BACKGROUND: The role of the ventricular assist device (VAD) in the management of heart failure is expanding. Despite its success, the clinical course for patients requiring noncardiac surgery (NCS) during VAD support is not well described. The objective of this study was to identify VAD patients requiring NCS (+NCS) and compare outcomes with those not requiring NCS (-NCS). METHODS: Patients undergoing VAD implant from 2000 to 2007 were reviewed. NCS procedures, survival, and complications were collected. Survival at 1 year from implant, overall survival at the study conclusion, survival time from implant, and outcome of VAD therapy were compared between groups. RESULTS: We enrolled 142 subjects. Demographics did not differ between groups. Twenty-five subjects (18%) underwent 27 NCS procedures. Perioperative survival was 100% and 28-day survival was 64%. Survival to discharge was 56%. Bleeding occurred in 48%. Infection occurred in 33%. Estimated blood loss was 355 mL, and the international normalized ratio at time of NCS was 1.9. Laparoscopy was performed in 3 cases. There was no difference in 1-year survival (59% vs 54%), survival at study conclusion (44% vs 46%) or survival time (517 vs 523 days) between +NCS subjects and -NCS subjects. There were similar causes of death in both groups. The +NCS group was on VAD support longer (245 vs 87 days; P < .01), and less likely to undergo heart transplantation (12% vs 35%; P < .01). CONCLUSION: NCS is not uncommon during VAD therapy. Bleeding and infection were common complications. Despite this, NCS seems to be feasible and safe and does not seem to increase mortality in the VAD population.
BACKGROUND: The role of the ventricular assist device (VAD) in the management of heart failure is expanding. Despite its success, the clinical course for patients requiring noncardiac surgery (NCS) during VAD support is not well described. The objective of this study was to identify VAD patients requiring NCS (+NCS) and compare outcomes with those not requiring NCS (-NCS). METHODS:Patients undergoing VAD implant from 2000 to 2007 were reviewed. NCS procedures, survival, and complications were collected. Survival at 1 year from implant, overall survival at the study conclusion, survival time from implant, and outcome of VAD therapy were compared between groups. RESULTS: We enrolled 142 subjects. Demographics did not differ between groups. Twenty-five subjects (18%) underwent 27 NCS procedures. Perioperative survival was 100% and 28-day survival was 64%. Survival to discharge was 56%. Bleeding occurred in 48%. Infection occurred in 33%. Estimated blood loss was 355 mL, and the international normalized ratio at time of NCS was 1.9. Laparoscopy was performed in 3 cases. There was no difference in 1-year survival (59% vs 54%), survival at study conclusion (44% vs 46%) or survival time (517 vs 523 days) between +NCS subjects and -NCS subjects. There were similar causes of death in both groups. The +NCS group was on VAD support longer (245 vs 87 days; P < .01), and less likely to undergo heart transplantation (12% vs 35%; P < .01). CONCLUSION: NCS is not uncommon during VAD therapy. Bleeding and infection were common complications. Despite this, NCS seems to be feasible and safe and does not seem to increase mortality in the VAD population.
Authors: Jasmir G Nayak; Christopher W White; Wayne Nates; Rajan Sharda; David Horne; Kam Kaler; Mark Lytwyn; Hilary P Grocott; Darren H Freed; Thomas McGregor Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2013 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: George J Arnaoutakis; Gregory J Bittle; Jeremiah G Allen; Eric S Weiss; Jennifer Alejo; William A Baumgartner; Ashish S Shah; Christopher L Wolfgang; David T Efron; John V Conte Journal: World J Surg Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Elizabeth J Maynes; Jonathan S Gordon; Matthew P Weber; Thomas J O'Malley; Tyler M Bauer; Chelsey T Wood; Rohinton J Morris; Louis E Samuels; John W Entwistle; H Todd Massey; Vakhtang Tchantchaleishvili Journal: Ann Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2021-05