Pulsatile Left Ventricular Assist Devices Research Articles

Case report of increased left ventricular end-diastolic pressure with pulsatile left ventricular assist device

Abstract Background Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are increasingly utilized in cardiogenic shock and high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs). These devices aspirate and expel blood from the left ventricle (LV) into the aorta, consequently reducing left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP). We report a case of unexpected LVEDP rise under LV-to-aorta LVAD in the context of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and concomitant multi-vessel PCI. Case summary A patient with acute heart failure, severely depressed systolic LV function, severe aortic stenosis, and multi-vessel coronary artery disease underwent TAVI and concomitant PCI under pulsatile LVAD. Notably, the patient experienced unexpected shortness of breath and elevated LVEDP while under LVAD, which normalized immediately upon LVAD removal. Discussion Pulsatile LVAD enhances cardiac output by providing pulsatile support through a percutaneous bi-directional flow catheter. Despite expectations of reduced LVEDP and improved myocardial oxygen supply under LVAD support, we observed high LVEDP and clinical complaints of shortness of breath following TAVI and multi-vessel PCI. This case illustrates that an LVAD across the aortic valve may immobilize aortic leaflets and generate acute aortic regurgitation.

The impact of right ventricular hemodynamics on the performance of a left ventricular assist device in a numerical simulation model.

Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have been established as alternative to heart transplantation for patients with end-stage heart failure refractory to medical therapy. Right heart failure (RHF) after LVAD implantation is associated with inferior outcome. Its preoperative anticipation may influence the selection between a pure left ventricular and a biventricular device type and, thus, improve outcomes. Reliable algorithms to predict RHF are missing. A numerical model was used for simulation of a cardiovascular circulation. The LVAD was placed as parallel circuit between left ventricle and aorta. In contrast to other studies, the dynamic hydraulic behavior of a pulsatile LVAD was replaced by that of a continuous LVAD. A variety of hemodynamic states was tested mimicking different right heart conditions. Adjustable parameters included heart rate (HR), pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR), tricuspid regurgitation (TR), right ventricular contractility (RVC) and pump speed. Outcome parameters comprised central venous pressure (CVP), mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP), cardiac output (CO) and occurrence of suction. Alteration of HR, PVR, TR, RVC and pump speed resulted in diverse effects on CO, CVP and mPAP, resulting in improvement, impairment or no change of the circulation, depending on the degree of alteration. The numerical simulation model allows prediction of circulatory changes and LVAD behaviour following variation of hemodynamic parameters. Such a prediction may be of particular advantage to anticipate RHF after LVAD implantation. It may help preoperatively to choose the appropriate strategy of only left ventricular or both left and right ventricular support.

A Comparison of Novel Developed Centrifugal-Flow and Conventional Pulsatile-Flow Extracorporeal Left Ventricular Assist Devices as Bridging Strategy in Patients with Refractory Heart Failure; Sub-Analysis of NCVC-BTD_01 Trial

Purpose An extracorporeal centrifugal-flow left ventricular assist device (CF-E-LVAD) system (BR16010) was newly developed. Since implantation of the durable implantable LVAD (I-LVAD) is still controversial in patients with cardiogenic shock or refractory heart failure because of its significant inferiority of outcomes as compared with higher INTERMACS profile patients, short-term E-LVADs have been still clinically important for bridging strategy for the next definitive treatment. Our aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of the novel developed CF-E-LVAD on the clinical prognosis in patients with bridging strategy, as compared with conventional extracorporeal pulsatile flow LVAD (PF-E-LVAD). Methods We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 62 patients who were implanted E-LVAD as bridging strategy from April 2011 to January 2019. Six patients (9.7%) were implanted CF-E-LVAD. The clinical prognosis until 30 days after E-LVAD implantation, and the change of cardiac function and laboratory data at the early follow up were evaluated. Results Improvement of left ventricular ejection fraction was significantly greater in the CF-E-LVAD group than in the PF-E-LVAD group (217.9 [147.8 to 335.3] vs 38.3 [-21.7 to 128.8] %, P=0.010). Serum total bilirubin level significantly improved in CF-E-LVAD group than in the PF-E-LVAD group (-7.9 [-33.3 to 82.4] vs 68.8 [10.0 to 202.1] %, P=0.041). Although clinical courses, including death, cerebrovascular accidents and re-thoracotomy due to removal of mediastinal hematoma, were no significant difference between two groups, almost half (54.5%) in the PF-E-LVAD group was still ongoing the E-LVAD support at the 30 days post-E-LVAD implantation while only one patient (16.7%) was supported with E-LVAD in the CF-E-LVAD group. Conclusion The novel developed CF-E-LVAD system might influence on the earlier recovery of cardiac function and the multiple organ failure, and lead to the earlier decision for next definitive strategy.

30 Years of Heart Transplant: Outcomes After Mechanical Circulatory Support From a Single Center

BackgroundSurvival after bridge to transplantation with mechanical circulatory support (MCS) has yielded varying outcomes on the basis of device type and baseline characteristics. Continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVADs) have significantly improved waitlist mortality, but recent changes to the transplantation listing criteria have dramatically altered the use of MCS for bridge to transplantation. MethodsOrthotopic heart transplantations from 1988 to 2019 at our institution (Washington University School of Medicine, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St Louis, MO) were retrospectively reviewed and stratified by pretransplantation MCS status into CF-LVAD (n = 224), pulsatile LVAD (n = 49), temporary MCS (n = 71), and primary transplantation (n = 463) groups. Patients who underwent heart transplantation after the approval of CF-LVAD for bridge to transplantation and before the 2018 allocation policy changes underwent subgroup analysis to evaluate predictors of survival and complications in a contemporary cohort. ResultsRates of primary transplantation declined from 88% to 14% over the course of the study. No significant difference in survival was detected in the cohort stratified by MCS status (P = .18). In the modern era, survival of patients treated with CF-LVADs and temporary MCS was noninferior to that seen with primary transplantation (P = .22). Notable predictors of long-term mortality included lower body mass index, peripheral vascular disease, previous coronary artery bypass graft, ABO nonidentical transplant, and increased donor age (all P ≤ .02). There were no differences in major postoperative complications. ConclusionsCF-LVAD has grown to account for the majority of transplantations at our center in the last decade, with no adverse effect on survival or postoperative complications. Temporary MCS increased after the 2018 listing criteria change, with acceptable early outcomes.

Ventricular Assist Device Technology and Black-White Disparities on the Heart Transplant Wait List.

Heart transplantation is the definitive treatment for end-stage heart failure. Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are a continually improving technology that extends life for some candidates on the heart transplant waiting list. Research Questions: Our objective is to compare Black-White differences in LVAD implantation and heart transplant outcomes during a period of technological innovation when the pulsatile flow LVAD was largely replaced by the continuous flow LVAD between 1999-2014. We used transplant registry data from the United Network for Organ Sharing (N = 5,550) to identify Black and White patients with heart failure who used an LVAD as a bridge-to-transplant (BTT). Using logistic regression, we compared Black-White differences in access to newer LVAD technology and timing of implantation relative to wait listing for heart transplantation. We used competing-risks event history models to predict transplant outcomes across race, LVAD type, and timing of LVAD implantation. Black and White candidates were equally likely to receive newer continuous flow LVADs, but Black candidates received LVADs later in the disease course (i.e. after transplant listing). This later timing of technological intervention contributed to poorer wait list outcomes among black transplant candidates, including lower likelihood of receiving a heart transplant and greater likelihood of being removed from the wait list due to worsening health. Delayed LVAD implantation is more common among Black patients and is associated with poorer transplant outcomes.

Endothelial Function in Patients With Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Devices.

The endothelium plays a crucial role in maintaining cardiovascular homeostasis. Shear stress generated by flowing blood regulates the release of substances that provide adequate tissue perfusion. The extent of damage to endothelial cells depends on locally disturbed shear stress caused by the deteriorated flow. Patients with heart failure have reduced cardiac output, which results in reduced blood flow and negative shear stress. Reduced shear stress also affects microcirculation and reduces tissue perfusion. Consequently, the production of free oxygen radicals is increased and bioavailability of nitric oxide is additionally decreased. Therefore, endothelial dysfunction is involved in the progression of heart failure and cardiovascular events. Left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) are used for the treatment of patients with advanced heart failure. Older pulsatile flow LVADs were mostly substituted by continuous-flow LVADs (cf-LVADs). Despite the advantages of the cf-LVADs, the loss of pulsatility leads to different complications on the micro- and macrovascular levels. One of the pathogenetic mechanisms of cardiovascular complications with cf-LVADs may be endothelial dysfunction, which after the implantation of the device does not improve and may even deteriorate. In contrast, the pulsatile pattern of LVADs on blood flow could preserve endothelial function.

Physiologically Significant Pulsatility Key to Reducing Adverse Events in CF LVADS

Hypertension is common in continuous flow LVAD (CFLVAD) patients and is linked to major adverse events like stroke and aortic incompetence. The human circulation was modelled with wave propagation and reflections using physiologic data from ADAN 86, with a set of 86 arteries including the cerebral vessels. 1. Blood pressure was compared for a flow of 5 litres/minute for a normal pulsatile flow and CF LVAD with varying degrees of pulsatility RESULTS: CONCLUSION: Restoring physiologically significant pulsatility is likely to restore normal blood pressure with significant reduction in adverse events like stroke, aortic incompetence and gastric bleeds. The degree of pulsatility needed to achieve this needs further study.

Gastrointestinal Bleeding After HeartMate II or HVAD Implantation: Incidence, Location, Etiology, and Effect on Survival.

The number of patients on destination therapy is increasing as long-term survival on continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD) therapy has improved. Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) is a common complication after CF-LVAD implantation, and its risk correlates with longer support time, emphasizing the importance of GIB management. The lower pulsatility of CF-LVADs may promote arteriovenous malformations, which amplify the bleeding risk. Here, we retrospectively analyzed the location, incidence, and survival effect of GIB events in HeartMate II (HM-II) and HeartWare Ventricular Assist Device (HVAD) recipients to provide specific details regarding these complications. From November 2003 to March 2016, 526 patients with chronic heart failure underwent primary implantation of an HM-II (n = 403) or HVAD (n = 123) CF-LVAD at our center. Of the 526 patients, 140 (26.6%) had a GIB event (HM-II: n = 100; HVAD: n = 40), 92 (17.5%) had a single GIB event, and 48 (9.1%) had multiple GIB events (range: 2-9 events). HVAD recipients had a higher incidence of both upper and lower GIB events (p < 0.001 and P = 0.002, respectively) than HM-II recipients. Arteriovenous malformation was the most common etiology for GIB (50 patients/72 events); for this group, the average time-to-event was 300.4 days, the recurrence rate was 34%, and the 90-day and 1-year survival rates were 88.3% and 66.7%, respectively. Age at implantation was the only predictor of GIB. In conclusion, our study provides detailed information about GIB events associated with current CF-LVADs. Additional studies are required to evaluate strategies to reduce the incidence of GIB morbidity.

Management and outcomes of left ventricular assist device-associated endocarditis: a systematic review.

Left ventricular assist device (LVAD)-associated endocarditis remains poorly studied, especially in newer continuous-flow LVADs (CF-LVADs). The aim of this review was to assess outcomes of patients with LVAD-associated endocarditis, as stratified by CF-LVAD and pulsatile LVAD (P-LVAD) use as well as by different interventions and pathogen types. An electronic search was performed to identify studies in the English literature on LVAD-associated endocarditis. Overall, 16 articles with 26 patients were included; seven had CF-LVADs and 19 had P-LVADs; time to development of endocarditis was 91 days (152 vs. 65 days, respectively, P=0.05). Eleven of 25 patients were treated with antibiotics only. Remaining 14 patients received antibiotics, however, they also underwent additional surgical intervention. One patient was treated with embolization alone for mycotic aneurysm and was therefore excluded. At a median follow-up time of 344 days post implant, there was no difference in overall mortality between CF-LVAD and P-LVAD-associated endocarditis patients (57.9% vs. 42.9%, P=0.81). Patients who underwent additional surgical intervention had higher overall survival compared to those treated with antibiotics alone (71.4% vs. 27.3%, P=0.07); with no difference in outcomes amongst those who underwent surgical device exchange as compared to heart transplantation (80.0% vs. 66.7%; P=0.23). Compared to patients with P-LVADs, CF-LVAD patients appeared to be resistant to early development of LVAD-associated endocarditis. There was a trend towards high survival observed amongst patients who underwent additional surgical intervention as compared to those treated with antibiotics alone, with no difference amongst surgical device exchange as compared to heart transplantation. Advantages of additional surgical intervention vs. medical therapy alone deserves further exploration to determine its applicability in CF-LVADs.

The Impact of Left Ventricular Assist Device Infections on Postcardiac Transplant Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are associated with numerous short- and long-term complications, including infection. The impact LVAD infections have on clinical outcomes after transplantation is not well established. We sought to determine whether the presence of infection while on LVAD support negatively influences outcomes after cardiac transplantation. We searched electronic databases and bibliographies for full text studies that identified LVAD infections during support and also reported on posttransplant outcomes. A meta-analysis of posttransplant survival was conducted using a random effects model. Of 2,373 records, 13 bridge to transplant (BTT) cohort studies were selected (n = 6,631, 82% male, mean age 50.7 ± 2.7 years). A total of 6,067 records (91.5%) received transplant. There were 3,718 (56.1%) continuous-flow LVADs (CF-LVADs), 1,752 (26.4%) pulsatile LVADs, and 1,161 (17.5%) unknown type records. A total of 2,586 records (39.0%) developed LVAD infections. Patients with LVAD infections were younger (50.5 ± 1.5 vs. 51.3 ± 1.5, p = 0.02), had higher body mass indeices (BMIs) (28.4 ± 0.7 vs. 26.8 ± 0.4, p < 0.01), and longer LVAD support times (347.0 ± 157.6 days vs. 180.2 ± 106.0 days, p < 0.01). Meta-analysis demonstrated increased posttransplant mortality in those patients who had an LVAD infection (hazard ratio [HR] 1.30, 95% CI: 1.16-1.46, p < 0.001). Subgroup meta-analyses by continuous-flow and pulsatile device type demonstrated significant increased risk of death for both types of devices (HR 1.47, 95% CI: 1.22-1.76, p < 0.001 and 1.71, 95% CI: 1.19-2.45, p = 0.004, respectively). Patients who develop LVAD infections are younger, have higher BMIs and longer LVAD support times. Our data suggests that LVAD-related infections result in a 30% increase in postcardiac transplantation mortality. Strategies to prevent LVAD infections should be implemented to improve posttransplant outcomes in this high-risk population.

Single versus multi-drug antimicrobial surgical infection prophylaxis for left ventricular assist devices: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Infection remains the Achilles heel of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) therapy. However, an optimal antimicrobial surgical infection prophylaxis (SIP) regimen has not been established. This study evaluated the efficacy of a single-drug SIP compared to a multi-drug SIP on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing continuous-flow LVAD (CF-LVAD) and pulsatile LVAD (P-LVAD) implantation. An electronic search was performed to identify studies in the English literature on SIP regimens in patients undergoing LVAD implantation. Identified articles were assessed for inclusion and exclusion criteria. Fourteen articles with 1,311 (CF-LVAD: 888; P-LVAD: 423) patients were analyzed. Overall, 501 (38.0%) patients received single-drug SIP, whereas 810 (62.0%) received multi-drug SIP. Time to infection was comparable between groups. There was no significant difference in overall incidence of LVAD-specific infections [single-drug: 18.7% vs. multi-drug: 24.8%, P = 0.49] including driveline infections [single-drug: 14.1% vs. multi-drug: 20.8%, P = 0.37]. Compared to single-drug SIP, patients who received multi-drug SIP had a significantly lower survival rate [single-drug: 90.0% vs. multi-drug: 76.0%, P = 0.01] and infection-free survival rate [single-drug: 88.4% vs. multi-drug: 77.3%, P = 0.04] at 90 days. However, there were no significant differences in 1-year survival and 1-year infection-free survival between groups. No survival differences were observed in the CF-LVAD subset as well. This study demonstrated no additional advantage of a multi-drug compared to a single-drug regimen for SIP. Although there was a modest advantage in early survival among CF-LVAD and P-LVAD patients who received single-drug SIP, there were no significant differences in the 1-year survival and 1-year infection-free survival.

Right Ventricular Failure Risk Prediction Models in Patients Undergoing Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation: A Systematic Review

Purpose Right ventricular failure (RVF) remains a frequent major cause of morbidity and mortality after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. Timely intervention with planned right ventricular assistance has been shown to improve patient outcomes. Adequate prediction of RVF is important for guiding appropriate selection of LVAD patients and risk prognostication . Methods We systematically searched literature databases in February 2018, as well as the references of included publications. Two reviewers selected studies on adults undergoing LVAD implantation that derived and/or validated a risk prediction model to predict postoperative RVF. We summarized the results of discrimination and calibration qualitatively. Results A total of 23 studies were included, testing 22 models. There were 2 models from large multicenter registries: the RVFRS score from INTERMACS (10 909 patients) and EUROMACS score (2 000 patients). The rest were from single centers. Of the 22 models (Table 1), 7 were externally validated (RVFRS, Penn, Utah, CRITT, Kormos, Pittsburgh, EUROMACS). 6 models were derived from cohorts based on a majority (>50%) of pulsatile LVADs and had poor-to-modest discrimination (AUC between 0.49 to 0.69). Only EUROMACS showed adequate calibration in a validation study. The definition of RVF as an outcome was heterogenous among both derivation and validation studies. Conclusion Existing RVF prediction scores exhibit heterogeneous derivation and validation methodologies, with varying definitions of events and types of devices used. Many of the classically validated scores originate from cohorts on pulsatile first-generation LVADs and were derived from single centers. The majority of models for post-LVAD RVF risk prediction perform poorly to modestly in validation studies. The EUROMACS score reported more promising performance, though modest. Further validation of scores developed from third-generation LVAD cohorts is needed.

RF63 PROSPECTIVE EVALUATION OF VENTRICULAR LOADING TREND IN PEDIATRIC PATIENTS WITH PULSATILE FLOW LVAD

Aim: The aim of this study was to describe the echocardiographic trend of left ventricular (LV) and right ventricular (RV) function after implantation of a pulsatile flow left ventricular assist device (LVAD) in children. Methods: From 2013 to 2016, we prospectively evaluated 13 consecutive pediatric Berlin Heart EXCOR LVAD patients. Clinical and echocardiographic data were collected at baseline, within 24 h after implantation and monthly until LVAD explant. Results: Median age and weight at the implantation was 8 (4–23) months and 5 (4.6–8.3) kg at the time of implantation, respectively. All were affected by dilated cardiomyopathy. Average LVAD support time was 226.2 ± 121.2 days. Nine (70%) were transplanted, 4 (30%) died. LV end-systolic and end-diastolic volumes were reduced until the follow up of two months (P = 0.019 and P = 0.001). A progressive increase in RV dimensions was observed. After 4 months of follow up, RV fractional area change worsening was statistically related with the deterioration of LV unloading (P = 0.0036). Four patients needed prolonged inotropic support for RV failure. Conclusion: Pulsatile LVAD in pediatrics is followed by an early and mid-term LV unloading, as expressed by a decrease in LV volumes and diameters at echocardiogram. The effects of unloading do not remain stable at long term follow up. RV function improved in the acute phase, but a progressive dilatation of RV was noted over time. In some patients, RV failure might lead to the need of an increase of inotropic support at long term follow up.

OC34 IMPACT OF CONTINUOUS FLOW LEFT VENTRICULAR ASSIST DEVICES AS BRIDGE TO TRANSPLANT ON GRAFT REJECTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF DONOR-SPECIFIC ANTIBODIES

Abstract Background and Aim: We analysed patients transplanted with and without previous continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVADs) to compare survival and rates of acute rejection, development of donor-specific antibodies (DSA) and chronic allograft vasculopathy (CAV). Methods: All consecutive patients aged&gt;18 years, who underwent HTx at our Institution from Jan-2012 to Dec-2017 were included. Patients assisted with pulsatile LVADs or total artificial heart were excluded. Cellular rejection score – CRS and antibody rejection score – ARS (total number of rejections divided by the number of endo-myocardial biopsies performed) were calculated at 3, 6 and 12 months after HTx. Results: We included 149 patients with a mean age of 54 ± 12 years. Among these, 47 (32%) were implanted with a CF-LVAD (25 HeartWare, 20 Jarvik 2000 and 2 HeartMate III) before HTx (LVAD group) and 102 (68%) were not (No-LVAD group). Pre-HTx allo-sensitization records were comparable among groups. Mean time of follow up was 25 ± 18 months in LVAD group and 24 ± 22 months in No-LVAD (p = 0.58). Overall mortality was comparable among groups (19% LVAD vs 18% No-LVAD, p = 0.83; Kaplan-Meier log-rank p = 0.98). Cellular and antibody-mediated rejection occurred similarly among groups. Incidence of CAV was comparable (p = 0.77), as well. De-novo DSA developed in a significantly higher number of bridged cases (29% vs 9%, p = 0.03). Conclusions: Patients supported with a CF-LVAD showed similar rates of cellular and antibody-mediated rejection and CAV after heart transplant, compared with non-bridged patients. Despite development of de-novo DSA was more frequent in assisted patients, this did not translate in worsened clinical outcomes.

Acquired Von Willebrand Syndrome and Blood Pump Design.

The existence of acquired von Willebrand syndrome (AVWS) in patients with continuous flow left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) is well documented and has been verified by numerous investigators. AVWS has not been observed to occur in pulsatile devices such as the SynCardia total artificial heart (TAH), the HeartMate XVE, and the Thoratec pulsatile ventricular assist device (PVAD) used as a single pump. AVWS can also occur in patients with aortic stenosis, ventricular septal defect, mitral stenosis, and patent ductus arteriosus. It has been experimentally verified that supraphysiologic shear stress that occurs under these conditions can cleave the von Willebrand molecule, but the critical magnitude of stress and duration is unclear. Limited experimental results demonstrate that shear stresses as low as 5 Pa (50 dyne/cm2 ) can cause cleavage. Stresses in current centrifugal pumps can be as high as two orders of magnitude greater than this value. Pulsatile LVADs have stresses almost two orders of magnitude less than continuous flow LVADs. In order to improve continuous flow LVADs, the challenge for designers is to first determine the magnitude and duration of stress that is causing AVWS and then, if possible, design a pump below these stresses.

QRS Shortens after Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation

QRS Shortens after Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation

Predictive Value of Models for End-Stage Liver Disease Score in Patients With Pulsatile Flow POLVAD MEV Left Ventricular Assist Device Support

BackgroundModel for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score predicts multisystem dysfunction and death in patients with heart failure (HF). Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have been used for the treatment of end-stage HF. Aim of the studyWe evaluated the prognostic values of MELD, MELD-XI, and MELD-Na scores in patients with POLVAD MEV LVAD. Materials and methodsWe retrospectively analyzed data of 25 consecutive pulsatile flow POLVAD MEV LVAD patients (22 men and 3 women) divided in 2 groups: Group S (survivors), 20 patients (18 men and 2 women), and Group NS (nonsurvivors), 5 patients (4 men and 1 woman). Patients were qualified in INTERMACS class 1 (7 patients) and class 2 (18 patients). Clinical data and laboratory parameters for MELD, MELD-XI, and MELD-Na score calculation were obtained on postoperative days 1, 2, and 3. Study endpoints were mortality or 30 days survival. MELD scores and complications were compared between Groups S and NS. Results20 patients survived, and 5 (4 men and 1 woman) died during observation. Demographics did not differ. MELD scores were insignificantly higher in patients who died (Group 2). Values were as follows: 1. MELD preoperatively (21.71 vs 15.28, P = .225) in day 1 (22.03 vs 17.14, P = .126), day 2 (20.52 vs 17.03, P = .296); 2. MELD-XI preoperatively (19.28 vs 16.39, P = .48), day 1 (21.55 vs 18.14, P = .2662), day 2 (20.45 vs 17.2, P = .461); and 3. MELD-Na preoperatively (20.78 vs 18.7, P = .46), day 1 23.68 vs 18.12, P = .083), day 2 (22.00 vs 19.19, P = .295) consecutively. ConclusionsThe MELD scores do not identify patients with pulsatile LVAD at high risk for mortality in our series. Further investigation is needed.

Evolution of Biventricular Loading Condition in Pediatric LVAD Patient: A Prospective and Observational Study.

The aim of this study was to describe the echocardiographic trend of left ventricular (LV) and right ventricular (RV) function after implantation of a pulsatile flow left ventricular assist device (LVAD) in children. From 2013 to 2016, we prospectively evaluated 13 consecutive pediatric Berlin Heart EXCOR LVAD patients. Clinical and echocardiographic data were collected at baseline, within 24 h after implantation and monthly until LVAD explant. Median age and weight at the implantation was 8 (4-23) months and 5 (4.6-8.3) kg at the time of implantation, respectively. All were affected by dilated cardiomyopathy. Average LVAD support time was 226.2 ± 121.2 days. Nine (70%) were transplanted, 4 (30%) died. LV end-systolic and end-diastolic volumes were reduced until the follow up of two months (P = 0.019 and P = 0.001). A progressive increase in RV dimensions was observed. After 4 months of follow up, RV fractional area change worsening was statistically related with the deterioration of LV unloading (P = 0.0036). Four patients needed prolonged inotropic support for RV failure. Pulsatile LVAD in pediatrics is followed by an early and mid-term LV unloading, as expressed by a decrease in LV volumes and diameters at echocardiogram. The effects of unloading do not remain stable at long term follow up. RV function improved in the acute phase, but a progressive dilatation of RV was noted over time. In some patients, RV failure might lead to the need of an increase of inotropic support at long term follow up.

Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators in Patients With a Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device: An Analysis of the INTERMACS Registry

ObjectivesThis study sought to determine if the presence of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) provided a mortality benefit during continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support. BackgroundAn ICD decreases mortality in selected patients with advanced heart failure and have been associated with reduced mortality in patients with pulsatile LVAD. However, it is unclear whether that benefit extends to patients with a contemporary continuous-flow LVAD. MethodsPropensity score matching was used to generate a cohort of patients with similar baseline characteristics. The primary outcome was freedom from death during LVAD support. Secondary endpoints included freedom from unexpected death, likelihood of transplantation and recovery, and adverse events. ResultsAmong 16,384 eligible patients in the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support registry, 2,209 patients with an ICD and 2,209 patients without one had similar propensity scores and were included. The presence of an ICD was associated with an increased mortality risk (hazard ratio: 1.20; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.04 to 1.39; p = 0.013) and an increased risk of unexpected death during device support (HR: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.71; p = 0.03). Patients with an ICD were more likely to undergo transplantation (HR: 1.16; 95% CI: 0.99 to 1.35; p = 0.06) and less likely to have LVAD explant for recovery (HR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.29 to 0.98; p = 0.04). Patients with an ICD had a higher rate of treated ventricular arrhythmias (rate ratio: 1.27; 95% CI: 1.10 to 1.48; p = 0.001) and rehospitalization (rate ratio: 1.08; 95% CI: 1.04 to 1.12; p < 0.0001), but rates of hemorrhagic stroke were similar (rate ratio: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.81 to 1.26; p = 0.98). ConclusionsAmong patients with a continuous flow LVAD, the presence of an ICD was not associated with reduced mortality.

O17-6 - Comparison of Renal Function after Implantation of Continuous-flow and Pulsatile Left Ventricular Assist Devices

O17-6 - Comparison of Renal Function after Implantation of Continuous-flow and Pulsatile Left Ventricular Assist Devices