Recovery of right heart function with temporary right ventricular assist using a centrifugal pump in patients with severe biventricular failure.

Long-term outcomes of a biventricular assist device (BiVAD) support are worse than those of an isolated left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support. This study evaluated our strategy for right heart failure using a temporary right VAD (RVAD) with an extracorporeal centrifugal pump. From January 2001 to December 2010, 108 patients underwent LVAD implantation at our institution and their clinical outcomes were studied. A temporary centrifugal RVAD was implanted in 26 patients. Multivariate logistic regression revealed pre-operative extracorporeal life support (odds ratio [OR], 37.0), central venous pressure (OR, 1.2), mean pulmonary artery pressure (OR, 0.9), and serum total bilirubin (OR, 1.4) were the risk factors for RVAD requirement. RVAD-off test was conducted, and 11 of the 26 patients showed significant recovery of right heart function and were eventually removed from RVAD support. The survival of patients with isolated LVAD was significantly better than those with a paracorporeal pulsatile BiVAD (80% vs 11% at 1 year, p < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference between the survival of patients who underwent isolated LVAD support and those who were initially implanted with temporary BiVAD but underwent the RVAD removal (80% vs 73% at 1 year, p = 0.827). Our strategy with temporary RVAD for severe acute right heart failure was effective in selecting the patients who could be weaned from RVAD support. Patient survival was improved by avoiding the long-term support with a paracorporeal pulsatile BiVAD.

Saito S ，Sakaguchi T ，Miyagawa S ，Nishi H ，Yoshikawa Y ，Fukushima S ，Daimon T ，Sawa Y ... -  《-》

Outcome of unplanned right ventricular assist device support for severe right heart failure after implantable left ventricular assist device insertion.

The use of a right ventricular assist device (RVAD) becomes necessary for severe right ventricular (RV) failure after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) insertion. Although temporary support could lead to successful RVAD weaning in certain patients, the data remain scarce. We retrospectively reviewed 398 patients who underwent implantable LVAD insertion between January 2000 and December 2012. Of these patients, 44 (11%) required unplanned RVAD support due to severe RV failure after LVAD insertion. For comparison, 37 patients who underwent planned biventricular assist device (BiVAD) insertion were identified during the same study period. We analyzed the early and late outcomes in these patients. The mean duration of RVAD support was 21 ± 23 days. Of the 44 patients, 21 (49%) were weaned from the RVAD (weaning group), whereas 23 (51%) required continued biventricular support (failure group). The failure group had ongoing end-organ dysfunction after RVAD insertion. Hospital mortality was significantly lower in the weaning group (24%) and in the planned BiVAD group (30%) as compared to the failure group (74%, p = 0.0009). The 6-month actuarial survival rate was 75% in the weaning group, 62% in the planned BiVAD group and 13% in the failure group (p < 0.0001). Successful bridge to transplant was achieved in 14 patients (67%) in the weaning group as compared with 8 patients (35%) in the failure group (p = 0.03). On multivariate logistic regression analyses, pre-operative white blood cell (odds ratio [OR] 1.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04 to 1.50, p = 0.016) and creatinine (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.079 to 0.88, p = 0.03) levels were significant predictors for RVAD removal. Among patients who developed acute RV failure after LVAD insertion, only half could be weaned from the temporary RVAD support. An alternative strategy is necessary in patients who require continuous RVAD support.

Takeda K ，Naka Y ，Yang JA ，Uriel N ，Colombo PC ，Jorde UP ，Takayama H ... -  《-》

Temporary right ventricular support following left ventricle assist device implantation: a comparison of two techniques.

Right ventricular failure (RVF) after implantation of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is a dramatic complication. We compared retrospectively two techniques of temporary right ventricular support after LVAD (HeartMate II, Thoratec Corp, Pleasonton, CA, USA) implantation. From 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2012, 78 patients [mean age 52 ± 1.34 years; 15 women (19%)] received a HeartMate II at our institution. Among these, 18 patients (23%) suffered postimplant RVF treated by peripheral temporary right ventricular support. Aetiology of heart failure was ischaemic in 12 (67%) and dilated cardiomyopathy in 6 (33%) patients. The preimplant RV risk score averaged 5.1 ± 0.59. Ten patients were treated using a femorofemoral venoarterial extracorporeal life support (ECLS) and 8 patients were treated using extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as a right ventricular assist device (RVAD) established between a femoral vein and the pulmonary artery via a Dacron prosthesis (RVAD). Duration of RV support was 7.12 ± 5.4 days and 9.57 ± 3.5 days in venoarterial ECLS and vein and the pulmonary artery RVAD groups, respectively (P = 0.32). Three patients (17%) died while under RV support (venoarterial ECLS, n = 2; and vein and the pulmonary artery RVAD, n = 1, P = 0.58). In the venoarterial ECLS group, 6 (60%) patients suffered major thromboembolic complications including thrombosis of the ECLS arterial line (n = 2), ischaemic stroke (n = 2) and thrombosis of the ascending aorta (n = 2). No major complication was observed in the vein and the pulmonary artery RVAD group (P = 0.01). RV support was successfully weaned in 8 (80%) patients of the venoarterial ECLS group and in 7 (87.5%) of the vein and the pulmonary artery RVAD group (P = 0.58). The duration of postimplant intensive care unit stay was not different (respectively, 27.5 ± 18.7 days and 20.0 ± 12.0 days; P = 0.38) between both groups. Temporary support of the failing RV after LVAD implantation using temporary vein and the pulmonary artery RVAD is a promising therapeutic option. This approach provides adequate LVAD pre- and afterload and is associated with significantly less thromboembolic complications.

Noly PE ，Kirsch M ，Quessard A ，Leger P ，Pavie A ，Amour J ，Leprince P ... -  《-》

Experience with right ventricular assist devices for perioperative right-sided circulatory failure.

Chen JM ，Levin HR ，Rose EA ，Addonizio LJ ，Landry DW ，Sistino JJ ，Michler RE ，Oz MC ... -  《ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY》

Right ventricular failure in patients with the HeartMate II continuous-flow left ventricular assist device: incidence, risk factors, and effect on outcomes.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence, risk factors, and effect on outcomes of right ventricular failure in a large population of patients implanted with continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices. Patients (n = 484) enrolled in the HeartMate II left ventricular assist device (Thoratec, Pleasanton, Calif) bridge-to-transplantation clinical trial were examined for the occurrence of right ventricular failure. Right ventricular failure was defined as requiring a right ventricular assist device, 14 or more days of inotropic support after implantation, and/or inotropic support starting more than 14 days after implantation. Demographics, along with clinical, laboratory, and hemodynamic data, were compared between patients with and without right ventricular failure, and risk factors were identified. Overall, 30 (6%) patients receiving left ventricular assist devices required a right ventricular assist device, 35 (7%) required extended inotropes, and 33 (7%) required late inotropes. A significantly greater percentage of patients without right ventricular failure survived to transplantation, recovery, or ongoing device support at 180 days compared with patients with right ventricular failure (89% vs 71%, P < .001). Multivariate analysis revealed that a central venous pressure/pulmonary capillary wedge pressure ratio of greater than 0.63 (odds ratio, 2.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-4.3; P = .009), need for preoperative ventilator support (odds ratio, 5.5; 95% confidence interval, 2.3-13.2; P < .001), and blood urea nitrogen level of greater than 39 mg/dL (odds ratio, 2.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-4.1; P = .02) were independent predictors of right ventricular failure after left ventricular assist device implantation. The incidence of right ventricular failure in patients with a HeartMate II ventricular assist device is comparable or less than that of patients with pulsatile-flow devices. Its occurrence is associated with worse outcomes than seen in patients without right ventricular failure. Patients at risk for right ventricular failure might benefit from preoperative optimization of right heart function or planned biventricular support.

Kormos RL ，Teuteberg JJ ，Pagani FD ，Russell SD ，John R ，Miller LW ，Massey T ，Milano CA ，Moazami N ，Sundareswaran KS ，Farrar DJ ，HeartMate II Clinical Investigators ... -  《-》