BACKGROUND: In patients with refractory heart failure, aortic valve (AV) insufficiency or the presence of a prosthetic AV has been considered a relative contraindication to left ventricular assist device (LVAD) therapy. Nevertheless, we have successfully implanted LVADs in 5 patients with native AV insufficiency or an AV prosthesis by closing the left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT). METHODS: The method of LVOT closure was tailored to the patients' differing circumstances. Patient 1 had a regurgitant tri-leaflet native AV. Patient 2 had undergone previous aortic root reconstruction with a porcine bioprosthesis. Patient 3 had a congenitally bicuspid AV with significant insufficiency. Patient 4 had a native tri-leaflet valve that developed thrombus and insufficiency after previous LVAD placement. Patient 5 required removal of a recently placed mechanical AV. Accordingly, the LVOT was closed with a bovine pericardial patch in Patients 1, 4 and 5, and the lines of coaptation of the AV leaflets were closed primarily in Patients 2 and 3. RESULTS: Four months post-operatively, 1 patient underwent heart transplantation; on removal of the heart, LVOT patch integrity was confirmed visually. After a follow-up period of 6 months to 2 years, the remaining 4 patients are in New York Heart Association Functional Class I while awaiting cardiac transplantation. Transesophageal echocardiography has confirmed persistent LVOT closure. CONCLUSION: In all 5 cases, LVOT closure circumvented the challenges associated with LVAD therapy in the presence of native AV insufficiency or an AV prosthesis.
BACKGROUND: In patients with refractory heart failure, aortic valve (AV) insufficiency or the presence of a prosthetic AV has been considered a relative contraindication to left ventricular assist device (LVAD) therapy. Nevertheless, we have successfully implanted LVADs in 5 patients with native AV insufficiency or an AV prosthesis by closing the left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT). METHODS: The method of LVOT closure was tailored to the patients' differing circumstances. Patient 1 had a regurgitant tri-leaflet native AV. Patient 2 had undergone previous aortic root reconstruction with a porcine bioprosthesis. Patient 3 had a congenitally bicuspid AV with significant insufficiency. Patient 4 had a native tri-leaflet valve that developed thrombus and insufficiency after previous LVAD placement. Patient 5 required removal of a recently placed mechanical AV. Accordingly, the LVOT was closed with a bovine pericardial patch in Patients 1, 4 and 5, and the lines of coaptation of the AV leaflets were closed primarily in Patients 2 and 3. RESULTS: Four months post-operatively, 1 patient underwent heart transplantation; on removal of the heart, LVOT patch integrity was confirmed visually. After a follow-up period of 6 months to 2 years, the remaining 4 patients are in New York Heart Association Functional Class I while awaiting cardiac transplantation. Transesophageal echocardiography has confirmed persistent LVOT closure. CONCLUSION: In all 5 cases, LVOT closure circumvented the challenges associated with LVAD therapy in the presence of native AV insufficiency or an AV prosthesis.
Authors: Andre Critsinelis; Chitaru Kurihara; Masashi Kawabori; Tadahisa Sugiura; Andrew B Civitello; O H Frazier; Jeffrey A Morgan Journal: J Artif Organs Date: 2017-10-05 Impact factor: 1.731
Authors: Lauren K Truby; A Reshad Garan; Raymond C Givens; Brian Wayda; Koji Takeda; Melana Yuzefpolskaya; Paolo C Colombo; Yoshifumi Naka; Hiroo Takayama; Veli K Topkara Journal: JACC Heart Fail Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 12.035