCBs with clinical outcomes in patients after LVAD implantation. This is a retrospective analysis based on the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) from 2006 to 2017, and adult patients who were alive with LVAD and CCB treatment information at 6months after implantation were included. Among 10717 patients, 1369 received CCBs 6months after implantation, and there was an increasing trend of CCB use after LVAD. Patients receiving CCB therapy at 6months had a similar 5year survival rate to those not receiving CCB [49.6%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 47.5-51.7% vs. 51.1%, 95% CI: 45.3-56.7%]. In both Cox and competing risk regressions after adjusting for confounding factors, CCB treatment at 6months after implantation was not associated with long-term mortality [hazard ratio (HR): 1.03, 95% CI: 0.91-1.17, P=0.624 and subdistribution HR (SHR): 1.07, 95% CI: 0.95-1.22, P=0.260]. Consistently, in time-varying models, CCB treatment was not linked to long-term mortality (HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.87-1.09, P=0.682 and SHR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.94-1.18, P=0.359). This null association remained in subgroup analysis according to device strategy and propensity-matching analyses. Neurological dysfunction, stroke, bleeding, rehospitalization, and renal dysfunction were more likely to occur among those with CCB when compared with those without CCB treatment. In patients with LVAD, CCB therapy fails to show benefits in long-term survival and is associated with increased incidences of neurological dysfunction, bleeding, renal dysfunction, and rehospitalization.

Abstract 18270: Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support Profile is Associated With Outcomes in Patients With an Impella 5.5 Ventricular Assist Device

Introduction: The Impella 5.5 left ventricular assist device (LVAD) can provide temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in select patients with advanced heart failure (HF). The Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) profile provides a standardized grading system for advanced HF patients receiving MCS, ranging from most (1) to least severe (7). Hypothesis: The INTERMACS profile is associated with outcomes in patients supported with an Impella 5.5 LVAD. Methods: From 2019-2022, retrospective review of perioperative characteristics, INTERMACS profile and outcomes in patients supported with an Impella 5.5. Results: When stratified by INTERMACS profile, there were 63 patients (28%) in profile 1, 73 (32%) in profile 2, 20 (8.8%) in profile 3, 72 (32%) in profiles 4-7. Indication for Impella 5.5 implant was primarily cardiogenic shock due to chronic HF (81; 52%), acute MI (33; 21%) or postcardiotomy (22; 14%) in profiles 1-3 and Impella 5.5-assisted cardiac interventions (cardiac surgery, VT ablation, PCI) (68; 94%) in profile 4-7 (p&lt;0.01). Composite freedom from death, durable LVAD, or heart transplant occurred for 63 (41%) profile 1-3 and 66 (92%) profile 4-7 patients (p&lt;0.01). Conclusions: Patients with advanced INTERMACS profiles (1-3) primarily underwent Impella 5.5 implant for chronic HF, postcardiotomy, or acute MI cardiogenic shock, whereas patients in profiles 4-7 primarily underwent Impella 5.5-assisted cardiac interventions. Patients with advanced profiles were more often transitioned to durable LVAD or heart transplant, however, also had higher rates of mortality.

Changing Strategy Between Bridge to Transplant and Destination LVAD Therapy After the First 3 Months: Analysis of the STS-INTERMACS Database

Background: Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have been implanted as bridge to transplantation (BTT), bridge to candidacy (BTC) or destination therapy (DT) based on relative and absolute contraindications to transplantation. Multiple factors may lead to change in the strategy of support after LVAD implantation. Methods: From INTERMACS (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support) 2012-2020, 11,262 patients survived to 3 months on continuous flow LVADs with intent of BTT or DT. Pre-implant characteristics and early events post-LVAD were analyzed in relation to changes in BTT or DT strategy during the next 12 months. Results: Among 3216 BTT patients at 3 months, later transplant de-listing or death without transplant occurred in 536 (16.7%) and, was more common with age, Profiles 1-2, renal dysfunction, and independently for prior cardiac surgery (HR 1.25, 95% CI 1.04-1.51, p = 0.02). Post-LVAD events of infections, gastrointestinal bleeding, stroke, and right heart failure defined by inotropic therapy predicted de-listing and death, as did in-hospital location at 3 months (HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.20-2.33, p =0.0024). Of 8046 patients surviving to 3 months with intent as destination therapy, 750 (9.3%) subsequently underwent listing or transplant, often with initial history of acute HF (HR 1.70, 95% CI 1.27-2.27, p = 0.0012) or malnutrition-cachexia (1.73, 95% CI 1.14-2.63, p = 0.0099). Multiple gastrointestinal bleeding events (≥4) with LVAD increased transition from BTT to DT (HR 4.22, 95% CI 1.46-12.275, p = 0.0078) but also from DT to BTT (HR 5.17, 95% CI 1.92-13.9, p = 0.0011). Conclusions: Implant strategies change over time in relation to pre-implant characteristics and adverse events post implant. Pre-implant recognition of factors predicting later change in implant strategy will refine initial triage, while further reduction of post-LVAD complications will expand options including eventual consideration of heart transplant.

Retrospective evaluation of the effect of nutritional status of patients with left ventricular assist device on clinical results in the postoperative period

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Objective Malnutrition in patients undergoing left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation has negative consequences, such as infection and limited functional capacity. The effects of nutritional status of patients with LVAD on their clinical outcomes were investigated. Methods 116 records of patients with LVAD implantation were retrospectively analysed. For nutritional evaluation, nutrition risk score NRI score was calculated to divide the patients into two groups with and without malnutrition risk. Demographic and clinical data before LVAD, early postoperative adverse events after LVAD, prognostic data, and laboratory findings were analysed. Results 116 patients (6 females, 110 man) had a mean age of 60.5±9,46 years; Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) scores were determined as 1 (n=11), 2 (n=36), 3 (n=65), and 4 (n=4). Forty four patients (44%) (19 mild, 6 moderate, 19 severe) had MR. The MR was higher in patients with preoperative INTERMACS score 1, low level of haemoglobin and albumin The incidence of adverse events was found to be significantly higher in patients with higher preoperative grade NRI (death during the pooperative period, bleeding). Conclusion In the early postoperative period, a MR of 44% was detected in patients who underwent LVAD. Total 72.2 % patients had any adverse events. We found that the presence of MR was effective in predicting postoperative adverse events according to NRI score before LVAD treatment.

Heart Transplant Outcomes After Total Artificial Heart

We sought to compare heart transplant (HTX) outcomes from patients with a total artificial heart (TAH), biventricular assist device (BiVAD), or left ventricular assist device (LVAD) as a bridge to transplant (BTT). Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS)-Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) created a dataset with TAH or durable mechanical circulatory support (MCS) who reached HTX between 2006 and 2015. The retrospective analysis compared TAH outcomes with those with a BiVAD or LVAD before HTX. The primary outcome was posttransplant survival at 1, 36, and 60 months. Secondary outcomes included simultaneous heart-kidney transplants, donor characteristics, and mortality risk factors. INTERMACS-SRTR cohort had, at the time of HTX, 2762 patients with LVAD; 205 BiVAD (139 durable and 66 temporary RVAD); 176 TAH (6 prior HeartMate II). Sixty months after HTX, mortality rates were 16.5% in the total group: LVAD 15.2%, BiVAD 22.4%, and TAH 29%. Survival differed between the LVAD, the TAH, and BiVAD but not between the BiVAD and TAH groups. One-year survival and complication rates were similar across groups-there was no difference in survival by donor age in the overall cohort. There was a difference in TTD based on recipient age in the LVAD group but not in BiVAD or TAH groups. Occurrence of HTX-kidney and post-transplant dialysis were higher in the TAH versus LVAD and BiVAD groups. The TAH is an efficacious BTT. Refinements in technology and patient selection may improve outcomes.

Risk of Infections With Long-Term Left Ventricular Assist Device Support.

We retrospectively reviewed all the patients who underwent new continuous-flow (C-F) LVAD implantation between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2014, at the University of Nebraska Medical Center. Patients were followed until heart transplant, LVAD explantation, death, or December 31, 2017. We defined LVAD infections as per the International Society of Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) definition: VAD-specific, VAD-related, and non-VAD infections. The primary outcome was to calculate the incidence of LVAD infections per 1000 days of LVAD support. Secondary outcomes were to assess the cause of death and the effect of bloodstream infections on LVAD thrombosis, stroke, and death. During the study period, a total of 94 patients underwent a C-F LVAD implantation. Five patients were lost in follow-up; 89 patients were included in the study. The mean age at LVAD implantation was 54 (SD+15) years. Out of 89 patients, 67 (75%) were men, and 53/89 (71%) received LVAD as destination therapy (DT). At the time of LVAD implantation,34/89 (38%) patients had ITERMACS (interagency registry for mechanically assisted circulatory support)score 1 (cardiogenic shock). The median duration of LVAD support was 387+493 days, with an interquartile range of 140 to 1083 days. The incidence rate of infections post-LVAD implantation decreased from 3.2 /1000 LVAD days (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.54-4.03) during the first year of LVAD support to 0.78/1000 LVAD days (95% CI, 0.38-1.65) during the following third year of LVAD support. Similarly, the incidence of VAD-specific infections in the first year post-LVAD implantation versus the third-year post LVAD implantation decreased from 0.83/1000 LVAD days (95% CI, 0.53-1.30) to 0.33/1000 LVAD days (95% CI, 0.10-1.04). On univariate survival analysis, an increased risk of death was associated with a one-year increase in age at LVAD implantation (hazard ratio (HR) 1.05 (95% CI, 1.01-1.09), p=0.01), the presence of infection within 30 days before LVAD implantation (HR 2.44 (95% CI, 1.09-5.48), p=0.03), underlying ischemic cardiomyopathy (HR 2.96 (95% CI, 1.28-6.80), p=0.01), and lower ITERMACS profile HR 3.64 (95% CI, 1.09-12.13, p=0.04). Bloodstream infections (BSIs) were not associated with an increased risk of death (HR 1.63 (95% CI, 0.56-4.80, p=0.37). Univariate survival analysis for poor outcomes (LVAD thrombosis, stroke, or death) showed BSIs increased the risk of having a poor outcome (HR 2.39 (95% CI, 1.02-5.57), p=0.04). The incidence rate of post-LVAD infections decreased significantly over time. LVAD implantation may not be contributing to immune suppression as previously suggested. In our study, BSIs were found to have a significantly increased hazard ratio for a poor outcome post-LVAD implantation.