BACKGROUND: Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) provide a bridge to recovery or heart transplantation but require serial assessment. Echocardiographic approaches may be limited by device artifact and acoustic window. Cardiovascular computed tomography (CCT) may provide improved non-invasive imaging of LVADs. We evaluated the diagnostic findings and clinical impact of CCT for non-invasive assessment of patients with LVADs. METHODS: CCT examinations performed between 2005 and 2008 in patients with LVADs were identified. Acquisitions were completed on the identical 64-detector-row scanner with intravenous contrast administration. Electrocardiographic gating was used in patients with pulsatile devices, and peripheral pulse gating was used in patients with continuous-flow devices. Comparison was made between CCT results and 30-day outcomes, including echocardiographic and intraoperative findings. RESULTS: We reviewed 32 CCT examinations from 28 patients. Indications included evaluation of low cardiac output symptoms, assessment of cannula position, low flow reading on the LVAD, and surgical planning. CCT identified critical findings in 6 patients, including thrombosis and inlet cannula malposition, all confirmed intraoperatively. CCT missed 1 case of intra-LVAD thrombus. Using intraoperative findings as the gold standard, CCT's sensitivity was 85% and specificity was 100%. Echocardiographic LVAD evaluation did not correlate with findings on CCT (kappa = -0.29, 95% confidence interval, -0.73 to 0.13). CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary observational cohort study indicates that non-invasive imaging using CCT of LVADs is feasible and accurate. CCT warrants consideration in the initial evaluation of symptomatic patients with LVADs. Copyright (c) 2010 International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) provide a bridge to recovery or heart transplantation but require serial assessment. Echocardiographic approaches may be limited by device artifact and acoustic window. Cardiovascular computed tomography (CCT) may provide improved non-invasive imaging of LVADs. We evaluated the diagnostic findings and clinical impact of CCT for non-invasive assessment of patients with LVADs. METHODS: CCT examinations performed between 2005 and 2008 in patients with LVADs were identified. Acquisitions were completed on the identical 64-detector-row scanner with intravenous contrast administration. Electrocardiographic gating was used in patients with pulsatile devices, and peripheral pulse gating was used in patients with continuous-flow devices. Comparison was made between CCT results and 30-day outcomes, including echocardiographic and intraoperative findings. RESULTS: We reviewed 32 CCT examinations from 28 patients. Indications included evaluation of low cardiac output symptoms, assessment of cannula position, low flow reading on the LVAD, and surgical planning. CCT identified critical findings in 6 patients, including thrombosis and inlet cannula malposition, all confirmed intraoperatively. CCT missed 1 case of intra-LVAD thrombus. Using intraoperative findings as the gold standard, CCT's sensitivity was 85% and specificity was 100%. Echocardiographic LVAD evaluation did not correlate with findings on CCT (kappa = -0.29, 95% confidence interval, -0.73 to 0.13). CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary observational cohort study indicates that non-invasive imaging using CCT of LVADs is feasible and accurate. CCT warrants consideration in the initial evaluation of symptomatic patients with LVADs. Copyright (c) 2010 International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: E A Rose; A C Gelijns; A J Moskowitz; D F Heitjan; L W Stevenson; W Dembitsky; J W Long; D D Ascheim; A R Tierney; R G Levitan; J T Watson; P Meier; N S Ronan; P A Shapiro; R M Lazar; L W Miller; L Gupta; O H Frazier; P Desvigne-Nickens; M C Oz; V L Poirier Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2001-11-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Matthew J Budoff; Mylan C Cohen; Mario J Garcia; John McB Hodgson; W Gregory Hundley; Joao A C Lima; Warren J Manning; Gerald M Pohost; Paolo M Raggi; George P Rodgers; John A Rumberger; Allen J Taylor; Mark A Creager; John W Hirshfeld; Beverly H Lorell; Geno Merli; George P Rodgers; Cynthia M Tracy; Howard H Weitz Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2005-07-19 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: H Joachim Nesser; Wolfgang Tkalec; Ayan R Patel; Navroz D Masani; J Niel; Bernhard Markt; Natesa G Pandian Journal: Echocardiography Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 1.724
Authors: J L Pennock; W S Pierce; D B Campbell; W E Pae; D Davis; F A Hensley; W E Richenbacher; J A Waldhausen Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 1986-12 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Keyur B Shah; Daniel G Tang; Richard H Cooke; Michael C Kontos; Neil P Lewis; Gundars J Katlaps; Michael L Hess; Vigneshwar Kasirajan Journal: Curr Heart Fail Rep Date: 2012-03
Authors: Max Ruge; Tal Zivan; Ron Leong; Eric Feduska; Mahek Shah; J Eduardo Rame; Howard Massey; Rene Alvarez; Yevgeniy Brailvosky; Indranee Rajapreyar Journal: CASE (Phila) Date: 2022-02-17
Authors: Salim Hayek; Daniel B Sims; David W Markham; Javed Butler; Andreas P Kalogeropoulos Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: Olufoladare G Olorunsola; Steven H Kim; Ryan Chang; Yuo-Chen Kuo; Steven W Hetts; Alex Heller; Rishi Kant; Maythem Saeed; William H Fissell; Shuvo Roy; Mark W Wilson Journal: Med Instrum (Luton) Date: 2014-03-27
Authors: Waqar Aziz; Simon Claridge; Ioannis Ntalas; Justin Gould; Adelaide de Vecchi; Orod Razeghi; Daniel Toth; Peter Mountney; Rebecca Preston; Christopher A Rinaldi; Reza Razavi; Steven Niederer; Ronak Rajani Journal: ESC Heart Fail Date: 2019-08-10
Authors: Ayan Sen; Joel S Larson; Kianoush B Kashani; Stacy L Libricz; Bhavesh M Patel; Pramod K Guru; Cory M Alwardt; Octavio Pajaro; J Christopher Farmer Journal: Crit Care Date: 2016-06-25 Impact factor: 9.097